Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42332191›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging2026

Dose-Response and survival analysis after transarterial radioembolization for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma: A multicenter multicompartment dosimetry study.

Cigdem Soydal, Tunc Ones, Murat Fani Bozkurt, Emine Goknur Isık, Nalan Alan Selcuk, Nazım Coskun, Ramazan Kutlu, Burcu Esen Akkas, Hasan Onner, Aziz Gultekin and 29 more

Abstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

39 authors.

Cigdem SoydalMedical School Department of Nuclear Medicine, Ankara University, 06590, Cebeci, Ankara, Türkiye. csoydal@yahoo.com.ORCID 0000-0002-6199-8551
Tunc OnesDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, Marmara University Pendik Training and Research Hospital, Istanbul, Türkiye.
Murat Fani BozkurtMedical School Department of Nuclear Medicine, Hacettepe University, Ankara, Türkiye.
Emine Goknur IsıkMedical School Department of Nuclear Medicine, Istanbul University, Istanbul, Türkiye.
Nalan Alan SelcukMedical School Department of Nuclear Medicine, Yeditepe University, Istanbul, Türkiye.
Nazım CoskunAnkara Bilkent City Hospital Department of Nuclear Medicine, Ankara, Türkiye.
Ramazan KutluMedical School Department of Radiology, Inonu University, Malatya, Türkiye.
Burcu Esen AkkasBasaksehir Cam Ve Sakura City Hospital Department of Nuclear Medicine, Istanbul, Türkiye.
Hasan OnnerMedical School Department of Nuclear Medicine, Selcuk University, Konya, Türkiye.
Aziz GultekinMedical School Department of Nuclear Medicine, Pamukkale University, Denizli, Türkiye.
Semra InceDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, Gulhane Training and Research Hospital, Ankara, Türkiye.
Pınar OzbayDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, Acıbadem Adana Hospital, Adana, Türkiye.
Seyhan KaracavusDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, Health Sciences University Kayseri City Health Practice and Research Hospitals, Kayseri, Türkiye.
Irem MesciMedical School Department of Nuclear Medicine, Ankara University, 06590, Cebeci, Ankara, Türkiye.
Efe SoydemirDepartment of Radiology, Marmara University Pendik Training and Research Hospital, Istanbul, Türkiye.
Bilge Volkan SalancıMedical School Department of Nuclear Medicine, Hacettepe University, Ankara, Türkiye.
Güney DenizMedical School Department of Nuclear Medicine, Istanbul University, Istanbul, Türkiye.
Osman Melih TopcuoğluMedical School Department of Radiology, Yeditepe University, Istanbul, Türkiye.
Elif OzdemirAnkara Bilkent City Hospital Department of Nuclear Medicine, Ankara, Türkiye.
Müge OtluDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, Malatya Training and Research Hospital, Malatya, Türkiye.
Enes Mustafa KayaBasaksehir Cam Ve Sakura City Hospital Department of Nuclear Medicine, Istanbul, Türkiye.
Alaaddin NaymanMedical School Department of Radiology, Selcuk University, Konya, Türkiye.
Muhammet ArslanMedical School Department of Radiology, Pamukkale University, Denizli, Türkiye.
Hulya PekerDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, Gulhane Training and Research Hospital, Ankara, Türkiye.
Huseyin Tugsan BallıDepartment of Radiology, Acıbadem Adana Hospital, Adana, Türkiye.
Mustafa BilgiliDepartment of Radiology, Health Sciences University Kayseri Health Practice and Research Hospitals, Kayseri, Türkiye.
Emre Can CelebiogluMedical School Department of Radiology, Ankara University, Ankara, Türkiye.
Erbil ArikDepartment of Radiology, Marmara University Pendik Training and Research Hospital, Istanbul, Türkiye.
Gonca Eldem
M DMedical School Department of Radiology, Hacettepe University, Ankara, Türkiye.
Arzu PoyanliMedical School Department of Radiology, Istanbul University, Istanbul, Türkiye.
Türkay TokluMedical School Department of Nuclear Medicine, Yeditepe University, Istanbul, Türkiye.
Mustafa OzdemirAnkara Bilkent City Hospital Department of Radiology, Ankara, Türkiye.
Meryem KayaBasaksehir Cam Ve Sakura City Hospital Department of Nuclear Medicine, Istanbul, Türkiye.
Ismail DilekMedical School Department of Radiology, Selcuk University, Konya, Türkiye.
Ali CelikMedical School Department of Nuclear Medicine, Pamukkale University, Denizli, Türkiye.
Gökhan YuceDepartment of Radiology, Gulhane Training and Research Hospital, Ankara, Türkiye.
Fadime DemirDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, Health Sciences University Kayseri City Health Practice and Research Hospitals, Kayseri, Türkiye.
Nuriye Ozlem KucukMedical School Department of Nuclear Medicine, Ankara University, 06590, Cebeci, Ankara, Türkiye.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimWe aimed to report real-world outcomes of transarterial radioembolization (TARE) in patients with intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC), focusing on different microsphere types and posttreatment dosimetric approaches in relation to dose-response and survival analyses. MATERIALS AND

