Vincent Massullo

Catheter-Based Radiotherapy to Inhibit Restenosis after Coronary Stenting

BACKGROUND In animal models of coronary restenosis, intracoronary radiotherapy has been shown to reduce the intimal hyperplasia that is a part of restenosis. We studied the safety and efficacy of catheter-based intracoronary gamma radiation plus stenting to reduce coronary restenosis in patients with previous restenosis. METHODS Patients with restenosis underwent coronary stenting, as required, and balloon dilation and were then randomly assigned to receive catheter-based irradiation with iridium-192 or placebo. Clinical follow-up was performed, with quantitative coronary angiographic and intravascular ultrasonographic measurements at six months. RESULTS Fifty-five patients were enrolled; 26 were assigned to the iridium-192 group and 29 to the placebo group. Angiographic studies were performed in 53 patients (96 percent) at a mean (+/-SD) of 6.7+/-2.2 months. The mean minimal luminal diameter at follow-up was larger in the iridium-192 group than in the placebo group (2.43+/-0.78 mm vs. 1.85+/-0.89 mm, P=0.02). Late luminal loss was significantly lower in the iridium-192 group than in the placebo group (0.38+/-1.06 mm vs. 1.03+/-0.97 mm, P=0.03). Angiographically identified restenosis (stenosis of 50 percent or more of the luminal diameter at follow-up) occurred in 17 percent of the patients in the iridium-192 group, as compared with 54 percent of those in the placebo group (P= 0.01). There were no apparent complications of the treatment. CONCLUSIONS In this preliminary, short-term study of patients with previous coronary restenosis, coronary stenting followed by catheter-based intracoronary radiotherapy substantially reduced the rate of subsequent restenosis.

Three-year clinical and angiographic follow-up after intracoronary radiation : results of a randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND Although several early trials indicate treatment of restenosis with radiation therapy is safe and effective, the long-term impact of this new technology has been questioned. The objective of this report is to document angiographic and clinical outcome 3 years after treatment of restenotic stented coronary arteries with catheter-based (192)Ir. METHODS AND RESULTS A double-blind, randomized trial compared (192)Ir with placebo sources in patients with previous restenosis after coronary angioplasty. Over a 9-month period, 55 patients were enrolled; 26 were randomized to (192)Ir and 29 to placebo. At 3-year follow-up, target-lesion revascularization was significantly lower in the (192)Ir group (15. 4% versus 48.3%; P<0.01). The dichotomous restenosis rate at 3-year follow-up was also significantly lower in (192)Ir patients (33% versus 64%; P<0.05). In a subgroup of patients with 3-year angiographic follow-up not subjected to target-lesion revascularization by the 6-month angiogram, the mean minimal luminal diameter between 6 months and 3 years decreased from 2.49+/-0.81 to 2.12+/-0.73 mm in (192)Ir patients but was unchanged in placebo patients. CONCLUSIONS The early clinical benefits observed after treatment of coronary restenosis with (192)Ir appear durable at late follow-up. Angiographic restenosis continues to be significantly reduced in (192)Ir-treated patients, but a small amount of late loss was observed between the 6-month and 3-year follow-up time points. No events occurred in the (192)Ir group to suggest major untoward effects of vascular radiotherapy. At 3-year follow-up, vascular radiotherapy continues to be a promising new treatment for restenosis.

Five-Year Clinical Follow-Up After Intracoronary Radiation Results of a Randomized Clinical Trial

Background—Several clinical trials indicate that intracoronary radiation is safe and effective for treatment of restenotic coronary arteries. We previously reported 6-month and 3-year clinical and angiographic follow-up demonstrating significant decreases in target lesion revascularization (TLR) and angiographic restenosis after &ggr; radiation of restenotic lesions. The objective of this study was to document the clinical outcome 5 years after treatment of restenotic coronary arteries with catheter-based iridium-192 (192Ir). Methods and Results—A double-blind, randomized trail compared 192Ir to placebo sources in patients with restenosis after coronary angioplasty. Over a 9-month period, 55 patients were enrolled; 26 were randomized to 192Ir and 29 to placebo. At 5-year follow-up, TLR was significantly lower in the 192Ir group (23.1% versus 48.3%;P =0.05). There were 2 TLRs between years 3 and 5 in patients in the 192Ir group and none in patients in the placebo group. The 5-year event-free survival rate (freedom from death, myocardial infarction, or TLR) was greater in 192Ir-treated patients (61.5% versus 34.5%;P =0.02). Conclusions—Despite apparent mitigation of efficacy over time, there remains a significant reduction in TLR at 5 years and an improvement in event-free survival in patients treated with intracoronary 192Ir. The early clinical benefits after intracoronary &ggr; radiation with 192Ir seem durable at 5-year clinical follow-up.

