| Question 1: Which microspheres characteristic translates in lower hepatotoxicity: |
| Reference: | Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2022 Apr;49(5):1682-1699. EANM procedure guideline for the treatment of liver cancer and liver metastases with intra-arterial radioactive compounds. |
| Choice A: | Lower number of microspheres administered. |
| Choice B: | Lower half-life of the used isotope. |
| Choice C: | Lower specific activity of the used microspheres. |
| Choice D: | Lower specific weight of the used microspheres. |
| Question 2: Which profile of microsphere characteristics is best suited to transarterial radioembolization for glioblastoma? |
| Reference: | Pasciak AS, Abiola G, Liddell RP, Crookston N, Besharati S, Donahue D, Thompson RE, Frey E, Anders RA, Dreher MR, Weiss CR. The number of microspheres in Y90 radioembolization directly affectsnormal tissue radiation exposure. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2020 Apr;47(4):816-827. |
| Choice A: | Margin of radiation: wide; specific activity: high; embolic burden: low |
| Choice B: | Margin of radiation: narrow; specific activity: low; embolic burden: high |
| Choice C: | Margin of radiation: narrow; specific activity: high; embolic burden: low |
| Choice D: | Margin of radiation: wide; specific activity: low; embolic burden: high |
| Question 3: Assuming an appropriate target radiation dose in treatment planning, neurologic deficits that arise within 24 hours of Y-90 transarterial radioembolization in the brain are most likely due to: |
| Reference: | Pasciak AS, Manupipatpong S, Hui FK, Gainsburg L, Krimins R, Zink MC, Brayton CF, Morris M, Sage J, Donahue DR, Dreher MR, Kraitchman DL, Weiss CR. Yttrium-90 radioembolization as a possible new treatment for brain cancer: proof of concept and safety analysis in a canine model. EJNMMI Res. 2020 Aug 17;10(1):96. |
| Choice A: | Radiation necrosis |
| Choice B: | Ischemia |
| Choice C: | Tumor progression |
| Choice D: | Bleeding |
| Question 4: The prescribed dose for Oncosil treatment of a solitary pancreatic tumor is: |
| Reference: | Bhutani MS, Cazacu IM, Luzuriaga AA, et al. Novel EUS-guided brachytherapy treatment of pancreatic cancer with phosphorus-32 microparticles: first United States experience. Video GIE 2019; 4(5):223-225 (https://www.videogie.org/article/S2468-4481(19)30047-5/fulltext ) |
| Choice A: | 60 Gy |
| Choice B: | 150 Gy |
| Choice C: | 80 Gy |
| Choice D: | 100 Gy |
| Question 5: For yttrium-90 based radioembolization: |
| Reference: | S.P. Kim, C. Cohalan, N. Kopek, S.A. Enger. A guide to (90)Y radioembolization and its dosimetry. Phys Med, 68 (2019), pp. 132-145 |
| Choice A: | Liver tumors are the primary target for radioembolization treatment and shunts within a patient’s hepatic vasculature does not cause extrahepatic microsphere depositions. |
| Choice B: | Lung is the primary organ at risk. |
| Choice C: | The variability in the absorbed dose estimates in the lungs between various dosimetry methods is small. |
| Choice D: | Yttrium-90 SPECT self-calibration has no effect on the quantification of absorbed dose. |
| Question 6: For voxel-based yttrium-90 radioembolization: |
| Reference: | S.P. Kim, C. Cohalan, N. Kopek, S.A. Enger. A guide to (90)Y radioembolization and its dosimetry. Phys Med, 68 (2019), pp. 132-145 |
| Choice A: | PET and SPECT image reconstruction techniques have no effect on dosimetry. |
| Choice B: | Monte Carlo method is the only voxel-based dosimetry method. |
| Choice C: | The largest source of uncertainty for calculation of absorbed dose in voxel-based dosimetry results from image resolution differences. |
