.png){kind=small}
.png){kind=small}
BackTable / VI / Article
Percutaneous Hepatic Perfusion for Metastatic Uveal Melanoma: Techniques & Treatment Gaps
Audrey Qian • Updated Aug 28, 2025 • 39 hits
In more than 90% of cases of uveal melanoma metastasis, the liver is the primary site of neoplastic growth, making liver-directed therapies a central component of disease management. Available interventional strategies include radioembolization, ablation, and percutaneous hepatic perfusion. In a major development for treating metastatic uveal melanoma, the FDA recently approved percutaneous hepatic perfusion with the HEPZATO Kit, a system that delivers high-dose melphalan directly to the liver while minimizing systemic toxicity.
Although its outcomes are promising, the choice of interventional strategy still depends on various individual factors, such as the extent of liver tumor burden, the presence of extrahepatic disease, and prior patient history. Interventional radiologists Dr. Altan Ahmed and Dr. Siddharth Padia describe the workflow and coordination in executing percutaneous hepatic perfusion, current gaps in intervention, and potential future applications of the HEPZATO modality in treating other malignancies.
This article features transcripts for the BackTable Podcast. We’ve provided the highlight reel here, and you can listen to the full podcast below.
The BackTable VI Brief
• Percutaneous hepatic perfusion (PHP) with the HEPZATO Kit involves high-dose melphalan infusion and hepatic venous isolation using a double-balloon catheter system, enabling whole-liver treatment while minimizing systemic toxicity.
• Successful PHP delivery depends not only on surgical technique but also on tight coordination between pharmacy, anesthesia, and radiology teams. Timely drug reconstitution is essential, as melphalan must be administered within a 60-minute window after preparation, and interdisciplinary workflow optimization may reduce procedure times to as low as 2.5 hours.
• Current eligibility criteria for PHP with HEPZATO lack precision in patient selection, treating all multifocal bilobar diseases uniformly regardless of tumor burden or imaging phenotype. Emerging observations suggest treatment response may correlate with lesion characteristics in gadolinium weighted MRI, highlighting the need for improved patient stratification via imaging, tumor volume, and potential molecular markers to avoid overtreatment.
• While PHP is currently FDA-approved for uveal melanoma liver metastases only, its potential utility in other solid tumors, such as colorectal and breast cancer, may be investigated.
Table of Contents
(1) Percutaneous Hepatic Perfusion for Metastatic Uveal Melanoma: Technical Workflow
(2) Multidisciplinary Coordination in Percutaneous Hepatic Perfusion with HEPZATO Therapy
(3) Addressing Gaps in Current Interventions for Metastatic Uveal Melanoma
(4) Future Applications of Percutaneous Hepatic Perfusion Beyond Metastatic Uveal Melanoma
Percutaneous Hepatic Perfusion for Metastatic Uveal Melanoma: Technical Workflow
Patients first undergo standard preprocedural workups, including anesthesia consultation and cardiac screening, typically including a stress echocardiogram. While some institutions obtain brain MRI to screen for intracranial metastases, others omit this step due to logistical delays and low incidence of brain metastases. On the day of the procedure, general anesthesia is administered, and Dr. Padia explains how to optimize patient specific conditions using a Foley catheter, a radial arterial line for hemodynamic monitoring, and a central venous catheter for serial blood draws and rapid infusions as needed.
During percutaneous hepatic perfusion, arterial catheterization uses a split lobar approach to deliver melphalan, treating the entire liver while a double-balloon catheter is placed in the inferior vena cava to isolate the liver’s venous outflow, minimizing systemic toxicity via extracorporeal filtration. The ability to create a temporary, repeatable hepatic circuit without permanent implants reflects how these recent advances have shifted the role of interventional radiology for percutaneous hepatic perfusion.
[Dr. Venkatesh Krishnasamy]
Let's get into that a little bit, Sid. If you can, walk us through your workflow. We talked a little bit about the devices already that we're using. We talked a little bit about the drug, but walk us through the workflow, the day of, the procedure, a little bit of pre-post. What goes into the actual intervention?
[Dr. Siddharth Padia]
Beforehand, it's similar to other patients who undergo local regional therapy in that we do a consultation in advance, insurance pre-authorization. To be honest, the insurance pre-authorization has been fairly straightforward so far. The only real difference is that they undergo some cardiac testing.
In our case, a stress ECHO, but as Altan mentioned, in his case, a resting ECHO. That's the real one difference. We also have an anesthesia consultation, which is typically done virtual. Those are the two changes.