Two-Year Follow-Up After Catheter-Based Radiotherapy to Inhibit Coronary Restenosis

BACKGROUND Although early trials indicate the treatment of restenosis with radiation therapy is safe and effective, the long-term impact of this new technology has been questioned. The possibility of late untoward consequences, such as aneurysm formation, perforation, and accelerated vascular disease, is of significant concern. Furthermore, it is not known whether the beneficial effects of radiation therapy will be durable or whether radiation will only delay restenosis. METHODS AND RESULTS A double-blind, randomized trial was undertaken to compare 192Ir with placebo sources in patients with previous restenosis after coronary angioplasty. Patients were randomly assigned to receive a 0.76-mm (0. 03-in) ribbon containing sealed sources of either 192Ir or placebo. All patients underwent repeat coronary angiography at 6 months. All living patients were contacted 24 months after their index study procedure. Patients were assessed with respect to the need for target-lesion revascularization or nontarget-lesion revascularization, occurrence of myocardial infarction, or death. Over a 9-month period, 55 patients were enrolled; 26 were randomized to 192Ir and 29 to placebo. Follow-up was obtained in 100% of living patients at a minimum of 24 months. Target-lesion revascularization was significantly lower in the 192Ir group (15.4% versus 44.8%; P<0. 01). Nontarget-lesion revascularization was similar in 192Ir and placebo patients (19.2% versus 20.7%; P=NS). There were 2 deaths in each group. The composite end point of death, myocardial infarction, or target-lesion revascularization was significantly lower in 192Ir-treated versus placebo-treated patients (23.1% versus 51.7%; P=0.03). No patient in the 192Ir group sustained a target-lesion revascularization later than 10 months. CONCLUSIONS At 2-year clinical follow-up, treatment with 192Ir demonstrates significant clinical benefit. Although further follow-up (including late angiography) will be necessary, no clinical events have occurred to date in the 192Ir group to suggest major untoward effects of vascular radiotherapy. At the intermediate follow-up time point, vascular radiotherapy continues to be a promising new treatment for restenosis.

Prognostic factors in adult soft-tissue sarcomas of the head and neck

PURPOSE The main objectives of this study were (a) to review the treatment results of primary head and neck soft-tissue sarcoma at our institution, (b) to identify important prognostic factors in local control and survival, and (c) to assess the efficacy of salvage therapy. METHODS AND MATERIALS Sixty-five patients were treated at the University of California, San Francisco, between 1961 and 1993. Seventeen patients (27%) had low-grade, 10 (15%) had intermediate-grade, and 38 (58%) had high-grade sarcomas. Tumors were > 5 cm in 35 patients. Local management consisted of surgery alone in 14 patients (22%), surgery and radiotherapy in 40 (61%), and radiotherapy alone in 11 (17%) patients. The median follow-up was 64 months. RESULTS The 5-year actuarial local control rate of the entire group was 66%. Tumor size and grade were important predictors for local control on multivariate analysis. The actuarial local control rate at 5 years was 92% for T1 vs. 40% for T2 primaries (p = 0.004), and 80% for Grade 1-2 vs. 48% for Grade 3 tumors (p = 0.01). None of the patients treated with radiotherapy alone with a dose of 50-65 Gy were controlled locally. Combined radiotherapy and surgery appeared to yield superior local control compared to surgery alone (77% vs. 59%); however, the difference was not statistically significant. The 5-year actuarial overall and cause-specific survivals were 56% and 60%, respectively. Unfavorable prognostic factors for cause-specific survival on multivariate analysis were age > 55 (p = 0.009), high tumor grade (p = 0.0002), inadequate surgery (p = 0.008), and positive surgical margins (p = 0.0009). In patients who underwent salvage therapy for treatment failure, the 5-year actuarial survival after salvage treatment was 26%. CONCLUSION Tumor size and grade were important predictors for local control. Age, grade, adequacy of surgery, and status of surgical margins were significant prognostic factors for survival. There was a trend of improved local control with combined surgery and radiotherapy compared to either modality alone for high-risk patients. Radiotherapy alone with doses < or = 65 Gy was insufficient for control of gross disease. Aggressive salvage therapy was worthwhile in patients whose disease was uncontrolled after the initial treatment.

