Gadoxetate二钠vs Gadobenate Dimeglumine在已知或疑似局灶性肝脏病变患者中的诊断疗效和安全性:一项临床III期研究结果

Magnetic resonance insights Pub Date : 2019-02-18 eCollection Date: 2019-01-01 DOI:10.1177/1178623X19827976
Christoph J Zech, Carsten Schwenke, Jan Endrikat
{"title":"Gadoxetate二钠vs Gadobenate Dimeglumine在已知或疑似局灶性肝脏病变患者中的诊断疗效和安全性:一项临床III期研究结果","authors":"Christoph J Zech,&nbsp;Carsten Schwenke,&nbsp;Jan Endrikat","doi":"10.1177/1178623X19827976","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The aim of this study is to evaluate the diagnostic efficacy and safety of gadoxetate disodium vs gadobenate dimeglumine in patients with known or suspected focal liver lesions.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was a prospective, multicenter, double-blind, randomized, inter-individual Phase III study. The primary target-technical efficacy-was already published. Here, secondary efficacy parameters-sensitivity and specificity-and safety in specific patient populations are presented. Patients with suspected or known focal liver lesions scheduled for contrast-enhanced liver magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) were recruited and categorized in 4 a priori specified subgroups: (1) all patients, (2) patients with liver cancer (hepatocellular carcinoma [HCC]), (3) patients with cirrhosis, and (4) patients with HCC + cirrhosis. Dual multi-detector liver computed tomography (CT) served as standard of reference.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 295 patients were included. While the overall increase in sensitivity across all 4 patient groups was comparable for gadoxetate disodium (increase from pre- to post-contrast ranging from 6.2% to 9.9%) and gadobenate dimeglumine (ranging from -2.9% to 10.0%), significant differences were seen for some of the subgroups. There was a significantly higher increase in sensitivity for gadoxetate disodium in patients with HCC (7%) and HCC + cirrhosis (12.8%) in comparison with gadobenate dimeglumine. Specificity decreased for both agents: gadoxetate disodium by -2.8% to -6.3% and gadobenate dimeglumine by -3.3% to -8.7%. Gadoxetate showed a significantly lower loss of specificity in all subgroups. Safety was comparable in both groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Gadoxetate disodium proved to be an effective liver-specific MRI contrast agent. Some distinct advantages over gadobenate dimeglumine were demonstrated in patients with HCC and patients with HCC + liver cirrhosis for sensitivity and specificity in liver lesion detection.</p>","PeriodicalId":74096,"journal":{"name":"Magnetic resonance insights","volume":"12 ","pages":"1178623X19827976"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-02-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/1178623X19827976","citationCount":"5","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Diagnostic Efficacy and Safety of Gadoxetate Disodium vs Gadobenate Dimeglumine in Patients With Known or Suspected Focal Liver Lesions: Results of a Clinical Phase III Study.\",\"authors\":\"Christoph J Zech,&nbsp;Carsten Schwenke,&nbsp;Jan Endrikat\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/1178623X19827976\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The aim of this study is to evaluate the diagnostic efficacy and safety of gadoxetate disodium vs gadobenate dimeglumine in patients with known or suspected focal liver lesions.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was a prospective, multicenter, double-blind, randomized, inter-individual Phase III study. The primary target-technical efficacy-was already published. Here, secondary efficacy parameters-sensitivity and specificity-and safety in specific patient populations are presented. Patients with suspected or known focal liver lesions scheduled for contrast-enhanced liver magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) were recruited and categorized in 4 a priori specified subgroups: (1) all patients, (2) patients with liver cancer (hepatocellular carcinoma [HCC]), (3) patients with cirrhosis, and (4) patients with HCC + cirrhosis. Dual multi-detector liver computed tomography (CT) served as standard of reference.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 295 patients were included. While the overall increase in sensitivity across all 4 patient groups was comparable for gadoxetate disodium (increase from pre- to post-contrast ranging from 6.2% to 9.9%) and gadobenate dimeglumine (ranging from -2.9% to 10.0%), significant differences were seen for some of the subgroups. There was a significantly higher increase in sensitivity for gadoxetate disodium in patients with HCC (7%) and HCC + cirrhosis (12.8%) in comparison with gadobenate dimeglumine. Specificity decreased for both agents: gadoxetate disodium by -2.8% to -6.3% and gadobenate dimeglumine by -3.3% to -8.7%. Gadoxetate showed a significantly lower loss of specificity in all subgroups. Safety was comparable in both groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Gadoxetate disodium proved to be an effective liver-specific MRI contrast agent. Some distinct advantages over gadobenate dimeglumine were demonstrated in patients with HCC and patients with HCC + liver cirrhosis for sensitivity and specificity in liver lesion detection.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":74096,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Magnetic resonance insights\",\"volume\":\"12 \",\"pages\":\"1178623X19827976\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-02-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/1178623X19827976\",\"citationCount\":\"5\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Magnetic resonance insights\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/1178623X19827976\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2019/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Magnetic resonance insights","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1178623X19827976","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2019/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