[Dr. Venkatesh Krishnasamy]
Real quick, are you getting an MR of the brain or a CT of the brain beforehand to look for intracranial metastases?
[Dr. Siddharth Padia]
We've debated. The reason to get an MR of the brain is to look for intracranial metastases. You do pretty heavy doses of anticoagulation during the procedure. We have not yet started routinely getting MRI brains. Part of it is a logistical issue. We have quite a bit of delay in getting outpatient MRs.
I try not to push the patients back too far. I don't think it's a bad idea. That being said, the incidence of brain metastases from uveal melanoma is pretty low. That being said, it's not zero. I think it's, at this point, probably operator choice whether to get one. Altan, are you guys getting brain MRIs on everybody?
[Dr. Altan Ahmed]
We are, yes.
[Dr. Siddharth Padia]
In terms of the day of the procedure, in the morning, it's pretty much the same as anyone else getting any local regional therapy. Once we put them under general anesthesia, the main difference is we do get a Foley catheter, they're getting a radial arterial line, and we put in a standard triple lumen central venous catheter, and that's really for blood draws during the procedure and to give intravenous vasopressors.
[Dr. Venkatesh Krishnasamy]
You mentioned earlier, arterial access, venous access, arterial access is standard five, six French, venous access is how big, and what do you put through that venous access?
[Dr. Siddharth Padia]
It's interesting, Altan had talked about the fact that Moffitt's been doing this for over 10 years. I think what's evolved over 10 years and what now really belongs in the IR alley is over the last 10 years, I think two big things have happened in our profession. Number one, we started working with anesthesia more and more often.
I think when I started practice in 2009, getting an anesthesiologist in the IR suite took a lot of effort. Nowadays, they're there all the time, so they're comfortable with it. Number two is working with large board devices, specifically in the venous space. Now that we're doing so much DVT and PE work, putting in a 24 Fr sheath in the right femoral vein where I thought 10 years ago would've been insane is now fairly common in our practice.
When we talk about the access sites, we're really talking about a five or six Fr femoral arterial sheath, that's standard, that we do five times a day, an 18 Fr femoral venous sheath, and a 10 Fr right internal jugular sheath. These are all pretty standard and routine accesses that all IRs, I think, are proficient at performing.
In terms of the catheterization, it's relatively straightforward. I think from a technical perspective, if you, for example, can do chemoembolization or radioembolization, this is really nothing that you can't do.
[Dr. Venkatesh Krishnasamy]
I would argue, and both of you, please feel free to disagree with me, on the arterial side, it's a base catheter, it's a micro catheter, you're parking usually right, left, relatively lobar type distribution. It's not a lot of complex arterial catheterization and then infusing from there. On the venous side, it's that double balloon catheter.
The top balloon is at the caviatorial junction, bottom balloon is below the accessory hepatic veins, and you're literally isolating the liver as a circuit, which is one of the things that's most fascinating about this intervention to me, but tell me more.
[Dr. Siddharth Padia]
We've been doing lobar treatments, and by lobar, right hepatic artery, middle, left, et cetera, in every patient, and then effectively treating the whole liver in every case. Altan, are you guys doing the same thing?
[Dr. Altan Ahmed]
We are, absolutely. We're treating the whole liver.
[Dr. Siddharth Padia]
Are you doing any segmental treatments? Because we have not been. It doesn't really make, for us at least, a whole lot of logical sense to start doing PHP segmentectomies and so on.
[Dr. Altan Ahmed]
No, we're not there yet. We're also in the lobar space.
[Dr. Siddharth Padia]
Covey, as you said, the catheterization itself, let's say compared to an average Y90, is probably going to be, on average, either the same or a little bit easier.
[Dr. Venkatesh Krishnasamy]
We're isolating the liver with that double balloon catheter. Two large bore or large balloons, 18 Fr catheter. Then, Altan, you mentioned the veno-veno bypass circuit already with the filtration. Tell me a little bit more about that and how that works.
[Dr. Altan Ahmed]
Sure, absolutely. As you mentioned, the catheter itself has a cephalad balloon, cranial, or a caudal balloon. The cranial balloon is wedged at the inferior cavoatrial junction until it gets inflated and then retracted until it seems like an acorn-type shape. Wedged into that junction, the inferior balloon is inflated until it flattens around the edge of the IBC.
