Purpose: Trans-arterial radioembolization is a well-studied tumoricidal treatment for liver malignancies; however, consensus and evidence regarding periprocedural prophylactic medication (PPM) are lacking.
Methods: A single-center retrospective analysis from 2014 to 2020 was performed in patients treated with 90Y-glass microspheres for neuroendocrine or colorectal liver metastases. Inclusion criteria were the availability of at least 3 months of clinical, biochemical, and imaging follow-up and post-treatment 90Y-PET/CT imaging for the determination of the whole non-tumorous liver absorbed dose (Dh). Logistic regression models were used to investigate if variables (among which are P/UDCA and Dh) were associated with either clinical toxicity, biochemical toxicity, or hepatotoxicity. Additionally, a structured literature search was performed in November 2022 to identify all publications related to PPM use in radioembolization treatments.
Results: Fifty-one patients received P/UDCA as post-treatment medication, while 19 did not. No correlation was found between toxicity and P/UDCA use. Dh was associated with biochemical toxicity (p = 0.05). A literature review resulted in eight relevant articles, including a total of 534 patients, in which no consistent advice regarding PPM was provided.
Conclusion: In this single-center, retrospective review, P/UDCA use did not reduce liver toxicity in patients with metastatic liver disease. The whole non-tumorous liver-absorbed dose was the only significant factor for hepatotoxicity. No standardized international guidelines or supporting evidence exist for PPM in radioembolization.
Keywords: drug-induced liver disease; hepatotoxicity; prophylaxis; radioembolization.