Multicentre quantitative Ga-68 PET/CT performance harmonisation

Purpose Performance standards for quantitative F-18-FDG PET/CT studies are provided by the EANM Research Ltd. (EARL) to enable comparability of quantitative PET in multicentre studies. Yet, such specifications are not available for Ga-68. Therefore, our aim was to evaluate Ga-68-PET/CT quantification variability in a multicentre setting. Methods A survey across Dutch hospitals was performed to evaluate differences in clinical Ga-68 PET/CT study protocols. Ga-68 and F-18 phantom acquisitions were performed by 8 centres with 13 different PET/CT systems according to EARL protocol. The cylindrical phantom and NEMA image quality (IQ) phantom were used to assess image noise and to identify recovery coefficients (RCs) for quantitative analysis. Both phantoms were used to evaluate cross-calibration between the PET/CT system and local dose calibrator. Results The survey across Dutch hospitals showed a large variation in clinical Ga-68 PET/CT acquisition and reconstruction protocols. Ga-68 PET/CT image noise was below 10%. Cross-calibration was within 10% deviation, except for one system to overestimate F-18 and two systems to underestimate the Ga-68 activity concentration. RC-curves for F-18 and Ga-68 were within and on the lower limit of current EARL standards, respectively. After correction for local Ga-68/F-18 cross-calibration, mean Ga-68 performance was 5% below mean EARL performance specifications. Conclusions Ga-68 PET/CT quantification performs on the lower limits of the current EARL RC standards for F-18. Correction for local Ga-68/F-18 cross-calibration mismatch is advised, while maintaining the EARL reconstruction protocol thereby avoiding multiple EARL protocols

Quantification of biochemical PSA dynamics after radioligand therapy with [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-I&T using a population pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic model

Background: There is an unmet need for prediction of treatment outcome or patient selection for [177Lu]Lu-PSMA therapy in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). Quantification of the tumor exposure–response relationship is pivotal for further treatment optimization. Therefore, a population pharmacokinetic (PK) model was developed for [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-I&T using SPECT/CT data and, subsequently, related to prostate-specific antigen (PSA) dynamics after therapy in patients with mCRPC using a pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic (PKPD) modelling approach. Methods: A population PK model was developed using quantitative SPECT/CT data (406 scans) of 76 patients who received multiple cycles [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-I&T (± 7.4 GBq with either two- or six-week interval). The PK model consisted of five compartments; central, salivary glands, kidneys, tumors and combined remaining tissues. Covariates (tumor volume, renal function and cycle number) were tested to explain inter-individual variability on uptake into organs and tumors. The final PK model was expanded with a PD compartment (sequential fitting approach) representing PSA dynamics during and after treatment. To explore the presence of a exposure–response relationship, individually estimated [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-I&T tumor concentrations were related to PSA changes over time. Results: The population PK model adequately described observed data in all compartments (based on visual inspection of goodness-of-fit plots) with adequate precision of parameters estimates (< 36.1% relative standard error (RSE)). A significant declining uptake in tumors (k14) during later cycles was identified (uptake decreased to 73%, 50% and 44% in cycle 2, 3 and 4–7, respectively, compared to cycle 1). Tumor growth (defined by PSA increase) was described with an exponential growth rate (0.000408 h−1 (14.2% RSE)). Therapy-induced PSA decrease was related to estimated tumor concentrations (MBq/L) using both a direct and delayed drug effect. The final model adequately captured individual PSA concentrations after treatment (based on goodness-of-fit plots). Simulation based on the final PKPD model showed no evident differences in response for the two different dosing regimens currently used. Conclusions: Our population PK model accurately described observed [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-I&T uptake in salivary glands, kidneys and tumors and revealed a clear declining tumor uptake over treatment cycles. The PKPD model adequately captured individual PSA observations and identified population response rates for the two dosing regimens. Hence, a PKPD modelling approach can guide prediction of treatment response and thus identify patients in whom radioligand therapy is likely to fail

Advances in Radionuclide Therapies for Patients with Neuro-endocrine Tumors

Purpose of Review: To provide insights into the role of peptide receptor radionuclide therapy (PRRT) in patients with advanced neuroendocrine tumors (NET) and an overview of possible strategies to combine PRRT with locoregional and systemic anticancer treatments. Recent Findings: Research on combining PRRT with other treatments encompasses a wide variety or treatments, both local (transarterial radioembolization) and systemic therapies, chemotherapy (i.e., capecitabine and temozolomide), targeted therapies (i.e., olaparib, everolimus, and sunitinib), and immunotherapies (e.g., nivolumab and pembrolizumab). Furthermore, PRRT shows promising first results as a treatment prior to surgery. Summary: There is great demand to enhance the efficacy of PRRT through combination with other anticancer treatments. While research in this area is currently limited, the field is rapidly evolving with numerous ongoing clinical trials aiming to address this need and explore novel therapeutic combinations

Tolerability of concurrent external beam radiotherapy and [ 177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 for node-positive prostate cancer in treatment naïve patients, phase I study (PROQURE-I trial).