To confirm that we have isolated that segment, we actually take the patient's off pump momentarily and do a venogram to make sure we have stasis of contrast within those two balloons and no leak, most importantly, a cranial leak that would go into the right atrium. Once we do that, the patient is basically brought online for the filters, the charcoal filters sequentially, which are arranged in parallel.
We put those in, and then ultimately, once the hemodynamics have stabilized, you clamp the bypass line. I should say that when we put the balloon catheter in, before we inflate, the patient is put on the pump and the circuit is started before any of that happens.
Listen to the Full Podcast
Stay Up To Date
Follow:
Subscribe:
Sign Up:
Multidisciplinary Coordination in Percutaneous Hepatic Perfusion with HEPZATO Therapy
Uniquely important in effective HEPZATO application is the coordination of an interdisciplinary team to manage purposeful treatment scheduling and pre-treatment logistics. One important logistical factor to consider is timing the drug reconstitution well with the intervention itself. Melphalan, supplied as a lyophilized powder, must be infused within approximately 60 minutes of hepatic artery infusion. This expiration date necessitates close communication with pharmacies to avoid degradation or procedural delays.
In cases during the intervention when the blood pressure drops, anesthesia also plays a key role in managing blood pressure fluctuations and preventing vasospasm to optimize drug delivery. As a result, case times improve substantially, as more experienced teams have the coordination and communication to complete interventional radiology in as fast as 2.5 hours versus the usual 4-5 hours. The practical considerations that come with optimizing the PHP workflow reflect the importance of cohesive teamwork among IR, anesthesia, and pharmacy services.
[Dr. Venkatesh Krishnasamy]
Going back to what you said earlier, all three teams not only have to go observe a case, but then have to be proctored for their first case. I think that's an FDA mandate. That's anesthesia, that's perfusion, and then the interventional team, whether that's IR alone or IR plus surgical oncology, depending on what center you're at.
That's a great point as well. A couple of key points during the intervention where the blood pressure will drop, anesthesia is on alert to push the blood pressure with some pressors. Learned that over time, that flooding with a lot of fluids just overloads the patient afterwards as well. Optimizing the blood pressure, preventing vasospasm so we can deliver the drug. How long does this all take? This is a long process. How long does this all take?
[Dr. Siddharth Padia]
Are you asking about our first patient or the most recent patient? Because there's definitely a learning curve.
[Dr. Venkatesh Krishnasamy]
Absolutely. That's a great point. Your first case, and Altan, it's been several years for you, but if you remember, how long was the first case and where are you now?
[Dr. Altan Ahmed]
That's a good question. Overall, I would say on average, you'd anticipate about three to four hours. Now your first cases might be closer to five hours, just depending on logistics. There's a lot of different teams involved here. Now, as you mentioned, each center is going to be a little bit different.
At Moffitt, we do work hand in hand with our surgical oncology colleagues. It's actually a surgical oncologist, an interventional radiologist, the profusion team, anesthesia, and then pharmacy. That's another big key that we have there. You have to be in very close communication with the pharmacy.
We are actually requesting the drug to be reconstituted at a specific time so that we are not wasting time and it doesn't start to degrade. All of these things add to the time needed for the procedure. If, by chance, you happen to order the drug sooner than you are ready and end up waiting too long, you may have to get more drug later on, which can extend the time for a procedure.
[Dr. Siddharth Padia]
I would say that our first procedure took about three and a half to four hours. Now, our last several, and I'm talking about the IR procedure time, not including the anesthesia setup time and anesthesia breakdown time, is about two and a half. It is actually quite manageable. Part of it, as Altan mentioned, is coordinating with pharmacy.
The way it works is that the drug comes in a powder. It cannot be prepared the night before or so on, because once it is prepped by the pharmacy, meaning made into a solution, it has an expiration. That expiration, I think, is around 60 minutes. You need to really get it into the patient within that 60 minute window.
That includes, them delivering it, delivering to the IR suite, hooking it up, et cetera. Then, for example, if you're going right, middle, and left hepatic arteries, you got to do all three hepatic arteries within that 60 minutes. You can't just have the drug sitting in the room and then start your procedure.
You want to time it appropriately. At the same time, you don't want to ask for the drug at the very last minute and then sitting around for 30 minutes while they're mixing the drug and the patient is on these filters, hypo-- relatively hypotensive, or at least on high dose vasopressors at the same time.