A subgroup analysis of the scripps coronary radiation to inhibit proliferation poststenting trial

INTRODUCTION In the Scripps Coronary Radiation to Inhibit Proliferation Poststenting (SCRIPPS) Trial, 192Ir significantly reduced angiographic, ultrasonographic, and clinical endpoints of restenosis. The objective of this analysis was to quantitate the impact of patient, lesion and technical characteristics on late angiographic outcome. METHODS Patients with restenotic, stented coronary lesions were randomized to receive either 192Ir or placebo sources. Late luminal loss and loss index were calculated for several patient subgroups, including patients with diabetes, in-stent restenosis, multiple previous percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty (PTCA) procedures, longer lesion lengths, saphenous vein grafts, small vessel diameters, and minimum dose exposures < 8.00 Gy. Two-factor analysis of variance was used to test for an interaction between patient characteristics and treatment effect. RESULTS In the treated group, late loss was particularly low in patients with diabetes (0.19 mm), in-stent restenosis (0.17 mm), reference vessel diameters < 3.0 mm (0.07 mm), and patients who received a minimum radiation dose to the entire adventitial border of at least 8.00 Gy. The loss index in each of these subgroups was similarly low at -0.02, 0.03, -0.02, and 0.03, respectively. By 2-factor analysis of variance, a significant interaction between subgroup characteristic and treatment effect (late loss) was found in patients with in-stent restenosis (p = 0.035), and patients receiving a minimum dose of 8.00 Gy to the adventitial border (p = 0.009). CONCLUSION In this pilot study, patient characteristics associated with a more aggressive proliferative response to injury appeared to confer an enhanced response to radiotherapy. Furthermore, a dose threshold response to 192Ir was found with an enhanced response occurring when the entire circumference of the adventitial border was exposed to at least 8.00 Gy.

Clinical and angiographic outcomes after use of 90strontium/90yttrium beta radiation for the treatment of in-stent restenosis: Results from the stents and radiation therapy 40 (start 40) registry

PURPOSE To evaluate the safety and efficacy of a 40-mm 90Strontium/90Yttrium source train in the management of in-stent restenosis within native coronary arteries. MATERIALS AND METHODS This multicenter, prospective registry was designed to compare the results of patients with in-stent restenosis treated with a 40-mm source train to the placebo arm of the previously reported randomized Stents and Radiation Trial (START). All patients entered in the registry were treated with repeat balloon angioplasty followed by intravascular brachytherapy. Radiation dose was prescribed based on vessel size. 18 Gy was delivered at 2 mm for vessel diameters between 2.75 and 3.35 mm, and 23 Gy was used for vessels between 3.36 and 4.0 mm. The efficacy endpoints for the START 40 registry included a reduction in the target lesion revascularization (TLR) rate, target vessel revascularization rates, and target vessel failure (TVF) at 8 months. Secondary angiographic efficacy endpoints were binary restenosis at 8 months, in-stent minimum luminal diameter (MLD), and late loss. The safety endpoints included major adverse cardiac events as well as late aneurysm formation. The registry was designed to allow a statistically valid comparison of these results to the placebo group of the START 30 trial. Quantitative angiographic analysis was performed on the 8-month follow-up examination. Rates of restenosis were evaluated for various segments of the treated vessel. A separate analysis was performed to evaluate the relationship between vessel injury length and the radiated segment. RESULTS A total of 207 patients were entered into the START 40 registry. The postprocedure angiographic results, including the postprocedure MLD and percent diameter stenosis, were similar between the START 40 patients and the placebo group from the START trial in the stented segment of the treated vessel. Eight-month angiographic follow-up was available on 150 patients from the registry. The TLR rate was significantly reduced when compared to the placebo group (11% vs. 22.4% respectively, p = 0.008). A similar reduction was seen in terms of target vessel revascularization (15.9% vs. 24.1%, p = 0.03). The 8-month MLD was found to be significantly larger in the START 40 patients (1.85 mm vs. 1.47 mm, p < 0.0001). The difference seen in the clinical endpoint of TVF (19.3% vs. 25.9%) did not reach statistical significance (p = 0.1). Analysis of the procedural angiograms revealed mismatch between the length of vessel injured and the location of the 90% isodose in 46% of the treated cases. Angiographic analysis revealed that geographic miss was associated with a higher rate of binary restenosis (32% vs. 18% p = 0.04) in the analysis segment. CONCLUSIONS This multicenter registry demonstrates the safety and efficacy of a 40-mm 90Strontium/90Yttrium source train in the management of patients with in-stent restenosis. Restenosis rates were lowered with the use of this longer source train when compared to the placebo arm of the START trial for lesions with a maximum vessel injury length of 20 mm. Angiographic analysis identified the importance of the accurate delineation of injury length and correct source positioning. These results support the continued use of beta radiation for the treatment of this disease process.

Quantitative angiographic analysis of stent restenosis in the Scripps Coronary Radiation to Inhibit Intimal Proliferation Post Stenting (SCRIPPS) Trial.