摘要

目的:本研究的目的是评估gadoxetate二钠与gadobenate二聚氨胺在已知或疑似局灶性肝脏病变患者中的诊断效果和安全性。方法:这是一项前瞻性、多中心、双盲、随机、个体间的III期研究。主要目标——技术效能——已经公布。在这里,次要疗效参数-敏感性和特异性-以及特定患者群体的安全性。招募疑似或已知局灶性肝脏病变的患者进行肝磁共振增强成像(MRI),并将其分为4个预先指定的亚组:(1)所有患者,(2)肝癌(肝细胞癌[HCC])患者,(3)肝硬化患者,(4)HCC +肝硬化患者。双多探测器肝脏计算机断层扫描(CT)作为参考标准。结果:共纳入295例患者。虽然在所有4个患者组中,加多赛特二钠(从对比前到对比后的6.2%至9.9%的增加)和加多赛特二胺(从-2.9%至10.0%的增加)的敏感性总体增加是相当的,但在某些亚组中发现了显著差异。肝细胞癌患者(7%)和肝细胞癌+肝硬化患者(12.8%)对加多赛特二钠的敏感性明显高于加多赛特二胺。两种药物的特异性均下降:加多赛特二钠从-2.8%降至-6.3%,加多赛特二氨基从-3.3%降至-8.7%。Gadoxetate在所有亚组中显示出更低的特异性丧失。两组的安全性相当。结论:Gadoxetate二钠被证明是一种有效的肝脏特异性MRI造影剂。HCC患者和HCC +肝硬化患者在肝脏病变检测的敏感性和特异性方面比gadobenate二聚氰胺有明显的优势。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

摘要图片

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Diagnostic Efficacy and Safety of Gadoxetate Disodium vs Gadobenate Dimeglumine in Patients With Known or Suspected Focal Liver Lesions: Results of a Clinical Phase III Study.

Purpose: The aim of this study is to evaluate the diagnostic efficacy and safety of gadoxetate disodium vs gadobenate dimeglumine in patients with known or suspected focal liver lesions.

Methods: This was a prospective, multicenter, double-blind, randomized, inter-individual Phase III study. The primary target-technical efficacy-was already published. Here, secondary efficacy parameters-sensitivity and specificity-and safety in specific patient populations are presented. Patients with suspected or known focal liver lesions scheduled for contrast-enhanced liver magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) were recruited and categorized in 4 a priori specified subgroups: (1) all patients, (2) patients with liver cancer (hepatocellular carcinoma [HCC]), (3) patients with cirrhosis, and (4) patients with HCC + cirrhosis. Dual multi-detector liver computed tomography (CT) served as standard of reference.

Results: A total of 295 patients were included. While the overall increase in sensitivity across all 4 patient groups was comparable for gadoxetate disodium (increase from pre- to post-contrast ranging from 6.2% to 9.9%) and gadobenate dimeglumine (ranging from -2.9% to 10.0%), significant differences were seen for some of the subgroups. There was a significantly higher increase in sensitivity for gadoxetate disodium in patients with HCC (7%) and HCC + cirrhosis (12.8%) in comparison with gadobenate dimeglumine. Specificity decreased for both agents: gadoxetate disodium by -2.8% to -6.3% and gadobenate dimeglumine by -3.3% to -8.7%. Gadoxetate showed a significantly lower loss of specificity in all subgroups. Safety was comparable in both groups.

Conclusions: Gadoxetate disodium proved to be an effective liver-specific MRI contrast agent. Some distinct advantages over gadobenate dimeglumine were demonstrated in patients with HCC and patients with HCC + liver cirrhosis for sensitivity and specificity in liver lesion detection.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
The Evolving Role of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance Imaging in the Evaluation of Systemic Amyloidosis. Diagnostic Efficacy and Safety of Gadoxetate Disodium vs Gadobenate Dimeglumine in Patients With Known or Suspected Focal Liver Lesions: Results of a Clinical Phase III Study. A Correlational Study between Microstructural White Matter Properties and Macrostructural Gray Matter Volume Across Normal Ageing: Conjoint DTI and VBM Analysis. In Vivo MR Imaging of Tumor-Associated Macrophages: The Next Frontier in Cancer Imaging. Trial-Level Regressor Modulation for Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging Designs Requiring Strict Periodicity of Stimulus Presentations: Illustrated Using a Go/No-Go Task.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1