A large part of this learning curve was trying to time everybody in order to minimize your downtime and to minimize any degradation time of your drug. We figured out a pattern where it worked well for us. Lately, I would say our procedure time, the IR procedure time is about two hours, 30 minutes.
[Dr. Venkatesh Krishnasamy]
That's fantastic. For me, that's a complicated three, four dose, Y90 delivery, trying to move my catheters around in different places in a patient that can't get sedation. That's pretty amazing. What about you, Altan? Where are you at today?
[Dr. Altan Ahmed]
Around the same thing, two and a half hours for the IR time. Obviously, getting the patient back there adds total room time to closer to four hours. As Sid mentioned, I think it's a really important point, your balance is minimizing the pump time and maximizing the amount of time you have for the drug to be most active.
[Dr. Siddharth Padia]
One of the interesting, from just a practice standpoint, not a medical standpoint of having done, all of us have done a lot of oncology practice and then we have a huge venous practice. One of the differences of this procedure compared to others is the amount of coordination you have to do.
It's not the technical challenge. The amount of coordination you have to do has been both highly challenging and highly gratifying. You work with groups that you're not used to working with like groups like perfusion and specific anesthesiologists. It's nice to develop relationships with these people.
We developed a great deal of cohesion. We figured out ways to just improve our practice in general. There's been a lot of positives that have come out of starting this practice.
Addressing Gaps in Current Interventions for Metastatic Uveal Melanoma
As percutaneous hepatic perfusion and HEPZATO gain traction for treating metastatic uveal melanoma, it’s becoming apparent that there are some gaps in the current therapeutic protocols that complicate workflow with more contemporary treatment systems. One such gap is patient stratification; current PHP eligibility applies to patients with multifocal bilobar disease, regardless of tumor burden or lesion phenotype. The observation of different patterns of treatment responses based on patients’ baseline MRI suggests that improving patient stratification via imaging phenotype, lesion volume, and even genetic markers may lead to more tailored interventions. Gadolinium-enhanced MRI outperforms CT and standard MRI in detecting hepatic tumor burden, as some patients initially assessed with <50% tumor burden on CT were later found to have >90% burden on Eovist MRI.
In cases of miliary disease with diffused, low-volume metastases, Y-90 and PHP have similar outcomes in performance, though PHP is often favored due to its ability to minimize hepatotoxicity. However, radioembolization still remains appropriate for well-circumscribed, hypervascular tumors suitable for segmentectomy.
These insights suggest a need for refined dosing algorithms, stratified treatment pathways, and better diagnostic imaging to improve outcomes and avoid overtreatment or liver decompensation.
[Dr. Venkatesh Krishnasamy]
What are the other-- we've talked about some of the gaps in the current iteration of the intervention. What are the additional gaps that are out there that we need to address with future research? Tell me, guys.
[Dr. Siddharth Padia]
I think one of them is to stratify patients. Right now, for better or worse, let's say from a tumor perspective, we're taking all comers. In other words, the requirement from a tumor perspective is to have multifocal bilobar disease. Now, does that mean you have 1% tumor burden, or does that mean you have 40% tumor burden?
If we can start better stratifying those patients, uvea melanoma looks different on every patient. Sometimes you have these T1 tiny little bright lesions. Sometimes they enhance like HCC with arterial enhancement and washout. Does it respond better in those HCC-type looking lesions, or does it respond better in these bright T1-type lesions?
Because I'm starting to-- and these are all anecdotes, but I'm starting to see different patterns of response based on what their baseline MRI looked like. I think that if we can start to tease this out, to figure out who it's working in and who it's not, we can start then saying we should be aggressive in terms of approaching patients or offering this to patients where we think the success rates are going to be higher and so on.
[Dr. Altan Ahmed]
That's a great point, Sid. There is obviously a spectrum within the uveal melanoma disease process itself. There's some who are more prone to developing metastases in the first place with certain genetic markers and whatnot. Does that also influence how they respond to these treatments?
That's going to be very interesting to see in the future, for sure. I think another part of it is, optimizing dosing we had mentioned and touched on a little prior. Then seeing is there anything we can change in terms of filtration in the future? Is there going to be a better generation of filtration? Can we extract more of this melphalan to minimize the systemic side effects?
Then looking at other histologies as well, I think that's the next natural step here as well.
[Dr. Venkatesh Krishnasamy]
We've gone down this path for other interventions. Sid, you alluded to it earlier within the early 90 days, we treat with BSA, then we moved to MERD, and now we've moved to partition, and we have threshold dosing for a lot of our tumors. I envision that in this space as well. Again, better patient selection, better filtration, and then hopefully stratifying, which patients are going to have optimal outcomes versus less optimal outcomes.