To identify luminal dimension changes occurring within the stent alone and within the stent + margin segment, we reviewed the quantitative angiographic results obtained from the Scripps Coronary Radiation to Inhibit Proliferation Post Stenting (SCRIPPS) trial, a prospective randomized trial assessing the effect of iridium-192 (Ir-192) on the prevention of stent restenosis. Fifty-five patients were randomly assigned to receive Ir-192 or placebo sources after successful intervention. Procedural and 6-month follow-up cineangiograms were quantitatively reviewed in 52 patients to identify changes within the stent and the stent + margin segment. The percent diameter stenosis was lower within the stent than within the stent + margin segment after the procedure (6 +/- 22% vs 21+/- 15%, p <0.0001) and at follow-up (28 +/- 29% vs 42 +/- 21%, p <0.0001). As a result, a lower restenosis rate was found within the stent than within the stent + margin (25% vs 37%, p <0.0001); isolated stent margin restenosis occurred in 11.5% of lesions. Treatment with Ir-192 reduced restenosis within the stent (8% vs 39%; p = 0.010) and within the stent + margin segment (17% vs 54%; p = 0.010); the reduction in restenosis at the margin only (8.3% vs 14.3%, p = 0.503) was not significant. The lowest relative risk for restenosis resulting from Ir-192 occurred within the stent (0.21; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.05 to 0.86) compared with the stent + margin segment (0.31; 95% CI 0.12 to 0.81) or the stent margin (0.58; 95% CI 0.12 to 2.91). In the SCRIPPS trial, 32% of restenosis occurred at the stent margins. Treatment with Ir-192 reduced restenosis primarily within the stent rather than the margin. Whether extending the treatment length to fully include the stent margins will further reduce restenosis requires further study.

How long is enough? Defining the treatment length in endovascular brachytherapy

The International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurement (IRCU) 50 has clearly defined treatment volumes in radiation therapy in the management of neoplasms. These concepts are applied to the field of endovascular brachytherapy (EVBT) for the prevention of postangioplasty restenosis. The following definitions are proposed: gross target length (GTL) is defined as the narrowed segment of the artery that requires intervention. Clinical target length (CTL) is defined as the intervened or injured length, which could be due to angioplasty, stent strut injury, stent deployment, or debulking procedures. Planning target length (PTL) is the CTL plus a margin to account for heart/catheter movement and uncertainty in target localization. The final treatment length (TL) is the PTL plus the effect of penumbra. The accurate specification of treatment length serves several important purposes. Based on an understanding of the different factors constituting the treatment length, adequate margins can be provided beyond the GTL; this will avoid geographic misses and minimize edge failures. These definitions of target length ensure treatment consistency and provide a standard terminology for communication among practitioners of EVBT, something of critical importance in the conduct of multi‐institutional trials in this new and multidisciplinary therapy. Finally, since the efficacy of EVBT is critically dependent on the precision of radiation delivery, these guidelines ensure that the benefits of EVBT seen in prospective randomized trials can be translated into daily clinical practice at the community level. Cathet. Cardiovasc. Intervent. 51:147–153, 2000.

The American Brachytherapy Society perspective on intravascular brachytherapy.

BACKGROUND Recent clinical studies indicate that intravascular brachytherapy (IVB) can reduce the rate of restenosis substantially after angioplasty procedures. However, no clinical guidelines exist for optimal therapy. METHODS The members of the IVB Subcommittee of the American Brachytherapy Society (ABS) identified the areas of consensus and controversies in IVB to issue the ABS perspective on IVB, based on analysis of published reports and the clinical experience of the members in brachytherapy. RESULTS IVB is still experimental. The long-term efficacy, toxicity, the target tissue, and dose required for IVB are not established. The ABS recommends that IVB procedures must be performed, with careful attention to radiation-related issues, in the context of controlled multidisciplinary clinical trials with the approval of the institutional review board, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, the Food and Drug Administration, and under an Investigational Device Exemption. The therapeutic radiologist, with a qualified radiation physicist, is responsible for dose prescription and delivery and needs to be present during the IVB procedure as part of this multidisciplinary team. The long-term outcome from these studies should be reviewed critically and published in peer-reviewed journals. The ABS endorsed the dosimetric guidelines of the American Association of Physicists in Medicine Task Group 60 (AAPM TG-60) report. The ABS recommends that dose specification be defined clearly; to allow comparisons between studies, the dose should be prescribed at 2 mm from the source for intracoronary brachytherapy and at an average luminal radius of +2 mm for peripheral vascular brachytherapy. The prescription doses at the above point is generally in the 12-18 Gy range. Comprehensive procedures for quality assurance, radiation protection, and emergencies should be in place before initiating an IVB program. Higher energy beta sources, lower energy gamma sources, dose-volume histograms, and correlation of three-dimensional reconstructions of delivered dose with patterns of failure are areas for further research. CONCLUSION The ABS perspective on IVB is presented to assist the interventional team in developing protocols for the use of IVB in the prevention of restenosis. Long-term outcome data with a standardized reporting system are needed to establish the role of brachytherapy in preventing vascular restenosis. Endovascular brachytherapy is a new and evolving modality, and these recommendations are subject to modifications as new data become available.