BACKGROUND: Prostate cancer patients with locoregional lymph node disease at diagnosis (N1M0) still have a limited prognosis despite the improvements provided by aggressive curative intent multimodal locoregional external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) with systemic androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). Although some patients can be cured and the majority of patients have a long survival, the 5-year biochemical failure rate is currently 29-47%. [ 177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 has shown impressive clinical and biochemical responses with low toxicity in salvage setting in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. This study aims to explore the combination of standard EBRT and ADT complemented with a single administration of [ 177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 in curative intent treatment for N1M0 prostate cancer. Hypothetically, this combined approach will enhance EBRT to better control macroscopic tumour localizations, and treat undetected microscopic disease locations inside and outside EBRT fields. METHODS: The PROQURE-I study is a multicenter prospective phase I study investigating standard of care treatment (7 weeks EBRT and 3 years ADT) complemented with one concurrent cycle (three, six, or nine GBq) of systemic [ 177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 administered in week two of EBRT. A maximum of 18 patients with PSMA-positive N1M0 prostate cancer will be included. The tolerability of adding [ 177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 will be evaluated using a Bayesian Optimal Interval (BOIN) dose-escalation design. The primary objective is to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of a single cycle [ 177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 when given concurrent with EBRT + ADT, defined as the occurrence of Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) v 5.0 grade three or higher acute toxicity. Secondary objectives include: late toxicity at 6 months, dosimetric assessment, preliminary biochemical efficacy at 6 months, quality of life questionnaires, and pharmacokinetic modelling of [ 177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617. DISCUSSION: This is the first prospective study to combine EBRT and ADT with [ 177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 in treatment naïve men with N1M0 prostate cancer, and thereby explores the novel application of [ 177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 in curative intent treatment. It is considered likely that this study will confirm tolerability as the combined toxicity of these treatments is expected to be limited. Increased efficacy is considered likely since both individual treatments have proven high anti-tumour effect as mono-treatments. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials, NCT05162573 . Registered 7 October 2021

Rehabilitation and outcomes after complicated vs uncomplicated mild TBI:results from the CENTER-TBI study

Background: Despite existing guidelines for managing mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI), evidence-based treatments are still scarce and large-scale studies on the provision and impact of specific rehabilitation services are needed. This study aimed to describe the provision of rehabilitation to patients after complicated and uncomplicated mTBI and investigate factors associated with functional outcome, symptom burden, and TBI-specific health-related quality of life (HRQOL) up to six months after injury. Methods: Patients (n = 1379) with mTBI from the Collaborative European NeuroTrauma Effectiveness Research in TBI (CENTER-TBI) study who reported whether they received rehabilitation services during the first six months post-injury and who participated in outcome assessments were included. Functional outcome was measured with the Glasgow Outcome Scale – Extended (GOSE), symptom burden with the Rivermead Post Concussion Symptoms Questionnaire (RPQ), and HRQOL with the Quality of Life after Brain Injury – Overall Scale (QOLIBRI-OS). We examined whether transition of care (TOC) pathways, receiving rehabilitation services, sociodemographic (incl. geographic), premorbid, and injury-related factors were associated with outcomes using regression models. For easy comparison, we estimated ordinal regression models for all outcomes where the scores were classified based on quantiles. Results: Overall, 43% of patients with complicated and 20% with uncomplicated mTBI reported receiving rehabilitation services, primarily in physical and cognitive domains. Patients with complicated mTBI had lower functional level, higher symptom burden, and lower HRQOL compared to uncomplicated mTBI. Rehabilitation services at three or six months and a higher number of TOC were associated with unfavorable outcomes in all models, in addition to pre-morbid psychiatric problems. Being male and having more than 13 years of education was associated with more favorable outcomes. Sustaining major trauma was associated with unfavorable GOSE outcome, whereas living in Southern and Eastern European regions was associated with lower HRQOL. Conclusions: Patients with complicated mTBI reported more unfavorable outcomes and received rehabilitation services more frequently. Receiving rehabilitation services and higher number of care transitions were indicators of injury severity and associated with unfavorable outcomes. The findings should be interpreted carefully and validated in future studies as we applied a novel analytic approach. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02210221.</p