Maybe we still offer the intervention in that intermediate category of, some benefit but not, great benefit, especially if there's nothing else to offer. Helpful to know, helpful to educate the patient as to what to expect, right?
[Dr. Siddharth Padia]
Absolutely.
[Dr. Venkatesh Krishnasamy]
We've talked a little bit about already where this fits into the current algorithm of uvea melanoma. I personally have moved away from radioembolization, especially for miliary disease, not just for melanoma, for everything, unless it's a very hypervascular lesion and I have a great TNR. How do you both feel about Y90 for miliary disease in this disease type?
[Dr. Siddharth Padia]
It's a great question. If you look at the Y-- I actually think the Y90 data for uvea melanoma is quite good. The best paper comes out of Karen Gonzalves out of Thomas Jefferson, where she did a Phase 2 prospective study. Her response rates were very good. They're actually in the same league as HEPZATO in around 30% objective response rates based on resist.
It's unfortunate that, it's not FDA indicated or FDA approved for this specific indication, which does handcuff us a little bit. The miliary disease, when you-- if you have a patient with a bunch of little dots throughout the liver, if you actually measure their overall tumor burden, it's still relatively low. It's going to be 10% or maybe even less.
What happens is when you're doing a radioembolization, you have to treat the whole liver. You're going to get-- almost impossible to quantify it, but you're going to get a good amount of normal hepatocyte radiation deposition. Those are the patients I try to shy away from, not because it's not going to have any tumor response, but those are the patients that you will see higher incidence of liver-related adverse events in contrast to a single 6 centimeter hypervascular tumor, which is the exact opposite.
Those patients with 20, 30, 40 tiny little dots scattered throughout the liver, I think HEPZATO is a great option because it is non-hepatotoxic.
[Dr. Altan Ahmed]
It's been the same in our practice as well. Moving away from Y90 for the miliary-type pattern of disease. HEPZATO has not had those chronic liver effects that we mentioned earlier. Then local localized disease, definitely Y90, if you can get there through a segmentectomy, that's fantastic.
[Dr. Siddharth Padia]
Yes, and I've seen a lot of patients with-- I hear this argument that if you see one 5 centimeter tumor from buvio-melanoma in the liver, that means it's all over the liver. I don't believe that at all. I've had lots of patients where I've treated that one 5 centimeter tumor and they've had prolonged response for even on the order of years.
I'm happy to show examples to other people that that's not necessarily a case that if there's smoke, there's fire. I don't think that's necessarily true all the time. You have someone with one or two or even three tumors that are solid, that are well circumscribed, that are focal, that you can target selectively, radioembolization to me is my go-to therapy in those cases.
[Dr. Venkatesh Krishnasamy]
Yes, that's a great point. The other thing I'll add to that, and, we know this from other disease types as well, that preoperative MR or CT can sometimes be a little bit misleading. You get a catheter into place, you do a cone beam during the intervention, and you may see other spots light up and that may change your treatment algorithm a little bit. To your point, I totally agree with you. If you just have isolated bulking disease, then I think you both mentioned it, radiation segmentectomy type approach is totally relevant.
[Dr. Siddharth Padia]
Altan, what pre-op imaging are you getting prior to your cases?
[Dr. Altan Ahmed]
Typically, MRs.
[Dr. Siddharth Padia]
With a specific type of contrast or just anything?
[Dr. Altan Ahmed]
Anything. It's usually not any of those. We just use the standard.
[Dr. Siddharth Padia]
We've been using Eovist MRs for these patients and we found that we're picking up a lot more tumor than, let's say, a CT, which is night and day.
[Dr. Venkatesh Krishnasamy]
On the delay phase?
[Dr. Siddharth Padia]
Yes. If you look at that 18 to 19 to 20 minute Eovist MR, you end up seeing a lot more tumor than you really thought there was going to be.
[Dr. Venkatesh Krishnasamy]
That's a great point. Then maybe a little more apples to apples to the artiography and co-mem CT.
[Dr. Siddharth Padia]
I think that even these limits of 50% tumor burden and so on, when you deal with PHP or even any other local regional therapy, especially melanoma, if 50% on a CT with IV contrast and you do that MR with Eovist, it'll be 99%. It'll be completely replaced with tumor. I think that's where people are saying, oh, you're getting adverse events if you have 60% tumor burden. In reality, you don't have 60% tumor burden. In reality, you have 99% tumor burden and the patient's dying of liver failure from tumor infiltration.
