The DOI matches its Crossref record; 32 of the 32 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Personalised versus standard dosimetry approach of selective internal radiation therapy in patients with locally advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (DOSISPHERE-01): a randomised, multicentre, open-label phase 2 trial
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND All randomised phase 3 studies of selective internal radiation therapy for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma published to date have reported negative results. However, these studies did not use personalised dosimetry. We aimed to compare the efficacy of a personalised versus standard dosimetry approach of selective internal radiation therapy with yttrium-90-loaded glass microspheres in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma. METHODS DOSISPHERE-01 was a randomised, multicentre, open-label phase 2 trial done at four health-care centres in France. Patients were eligible if they were aged 18 years or older and had unresectable locally advanced hepatocellular carcinoma, at least one measurable lesion 7 cm or more in size, a hepatic reserve of at least 30% after selective internal radiation therapy, no extrahepatic spread (other than to the lymph nodes of the hilum, with a lesion <2 cm in size), and no contraindications to selective internal radiation therapy, as assessed by use of a technetium-99m macro-aggregated albumin scan. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) by use of a permutated block method, with block sizes of four and without stratification, to receive either standard dosimetry (120 ± 20 Gy) targeted to the perfused lobe; standard dosimetry group) or personalised dosimetry (≥205 Gy targeted to the index lesion; personalised dosimetry group). Investigators, patients, and study staff were not masked to treatment. The primary endpoint was the investigator-assessed objective response rate in the index lesion, according to European Association for the Study of the Liver criteria, at 3 months after selective internal radiation therapy in the modified intention-to-treat population. Safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one selective internal radiation therapy injection, and analysed on the basis of the treatment actually received (defined by central dosimetry assessment). The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02582034, and has been completed. FINDINGS Between Dec 5, 2015, and Jan 4, 2018, 93 patients were assessed for eligibility. Of these patients, 60 were randomly assigned: 31 to the personalised dosimetry group and 29 to the standard dosimetry group (intention-to-treat population). 56 (93%) patients (28 in each group) were treated (modified intention-to-treat population). In the modified intention-to-treat population, 20 (71% [95% CI 51-87]) of 28 patients in the personalised dosimetry group and ten (36% [19-56]) of 28 patients in the standard dosimetry group had an objective response (p=0·0074). In the safety analysis population, a least one serious adverse event was reported in seven (20%) of the 35 patients who received personalised dosimetry, and in seven (33%) of the 21 patients who received standard dosimetry. The most frequent (ie, occurring in >5% of patients) grade 3 or higher adverse events were ascites (one [3%] patient who received personalised dosimetry vs two [10%] patients who received standard dosimetry), hepatic failure (two [6%] vs none), lymphopenia (12 [34%] vs nine [43%]), increased aspartate aminotransferase concentrations (three [9%] vs two [10%]), increased alanine aminotransferase concentrations (three [9%] vs none), anaemia (two [6%] vs one [5%]), gastrointestinal haemorrhage (none vs two [10%]), and icterus (none vs two [10%]). One treatment-related death occurred in each group. INTERPRETATION Compared with standard dosimetry, personalised dosimetry significantly improved the objective response rate in patients with locally advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. The results of this study suggest that personalised dosimetry is likely to improve outcomes in clinical practice and should be used in future trials of selective internal radiation therapy. FUNDING Biocompatibles UK, a Boston Scientific Group company.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Cancer incidence and mortality worldwide: Sources, methods and major patterns in GLOBOCAN 2012
Ferlay, J., Soerjomataram, I., Dikshit, R., Eser, S., Mathers, C., Rebelo, M., Parkin, D. M., Forman, D., & Bray, F. (2015) · International Journal of Cancer · doi:10.1002/ijc.29210 · Cited by 28,766
Sorafenib in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma
Llovet, J. M., Ricci, S., Mazzaferro, V., Hilgard, P., Gane, E., Blanc, J.-F., de Oliveira, A. C., Santoro, A., Raoul, J.-L., Forner, A., et al. (2008) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa0708857 · Cited by 13,097
Atezolizumab plus bevacizumab in unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma
