myeloma; PET/CT; MRI; Magnetic Resonance Imaging/methods
Abstract :
[en] Multiple myeloma is the second most common hematologic malignancy and occurs most commonly in elderly patients. Almost all multiple myeloma patients develop bone lesions in the course of their disease or have evidence of bone loss at initial diagnosis. Whole-body conventional radiography remains the gold standard in the diagnostic evaluation, but computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging and 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography are increasingly used as complementary techniques in the detection of bone lesions. Moreover, the number of lesions detected and the presence of extramedullary disease give strong prognostic information. These new techniques may help to assess treatment response in solitary plasmacytoma or in multiple myeloma. In this article, we review recent data on the different imaging techniques used at diagnosis and in the assessment of treatment response, and discuss some current issues.
Disciplines :
Radiology, nuclear medicine & imaging Hematology
Author, co-author :
CAERS, Jo ; Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Liège - CHU > Hématologie clinique
WITHOFS, Nadia ; Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Liège - CHU > Médecine nucléaire et imagerie oncologique
Hillengass, Jens
SIMONI, Paolo ; Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Liège - CHU > Radiodiagnostic
Zamagni, Elena
HUSTINX, Roland ; Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Liège - CHU > Médecine nucléaire et imagerie oncologique
BEGUIN, Yves ; Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Liège - CHU > Hématologie clinique
Language :
English
Title :
The role of positron emission tomography-computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging in diagnosis and follow-up of multiple myeloma
Criteria for the classification of monoclonal gammopathies, multiple myeloma and related disorders: a report of the International Myeloma Working Group. Br J Haematol. 2003;121(5):749-57.
Lecouvet FE, Malghem J, Michaux L, Maldague B, Ferrant A, Michaux J-L, et al. Skeletal survey in advanced multiple myeloma: radiographic versus MR imaging survey. Br J Haematol. 1999;106(1):35-9.
Dimopoulos M, Terpos E, Comenzo RL, Tosi P, Beksac M, Sezer O, et al. International myeloma working group consensus statement and guidelines regarding the current role of imaging techniques in the diagnosis and monitoring of multiple Myeloma. Leukemia. 2009;23(9):1545-56.
Zamagni E, Nanni C, Patriarca F, Englaro E, Castellucci P, Geatti O, et al. A prospective comparison of 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography-computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging and whole-body planar radiographs in the assessment of bone disease in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. Haematologica. 2007;92(1):50-5.
Edelstyn GA, Gillespie PJ, Grebbell FS. The radiological demonstration of osseous metastases. Experimental observations. Clin Radiol. 1967;18(2):158-62.
Horger M, Claussen CD, Bross-Bach U, Vonthein R, Trabold T, Heuschmid M, et al. Whole-body low-dose multidetector row-CT in the diagnosis of multiple myeloma: an alternative to conventional radiography. Eur J Radiol. 2005;54(2):289-97.
Zamagni E, Cavo M. The role of imaging techniques in the management of multiple myeloma. Br J Haematol. 2012;159(5):499-513.
Gleeson TG, Moriarty J, Shortt CP, Gleeson JP, Fitzpatrick P, Byrne B, et al. Accuracy of whole-body low-dose multidetector CT (WBLDCT) versus skeletal survey in the detection of myelomatous lesions, and correlation of disease distribution with wholebody MRI (WBMRI). Skeletal Radiol. 2009; 38(3):225-36.
Kropil P, Fenk R, Fritz LB, Blondin D, Kobbe G, Modder U, et al. Comparison of wholebody 64-slice multidetector computed tomography and conventional radiography in staging of multiple myeloma. Eur Radiol. 2008;18(1):51-8.
Hanrahan CJ, Christensen CR, Crim JR. Current Concepts in the Evaluation of Multiple Myeloma with MR Imaging and FDG PET/CT1. Radiographics. 2010; 30(1):127-42.
Walker R, Barlogie B, Haessler J, Tricot G, Anaissie E, Shaughnessy JD Jr, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging in multiple myeloma: diagnostic and clinical implications. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25(9):1121-8.
Hillengass J, Fechtner K, Weber MA, Bauerle T, Ayyaz S, Heiss C, et al. Prognostic significance of focal lesions in whole-body magnetic resonance imaging in patients with asymptomatic multiple myeloma. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28(9):1606-10.
Moulopoulos LA, Dimopoulos MA, Kastritis E, Christoulas D, Gkotzamanidou M, Roussou M, et al. Diffuse pattern of bone marrow involvement on magnetic resonance imaging is associated with high risk cytogenetics and poor outcome in newly diagnosed, symptomatic patients with multiple myeloma: a single center experience on 228 patients. Am J Hematol. 2012;87(9):861-4.
Lecouvet FE, Malghem J, Michaux L, Maldague B, Ferrant A, Michaux JL, et al. Skeletal survey in advanced multiple myeloma: radiographic versus MR imaging survey. Br J Haematol. 1999;106(1):35-9.
Mariette X, Zagdanski A-M, Guermazi A, Bergot C, Arnould A, Frija J, et al. Prognostic value of vertebral lesions detected by magnetic resonance imaging in patients with stage I multiple myeloma. Br J Haematol. 1999;104(4):723-9.
Baur A, Stabler A, Nagel D, Lamerz R, Bartl R, Hiller E, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging as a supplement for the clinical staging system of Durie and Salmon? Cancer. 2002; 95(6):1334-45.