Future Applications of Percutaneous Hepatic Perfusion Beyond Metastatic Uveal Melanoma
While PHP with HEPZATO is currently approved for hepatic uveal melanoma metastases, clinicians are beginning to explore its future potential in other solid tumors. The most immediate opportunity lies in colorectal cancer, as historical data on isolated hepatic perfusion has shown 50-60% response rates in colorectal liver metastases. PHP may also be well suited for tertiary applications where systemic options have been exhausted, such as in cases of bilobar disease and unresponsiveness to ablation or radioembolization. Considering these potential applications, the future expansion of PHP will depend on carefully stratified trial design, biological rationale, and integration with systemic regimens.
[Dr. Venkatesh Krishnasamy]
I want to end on one last question and I fully recognize that this is reaching into the future a little bit, but where else can this therapy be applied? What other tumor types-- you both know this question was going to come. What other tumor types can we utilize here?
Where are the other gaps in our IR armamentarium that we really don't have something to offer that PHP in its current iteration or a future iteration can fill those gaps? Sid, why don't you start?
[Dr. Siddharth Padia]
Good question. I think right now it's going to be still isolated to liver, just the way that the kit is designed. In terms of other organs, let's just assume we're talking about liver. Then we want to talk about--
[Dr. Venkatesh Krishnasamy]
Sorry, I meant medical disease and liver.
[Dr. Siddharth Padia]
Yes. Unmet need. The unmet need I think is the biggest one is colorectal cancer. That's probably number one on the list. It's probably-- none of them are going to be easy to study. That's one of the challenges because you have so many different lines of systemic therapy. You're going to have to study this in a trial. You can't just-- Altan and I can't just start doing this in colorectal cancer. That's not going to work that way.
We would have to do this on a trial. How do you design that trial, let's say in colorectal cancer, when they have good first or even second line options, they have now genetic subtypes and so on. It's not as easy to design these trials in the other malignancies. Breast cancer is another one, but that one's even harder because you have now 15 different lines of systemic therapy. Where do you put this?
If you even get oncologists, forget about us, you get five medical oncologists in breast cancer, where would you insert this? Even in a trial, you'll get five different answers.
[Dr. Altan Ahmed]
A very loaded question for sure, but I think I'd agree with Sid. I think colorectal is the next natural histology to look at. It's not going to be easy because where do you insert this therapy? First and second line are great. Second or third line I think is an opportunity there. There is a pretty sharp drop off in systemic therapies from second to third line, the efficacy of those therapies.
That's where we would get some referrals for Y90 and whatnot. Maybe we can insert PHP there and see how these patients do. Honestly, I think the biggest deal is going to be that we're not seeing that chronic liver disease. A lot of these chemotherapies are very hard on the liver. You guys can think back to all the referrals you get for breast, colorectal, whatever it may be.
These patients, their livers take a pretty big hit from these chemotherapies. There is an opportunity there. Where it's going to fit in exactly is still a question mark, and I don't see it happening outside of a trial setting. It's just going to be very challenging to generate high-quality data without that…
One really promising thing, really, I'll just add on to that a little bit, is, the IHP data from the surgical procedure has shown pretty significant response rates for colorectal already in the 50-60% range. There is a precedent to use this methodology there as well.
[Dr. Venkatesh Krishnasamy]
I think to both of your points, there are also two separate patient populations with colorectal or with any metastatic disease. You have the oligometastatic population where you can pick off individual lesions either with RADSEG or thermal ablation or both or whatever. Then you have the more widespread disease across both lobes where something like this may be a little more applicable.
You're right. I think trial setting and hopefully, we can rely on some of that data that has been brought up and we'll figure it out as we go forward.
Podcast Contributors
Cite This Podcast
BackTable, LLC (Producer). (2025, March 4). Ep. 522 – Advancements in Treatment of Metastatic Ocular Melanoma [Audio podcast]. Retrieved from https://www.backtable.com
Disclaimer: The Materials available on BackTable.com are for informational and educational purposes only and are not a substitute for the professional judgment of a healthcare professional in diagnosing and treating patients. The opinions expressed by participants of the BackTable Podcast belong solely to the participants, and do not necessarily reflect the views of BackTable.
Podcasts
