Cargando…
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 pri...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
SAGE Publications
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6379790/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30799932 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1178623X19827976 |
_version_ | 1783396176620421120 |
---|---|
author | Zech, Christoph J Schwenke, Carsten Endrikat, Jan |
author_facet | Zech, Christoph J Schwenke, Carsten Endrikat, Jan |
author_sort | Zech, Christoph J |
collection | PubMed |
description | 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. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6379790 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | SAGE Publications |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-63797902019-02-22 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 Zech, Christoph J Schwenke, Carsten Endrikat, Jan Magn Reson Insights Original Research 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. SAGE Publications 2019-02-18 /pmc/articles/PMC6379790/ /pubmed/30799932 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1178623X19827976 Text en © The Author(s) 2019 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License (http://www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) which permits any use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage). |
spellingShingle | Original Research Zech, Christoph J Schwenke, Carsten Endrikat, Jan 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 |
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 |
title_full | 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 |
title_fullStr | 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 |
title_full_unstemmed | 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 |
title_short | 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 |
title_sort | 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 |
topic | Original Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6379790/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30799932 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1178623X19827976 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT zechchristophj diagnosticefficacyandsafetyofgadoxetatedisodiumvsgadobenatedimeglumineinpatientswithknownorsuspectedfocalliverlesionsresultsofaclinicalphaseiiistudy AT schwenkecarsten diagnosticefficacyandsafetyofgadoxetatedisodiumvsgadobenatedimeglumineinpatientswithknownorsuspectedfocalliverlesionsresultsofaclinicalphaseiiistudy AT endrikatjan diagnosticefficacyandsafetyofgadoxetatedisodiumvsgadobenatedimeglumineinpatientswithknownorsuspectedfocalliverlesionsresultsofaclinicalphaseiiistudy |