Evidence Hub

Lesional dosimetry in 131I refractory metastatic differentiated thyroid cancer with BRAFp.V600E or RAS mutation treated with trametinib +/- dabrafenib followed by radioactive iodine

Anizan N, Pignard A, Borget I, Lamartina L, Schlumberger M, Broggio D, Leboulleux S, Lamart S

Physica medica : PM : an international journal devoted to the applications of physics to medicine and biology : official journal of the Italian Association of Biomedical Physics (AIFB), 2026

19 participants

Abstract

Purpose: In the MERAIODE phase II prospective trial (NCT03244956), patients with radioactive iodine refractory metastatic differentiated thyroid cancer (DTC) were treated with trametinib +/- dabrafenib before the administration of 5.5 GBq of 131I. A post-therapeutic lesional dosimetry study was conducted to assess the correlation between lesion absorbed doses and tumour response.

Methods: Absorbed doses (AD) were calculated from four planar images acquired 1, 2, 3 and 4 days after 131I administration and normalized using a day-4 SPECT/CT. Lesional 131I activity was quantified on SPECT using a single calibration factor and a 50%SUVmax threshold segmentation. Lesion volumes were manually segmented on diagnostic CT scans acquired prior 131I and at 3, 6 and 9 months. Lesions were categorised using a 3D extrapolated RECIST 1.1 classification based on volumetric changes.

Results: Median AD was higher in BRAFp.V600E mutated lesions (n = 19; 393.5 Gy [20.4-2906.3]) than in RAS mutated lesions (n = 6; 35.3 Gy [6.9-76.0]; p = 0.0005). At 6 months, 58% of BRAFp.V600E mutated lesions showed partial/complete response with a higher median AD (896 Gy) than stable/progressive lesions (183 Gy; p = 0.006). Eighty per cent of lesions receiving an AD above 393 Gy were classified as responders, whereas all lesions receiving an AD above 478 Gy were classified as responders.

Conclusion: The median AD was significantly higher in the BRAFp.V600E mutated DTC lesions than in the RAS mutated DTC…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a clinical trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 19 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free