Laurence Beels
AZ Groeninge
Network
Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.
Publication
Featured researches published by Laurence Beels.
Nuklearmedizin | 2013
C. Van de Wiele; Karin Stellamans; Eddy Maurice Paul Brugman; Gilles Mees; B. De Spiegeleer; Y. D'Asseler; Laurence Beels; A. Maes
UNLABELLED Using quantitive VOI analysis, the percentage (99m)Tc-MAA uptake and SUVmax and mean values of liver metastases obtained prior to SIRT were related to treatment response using both a lesion-based and clinical dichotomous approach. Based on the VOI % of (99m)Tc-MAA activity, the estimated (90)Y-microspheres activity/cc (MBq/cc) was calculated from the effective dose injected. Baseline VOI FDG PET SUVmean and max values and estimated MBq/cc values were related to treatment response using a lesion-based approach (% change in SUVmean ≥ 50%) and a clinical dichotomous approach. Fifteen treatment sessions were analyzed (13 patients). Using the lesion-based approach (12 treatment sessions) 40 lesions responded and 37 did not. SUVmax and mean values proved significantly different between non-responding and responding lesions; 18.6 (SD 10.8) versus 13.5 (SD 8.4 ) for SUVmax (p = 0.02) and 11.4 (SD 3.8) versus 6.3 (SD 4.5) for SUVmean (p = 0.002). Using the clinical dichotomous approach (15 treatment sessions / 11 responding), 91 lesions were analyzed; 57 responded. VOI volumes and estimated (90)Y-loaded glass microspheres activity (MBq/cc) did not differ between responders and non responders; 24 cc (SD 27) versus 21 cc (SD 21 cc) (p = 0.4) and 1.95 MBq/cc (SD 1.1 MBq/cc) versus 1.90 MB/cc (SD 2.7 MBq/cc) (p = 0.92). On the contrary, SUVmax and mean values proved significantly different between responders and non-responders; 23.7 (SD 9.8) versus 9.4 (SD 3.8 ) for SUVmax (p = 0.0001) and 13.1 (SD 8.1) versus 4.9 (SD 1.4) for SUVmean. CONCLUSION These findings suggest that in patients presenting with high baseline SUVmax and mean values, the administration of higher activities or alternatively, other potentially more useful treatment options might be considered.
Nuklearmedizin | 2013
C. Van de Wiele; Karin Stellamans; Eddy Maurice Paul Brugman; Gilles Mees; B. De Spiegeleer; Y. D'Asseler; Laurence Beels; A. Maes
UNLABELLED Using quantitive VOI analysis, the percentage (99m)Tc-MAA uptake and SUVmax and mean values of liver metastases obtained prior to SIRT were related to treatment response using both a lesion-based and clinical dichotomous approach. Based on the VOI % of (99m)Tc-MAA activity, the estimated (90)Y-microspheres activity/cc (MBq/cc) was calculated from the effective dose injected. Baseline VOI FDG PET SUVmean and max values and estimated MBq/cc values were related to treatment response using a lesion-based approach (% change in SUVmean ≥ 50%) and a clinical dichotomous approach. Fifteen treatment sessions were analyzed (13 patients). Using the lesion-based approach (12 treatment sessions) 40 lesions responded and 37 did not. SUVmax and mean values proved significantly different between non-responding and responding lesions; 18.6 (SD 10.8) versus 13.5 (SD 8.4 ) for SUVmax (p = 0.02) and 11.4 (SD 3.8) versus 6.3 (SD 4.5) for SUVmean (p = 0.002). Using the clinical dichotomous approach (15 treatment sessions / 11 responding), 91 lesions were analyzed; 57 responded. VOI volumes and estimated (90)Y-loaded glass microspheres activity (MBq/cc) did not differ between responders and non responders; 24 cc (SD 27) versus 21 cc (SD 21 cc) (p = 0.4) and 1.95 MBq/cc (SD 1.1 MBq/cc) versus 1.90 MB/cc (SD 2.7 MBq/cc) (p = 0.92). On the contrary, SUVmax and mean values proved significantly different between responders and non-responders; 23.7 (SD 9.8) versus 9.4 (SD 3.8 ) for SUVmax (p = 0.0001) and 13.1 (SD 8.1) versus 4.9 (SD 1.4) for SUVmean. CONCLUSION These findings suggest that in patients presenting with high baseline SUVmax and mean values, the administration of higher activities or alternatively, other potentially more useful treatment options might be considered.