Occurrence and timing of withdrawal of life-sustaining measures in traumatic brain injury patients: a CENTER-TBI study

Funder: National Institute for Health Research (UK)Abstract: Background: In patients with severe brain injury, withdrawal of life-sustaining measures (WLSM) is common in intensive care units (ICU). WLSM constitutes a dilemma: instituting WLSM too early could result in death despite the possibility of an acceptable functional outcome, whereas delaying WLSM could unnecessarily burden patients, families, clinicians, and hospital resources. We aimed to describe the occurrence and timing of WLSM, and factors associated with timing of WLSM in European ICUs in patients with traumatic brain injury (TBI). Methods: The CENTER-TBI Study is a prospective multi-center cohort study. For the current study, patients with traumatic brain injury (TBI) admitted to the ICU and aged 16 or older were included. Occurrence and timing of WLSM were documented. For the analyses, we dichotomized timing of WLSM in early (< 72 h after injury) versus later (≥ 72 h after injury) based on recent guideline recommendations. We assessed factors associated with initiating WLSM early versus later, including geographic region, center, patient, injury, and treatment characteristics with univariable and multivariable (mixed effects) logistic regression. Results: A total of 2022 patients aged 16 or older were admitted to the ICU. ICU mortality was 13% (n = 267). Of these, 229 (86%) patients died after WLSM, and were included in the analyses. The occurrence of WLSM varied between regions ranging from 0% in Eastern Europe to 96% in Northern Europe. In 51% of the patients, WLSM was early. Patients in the early WLSM group had a lower maximum therapy intensity level (TIL) score than patients in the later WLSM group (median of 5 versus 10) The strongest independent variables associated with early WLSM were one unreactive pupil (odds ratio (OR) 4.0, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.3–12.4) or two unreactive pupils (OR 5.8, CI 2.6–13.1) compared to two reactive pupils, and an Injury Severity Score (ISS) if over 41 (OR per point above 41 = 1.1, CI 1.0–1.1). Timing of WLSM was not significantly associated with region or center. Conclusion: WLSM occurs early in half of the patients, mostly in patients with severe TBI affecting brainstem reflexes who were severely injured. We found no regional or center influences in timing of WLSM. Whether WLSM is always appropriate or may contribute to a self-fulfilling prophecy requires further research and argues for reluctance to institute WLSM early in case of any doubt on prognosis

How do 66 European institutional review boards approve one protocol for an international prospective observational study on traumatic brain injury? Experiences from the CENTER-TBI study

Abstract: Background: The European Union (EU) aims to optimize patient protection and efficiency of health-care research by harmonizing procedures across Member States. Nonetheless, further improvements are required to increase multicenter research efficiency. We investigated IRB procedures in a large prospective European multicenter study on traumatic brain injury (TBI), aiming to inform and stimulate initiatives to improve efficiency. Methods: We reviewed relevant documents regarding IRB submission and IRB approval from European neurotrauma centers participating in the Collaborative European NeuroTrauma Effectiveness Research in Traumatic Brain Injury (CENTER-TBI). Documents included detailed information on IRB procedures and the duration from IRB submission until approval(s). They were translated and analyzed to determine the level of harmonization of IRB procedures within Europe. Results: From 18 countries, 66 centers provided the requested documents. The primary IRB review was conducted centrally (N = 11, 61%) or locally (N = 7, 39%) and primary IRB approval was obtained after one (N = 8, 44%), two (N = 6, 33%) or three (N = 4, 23%) review rounds with a median duration of respectively 50 and 98 days until primary IRB approval. Additional IRB approval was required in 55% of countries and could increase duration to 535 days. Total duration from submission until required IRB approval was obtained was 114 days (IQR 75–224) and appeared to be shorter after submission to local IRBs compared to central IRBs (50 vs. 138 days, p = 0.0074). Conclusion: We found variation in IRB procedures between and within European countries. There were differences in submission and approval requirements, number of review rounds and total duration. Research collaborations could benefit from the implementation of more uniform legislation and regulation while acknowledging local cultural habits and moral values between countries

Informed consent procedures in patients with an acute inability to provide informed consent

Purpose: Enrolling traumatic brain injury (TBI) patients with an inability to provide informed consent in research is challenging. Alternatives to patient consent are not sufficiently embedded in European and national legislation, which allows procedural variation and bias. We aimed to quantify variations in informed consent policy and practice. Methods: Variation was explored in the CENTER-TBI study. Policies were reported by using a questionnaire and national legislation. Data on used informed consent procedures were available for 4498 patients from 57 centres across 17 European countries. Results: Variation in the use of informed consent procedur