@article{AngheloiuHaenscheidWenetal.2012, author = {Angheloiu, George O. and H{\"a}nscheid, Heribert and Wen, Xiaoyan and Capponi, Vincent and Anderson, William D. and Kellum, John A.}, title = {Experimental first-pass method for testing and comparing sorbent polymers used in the clearance of iodine contrast materials}, series = {Blood Purification}, volume = {34}, journal = {Blood Purification}, number = {1}, issn = {0253-5068}, doi = {10.1159/000339816}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-199118}, pages = {34-39}, year = {2012}, abstract = {Background: Sorbents have been shown to adsorb iodinated radiocontrast media. Objective: In this study we describe a simple method to compare various sorbents in terms of capacity to adsorb radiocontrast media. Methods: Iodixanol solution was injected into columns filled with three types of sorbent at filtration velocities of increasing magnitude. Two variables of interest - contrast removal rate and matched iodine retention (MIR) - were calculated to measure the adsorption efficiency and the mass of contrast iodine adsorbed versus sorbent used, respectively. Results: The highest contrast removal and MIR for Porapak Q, CST 401 and Amberlite XAD4 were 41, 38 and 16\% (p = 0.22 and 0.0005 for comparisons between Porapak Q-CST 401 and CST 401-Amberlite XAD4) and 0.060, 0.055 and 0.024, respectively (p = 0.18 and 0.0008). Extrapolation to a clinical scenario may suggest that removal of 8 ml iodixanol could be achieved by masses of sorbents of 43, 47 and 107 g, respectively. Conclusion: In this study we set a benchmark for comparing the radiocontrast-adsorbing efficiency of polymer sorbents during first-pass experiments, using a readily available methodology.}, language = {en} } @article{KreisslHaenscheidLoehretal.2012, author = {Kreissl, Michael C. and H{\"a}nscheid, Heribert and L{\"o}hr, Mario and Verburg, Frederik A. and Schiller, Markus and Lassmann, Michael and Reiners, Christoph and Samnick, Samuel S. and Buck, Andreas K. and Flentje, Michael and Sweeney, Reinhart A.}, title = {Combination of peptide receptor radionuclide therapy with fractionated external beam radiotherapy for treatment of advanced symptomatic meningioma}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-75540}, year = {2012}, abstract = {Background: External beam radiotherapy (EBRT) is the treatment of choice for irresectable meningioma. Due to the strong expression of somatostatin receptors, peptide receptor radionuclide therapy (PRRT) has been used in advanced cases. We assessed the feasibility and tolerability of a combination of both treatment modalities in advanced symptomatic meningioma. Methods: 10 patients with irresectable meningioma were treated with PRRT (177Lu-DOTA0,Tyr3 octreotate or - DOTA0,Tyr3 octreotide) followed by external beam radiotherapy (EBRT). EBRT performed after PRRT was continued over 5-6 weeks in IMRT technique (median dose: 53.0 Gy). All patients were assessed morphologically and by positron emission tomography (PET) before therapy and were restaged after 3-6 months. Side effects were evaluated according to CTCAE 4.0. Results: Median tumor dose achieved by PRRT was 7.2 Gy. During PRRT and EBRT, no side effects>CTCAE grade 2 were noted. All patients reported stabilization or improvement of tumor-associated symptoms, no morphologic tumor progression was observed in MR-imaging (median follow-up: 13.4 months). The median pre-therapeutic SUVmax in the meningiomas was 14.2 (range: 4.3-68.7). All patients with a second PET after combined PRRT + EBRT showed an increase in SUVmax (median: 37\%; range: 15\%-46\%) to a median value of 23.7 (range: 8.0-119.0; 7 patients) while PET-estimated volume generally decreased to 81 ± 21\% of the initial volume. Conclusions: The combination of PRRT and EBRT is feasible and well tolerated. This approach represents an attractive strategy for the treatment of recurring or progressive symptomatic meningioma, which should be further evaluated.}, subject = {Medizin}, language = {en} }