Finn, R. S., Qin, S., Ikeda, M., Galle, P. R., Ducreux, M., Kim, T.-Y., Kudo, M., Breder, V., Merle, P., Kaseb, A. O., et al. (2020) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa1915745 · Cited by 7,470
Self-citationSorafenib in Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma
정, 재. (2008) · Cited by 5,586
A note on quantifying follow-up in studies of failure time
Schemper, M., & Smith, T. L. (1996) · Controlled Clinical Trials · doi:10.1016/0197-2456(96)00075-x · Cited by 2,575
Renal cell carcinoma: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up
Escudier, B., Porta, C., Schmidinger, M., Algaba, F., Patard, J. J., Khoo, V., Eisen, T., & Horwich, A. (2014) · Annals of Oncology · doi:10.1093/annonc/mdu259 · Cited by 2,251
Hepatocellular carcinoma: a review
Balogh, J., Victor, D., Asham, E. H., Burroughs, S. G., Boktour, M., Saharia, A., Li, X., Ghobrial, M., & Monsour, H. (2016) · Journal of Hepatocellular Carcinoma · doi:10.2147/jhc.s61146 · Cited by 1,185
Salem, R., Lewandowski, R. J., Mulcahy, M. F., Riaz, A., Ryu, R. K., Ibrahim, S., Atassi, B., Baker, T., Gates, V., Miller, F. H., et al. (2010) · Gastroenterology · doi:10.1053/j.gastro.2009.09.006 · Cited by 1,074
Vilgrain, V., Pereira, H., Assenat, E., Guiu, B., Ilonca, A. D., Pageaux, G.-P., Sibert, A., Bouattour, M., Lebtahi, R., Allaham, W., et al. (2017) · The Lancet Oncology · doi:10.1016/s1470-2045(17)30683-6 · Cited by 834
Self-citationBruix, J., Raoul, J.-L., Sherman, M., Mazzaferro, V., Bolondi, L., Craxi, A., Galle, P. R., Santoro, A., Beaugrand, M., Sangiovanni, A., et al. (2012) · Journal of Hepatology · doi:10.1016/j.jhep.2012.06.014 · Cited by 822
Cited by
Vogel, A., Meyer, T., Sapisochin, G., Salem, R., & Saborowski, A. (2022) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(22)01200-4 · Cited by 2,427
AASLD Practice Guidance on prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma
Singal, A. G., Llovet, J. M., Yarchoan, M., Mehta, N., Heimbach, J. K., Dawson, L. A., Jou, J. H., Kulik, L. M., Agopian, V. G., Marrero, J. A., et al. (2023) · Hepatology · doi:10.1097/hep.0000000000000466 · Cited by 2,052
“[304] Such decisions should be made in the context of a multidisciplinary tumor board.”
EASL Clinical Practice Guidelines on the management of hepatocellular carcinoma
Sangro, B., Argemi, J., Ronot, M., Paradis, V., Meyer, T., Mazzaferro, V., Jepsen, P., Golfieri, R., Galle, P., Dawson, L., et al. (2025) · Journal of Hepatology · doi:10.1016/j.jhep.2024.08.028 · Cited by 985
Survey of Explainable AI Techniques in Healthcare
Chaddad, A., Peng, J., Xu, J., & Bouridane, A. (2023) · Sensors · doi:10.3390/s23020634 · Cited by 591
Ganesan, P., & Kulik, L. M. (2023) · Clinics in Liver Disease · doi:10.1016/j.cld.2022.08.004 · Cited by 478
Metadata
- Authors
- Garin, E., Tselikas, L., Guiu, B., Chalaye, J., Edeline, J., de Baere, T., Assenat, E., Tacher, V., Robert, C., Terroir-Cassou-Mounat, M., Mariano-Goulart, D., Amaddeo, G., Palard, X., Hollebecque, A., Kafrouni, M., Regnault, H., Boudjema, K., Grimaldi, S., Fourcade, M., Kobeiter, H., Vibert, E., Le Sourd, S., Piron, L., Sommacale, D., Laffont, S., Campillo-Gimenez, B., Rolland, Y., Garin, E., Edeline, J., Robert, C. R., Le Sourd, S., Palard, X., Laffont, S., Campillo-Gimenez, B., Rolland, Y., Pracht, M., Ardisson, V., Lenoir, L., Boudjema, K., Tselikas, L., De Baere, T., Terroir-Cassou-Mounat, M., Hollebecque, A., Grimaldi, S., Deschamps, F., Ducreux, M., Gelli, M., Vibert, E., Guiu, B., Piron, L., Kafrouni, M., Fourcade, M., Assenat, E., Mariano-Goulart, D., Cassinotto, C., Allimant, C., Chalaye, J., Regnault, H., Amaddeo, G., Sommacale, D., Kobeiter, H., Tacher, V., Bonnot-Lours, S., Marie, M., Itti, E., Lerman, L., Abulizi, M., Luciani, A., Costentin, C. E., & Milliner, M.
- Venue
- The Lancet Gastroenterology & Hepatology
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2021-01
- Volume
- 6
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 17-29
- ISSN
- 2468-1156 (ISSN-L)
- 2468-1253
- OpenAlex
- W3096906134
- Cited by
- 630
- References
- 32
- FWCI
- 37.78
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Personalised versus standard dosimetry approach of selective internal radiation therapy in patients with locally advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (DOSISPHERE-01): a randomised, multicentre, open-label phase 2 trial. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/s2468-1253(20)30290-9
- The paper
- Garin, E., Tselikas, L., Guiu, B., Chalaye, J., Edeline, J., de Baere, T., Assenat, E., Tacher, V., Robert, C., Terroir-Cassou-Mounat, M., Mariano-Goulart, D., Amaddeo, G., Palard, X., Hollebecque, A., Kafrouni, M., Regnault, H., Boudjema, K., Grimaldi, S., Fourcade, M., . . . Milliner, M. (2021). Personalised versus standard dosimetry approach of selective internal radiation therapy in patients with locally advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (DOSISPHERE-01): a randomised, multicentre, open-label phase 2 trial. The Lancet Gastroenterology & Hepatology. https://doi.org/10.1016/s2468-1253(20)30290-9
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.