Nuklearmedizin-nuclear Medicine | 2013
C. Van de Wiele; Karin Stellamans; Eddy Maurice Paul Brugman; Gilles Mees; B. De Spiegeleer; Y. D'Asseler; Laurence Beels; Alex Maes
UNLABELLED Using quantitive VOI analysis, the percentage (99m)Tc-MAA uptake and SUVmax and mean values of liver metastases obtained prior to SIRT were related to treatment response using both a lesion-based and clinical dichotomous approach. Based on the VOI % of (99m)Tc-MAA activity, the estimated (90)Y-microspheres activity/cc (MBq/cc) was calculated from the effective dose injected. Baseline VOI FDG PET SUVmean and max values and estimated MBq/cc values were related to treatment response using a lesion-based approach (% change in SUVmean ≥ 50%) and a clinical dichotomous approach. Fifteen treatment sessions were analyzed (13 patients). Using the lesion-based approach (12 treatment sessions) 40 lesions responded and 37 did not. SUVmax and mean values proved significantly different between non-responding and responding lesions; 18.6 (SD 10.8) versus 13.5 (SD 8.4 ) for SUVmax (p = 0.02) and 11.4 (SD 3.8) versus 6.3 (SD 4.5) for SUVmean (p = 0.002). Using the clinical dichotomous approach (15 treatment sessions / 11 responding), 91 lesions were analyzed; 57 responded. VOI volumes and estimated (90)Y-loaded glass microspheres activity (MBq/cc) did not differ between responders and non responders; 24 cc (SD 27) versus 21 cc (SD 21 cc) (p = 0.4) and 1.95 MBq/cc (SD 1.1 MBq/cc) versus 1.90 MB/cc (SD 2.7 MBq/cc) (p = 0.92). On the contrary, SUVmax and mean values proved significantly different between responders and non-responders; 23.7 (SD 9.8) versus 9.4 (SD 3.8 ) for SUVmax (p = 0.0001) and 13.1 (SD 8.1) versus 4.9 (SD 1.4) for SUVmean. CONCLUSION These findings suggest that in patients presenting with high baseline SUVmax and mean values, the administration of higher activities or alternatively, other potentially more useful treatment options might be considered.
Physics in Medicine and Biology | 2016
Joke Devriese; Laurence Beels; Alex Maes; Christophe Van de Wiele; Hans Pottel
The Journal of Nuclear Medicine | 2013
Laurence Beels; Filip Lavent; Kristof Baete; Olivier Gheysens; Christophe Van de Wiele; Daniel Nicolaij; Alex Maes
Nuclear Medicine Communications | 2018
Joke Devriese; Laurence Beels; Alex Maes; Christophe Van de Wiele; Hans Pottel
European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging | 2016
Joke Devriese; Laurence Beels; Alex Maes; Christophe Van de Wiele; Hans Pottel
European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging | 2016
Joke Devriese; Laurence Beels; Alex Maes; Christophe Van de Wiele; Hans Pottel
European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging | 2015
Joke Devriese; Laurence Beels; A. Maes; C. Van de Wiele; Olivier Gheysens; Hans Pottel
The Journal of Nuclear Medicine | 2013
Laurence Beels; Filip Lavent; Tom Coolen; Kristof Baete; Olivier Gheysens; Christophe Van de Wiele; Daniel Nicolaij; Alex Maes