methodsThis multicenter retrospective single-arm cohort study included adult patients with intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma treated with Y-90 glass or resin microspheres using lobar or segmental approaches between January 2014 and December 2024 across 13 centers. All posttreatment Y-90 Bremsstrahlung single photon emission tomography (SPECT)/ computed tomography (CT) or Y-90 positron emission tomography (PET) images were reviewed. Post-treatment dose estimations were performed centrally by a nuclear medicine physician with 10 years of experience in dosimetric calculations using the VoxelDosimetry tool of Hermia software (Hermes Medical Solutions, Sweden). Mean perfused liver absorbed dose (PLAD), mean tumor absorbed dose (TAD), and mean whole-liver absorbed dose (WLAD) were calculated. Dosimetric analysis for Y-90 SPECT/CT and PET/CT were performed separately. Tumor response was assessed by comparing imaging obtained within 6 weeks before treatment and 2-4 months after treatment. Response categories were grouped as objective response (complete response + partial response) and nonresponse (stable disease + progressive disease) for treated lesions. Hepatotoxicity was graded according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) using serum Aspartate Aminotransferase (AST), Alanine Aminotransferase (ALT), and bilirubin levels within 3 months after TARE. Additionally, albumin-bilirubin (ALBI) scores were calculated before and after treatment, and changes in ALBI grade were analyzed.

resultsInitially, data from 194 (110 female, 84 male; mean age 53.8 ± 16.6 years) patients were included. After excluding patients without survival status data, 180 patients were included in the overall survival (OS) analysis. Seventeen patients were excluded from dose-response evaluation due to suboptimal posttreatment Y-90 imaging for dosimetric calculations. Survival analyses were performed on a per-patient basis, whereas dosimetric and response analyses were performed on a per-treatment-session basis. For dose response analysis, a total of 194 TARE sessions in 163 (101 female, 62 male; mean age 51.4 ± 12.6 years) patients were analyzed. Median (min-max) of administered activities were 2.7 (1.4-6.1) GBq for glass microspheres and 1.4 (0.6-1.8) GBq for resin microspheres (p = 0.004). In separate analyses of SPECT and PET studies, higher TAD and PLAD values were observed in sessions analyzed with PET-based dosimetry (for mean TAD; 249.2 ± 26.6 Gy vs 114.8 ± 15.7 Gy, p < 0.001, for mean PLAD; 102.1 ± 10.4 Gy vs 59.4 ± 11.3 Gy, p = 0.031). A significant positive trend between TAD and response category was observed in the resin microsphere sessions using Y-90 PET-based dosimetry (Area Under Curve 0.693, p = 0.028). In the OS analysis of 180 patients (median follow-up 13.3 months, range 7-81), 128 deaths occurred. Medians of OS did not differ between patients treated with glass versus resin microspheres [17.4 (13.2-21.5, 95%CI) vs 16.6 (7.7-25.5, 95%CI) months, p = 0.80]. Among 107 patients included in time to progression (TTP) analysis, no significant difference in medians of TTP was observed between patients treated with glass and resin microspheres [12.1 (7.8-12.4, 95%CI) vs 14.5 (5.6- 14.4, 95%CI) months, p = 0.11]. One patient developed grade 2 hepatotoxicity and irreversible hepatic failure 10 months after a second TARE session due to tumor progression. In addition, cholangitis occurred in 1 patient and gastritis in 3 patients following TARE.

conclusionThis multicenter analysis suggests that TARE may provide encouraging survival outcomes with acceptable toxicity in patients with ICC, including salvage settings. A potential dose-response association was identified in the resin microsphere subgroup evaluated with Y-90 PET-based dosimetry. Given the retrospective multicenter design and heterogeneity of imaging modalities, these findings should be considered hypothesis-generating and require confirmation in prospective studies using standardized posttreatment dosimetry.

Indexed as

Bile Duct NeoplasmsCholangiocarcinomaEmbolization, TherapeuticRadioembolization, TherapeuticAgedDose-Response Relationship, RadiationFemaleHumansMaleMicrospheresMiddle AgedPositron Emission Tomography Computed TomographyRadiometryRadiotherapy DosageRetrospective StudiesSingle Photon Emission Computed Tomography Computed TomographyYttrium RadioisotopesCholangiocarcinomaMulticompartment dosimetryTransarterial radioembolizationTreatment responseY-90 microspheres

Identifiers

PMID42332191
PMCPMC13525960

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.