Ghanem N, Lohrmann C, Engelhardt M, Pache G, Uhl M, Saueressig U, et al. Wholebody MRI in the detection of bone marrow infiltration in patients with plasma cell neoplasms in comparison to the radiological skeletal survey. Eur Radiol. 2006;16(5):1005-14.
Baur-Melnyk A, Buhmann S, Becker C, Schoenberg SO, Lang N, Bartl R, et al. Wholebody MRI versus whole-body MDCT for staging of multiple myeloma. AJR. 2008;190(4):1097-104.
Dinter D, Neff W, Klaus J, Böhm C, Hastka J, Weiss C, et al. Comparison of whole-body MR imaging and conventional X-ray examination in patients with multiple myeloma and implications for therapy. Ann Hematol. 2009;88(5):457-64.
Lecouvet FE, Vande Berg BC, Michaux L, Malghem J, Maldague BE, Jamart J, et al. Stage III multiple myeloma: clinical and prognostic value of spinal bone marrow MR imaging. Radiology. 1998;209(3):653-60.
Bäuerle T, Hillengass J, Fechtner K, Zechmann CM, Grenacher L, Moehler TM, et al. Multiple Myeloma and Monoclonal Gammopathy of Undetermined Significance: Importance of Whole-Body versus Spinal MR Imaging. Radiology. 2009;252(2):477-85.
Regelink JC, Minnema MC, Terpos E, Kamphuis MH, Raijmakers PG, Pieters-van den Bos IC, et al. Comparison of modern and conventional imaging techniques in establishing multiple myeloma-related bone disease: a systematic review. Br J Haematol. 2013; 162(1):50-61.
Hillengass J, Bauerle T, Bartl R, Andrulis M, McClanahan F, Laun FB, et al. Diffusionweighted imaging for non-invasive and quantitative monitoring of bone marrow infiltration in patients with monoclonal plasma cell disease: a comparative study with histology. Br J Haematol. 2011;153(6):721-8.
Nosas-Garcia S, Moehler T, Wasser K, Kiessling F, Bartl R, Zuna I, et al. Dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI for assessing the disease activity of multiple myeloma: a comparative study with histology and clinical markers. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2005; 22(1):154-62.
Horger M, Weisel K, Horger W, Mroue A, Fenchel M, Lichy M. Whole-Body Diffusion-Weighted MRI With Apparent Diffusion Coefficient Mapping for Early Response Monitoring in Multiple Myeloma: Preliminary Results. AJR. 2011;196(6):W790-W5.
Messiou C, Giles S, Collins DJ, West S, Davies FE, Morgan GJ, et al. Assessing response of myeloma bone disease with diffusion-weighted MRI. Brit J Radiol. 2012; 85(1020):e1198-e203.
Hillengass J, Zechmann C, Bauerle T, Wagner-Gund B, Heiss C, Benner A, et al. Dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging identifies a subgroup of patients with asymptomatic monoclonal plasma cell disease and pathologic microcirculation. Clin Cancer Res. 2009;15(9):3118-25.
Wahl RL, Jacene H, Kasamon Y, Lodge MA. From RECIST to PERCIST: Evolving Considerations for PET response criteria in solid tumors. J Nucl Med. 2009;50(Suppl 1):122S-50S.
Durie BG, Waxman AD, D'Agnolo A, Williams CM. Whole-body (18)F-FDG PET identifies high-risk myeloma. J Nucl Med. 2002;43(11):1457-63.
Withofs N, Grayet B, Tancredi T, Rorive A, Mella C, Giacomelli F, et al. (1)(8)F-fluoride PET/CT for assessing bone involvement in prostate and breast cancers. Nucl Med Commun. 2011;32(3):168-76.
Nanni C, Zamagni E, Cavo M, Rubello D, Tacchetti P, Pettinato C, et al. 11C-choline vs. 18F-FDG PET/CT in assessing bone involvement in patients with multiple myeloma. World J Surg Oncol. 2007;5:68.
Dankerl A, Liebisch P, Glatting G, Friesen C, Blumstein NM, Kocot D, et al. Multiple Myeloma: Molecular Imaging with 11CMethionine PET/CT--Initial Experience. Radiology. 2007;242(2):498-508.
Moulopoulos LA, Dimopoulos MA, Smith TL, Weber DM, Delasalle KB, Libshitz HI, et al. Prognostic significance of magnetic resonance imaging in patients with asymptomatic multiple myeloma. J Clin Oncol. 1995; 13(1):251-6.
Kastritis E, Terpos E, Moulopoulos L, Spyropoulou-Vlachou M, Kanellias N, Eleftherakis-Papaiakovou E, et al. Extensive bone marrow infiltration and abnormal free light chain ratio identifies patients with asymptomatic myeloma at high risk for progression to symptomatic disease. Leukemia. 2012;6(10):309.
Hillengass J, Kilk K, Listl K, Hielscher T, Neben K, Hose D, et al. Appearance of Monoclonal Plasma Cell Diseases in Whole Body MRI in 544 Patients and Correlation with Parameters of Disease Activity. ASH Annual Meeting Abstracts. 2012;120(21): 4966-.
Hillengass J, Kilk K, Listl K, Hielscher T, Neben K, Hose D, et al. Over 30% of Smoldering Myeloma Patients Have Tumor Cell Bone Marrow Infiltration Patterns Similar to Multiple Myeloma: A Large (n=544) Clinical Study Using Whole-Body MRI. ASH Annual Meeting Abstracts. 2012; 120(21):2911-.
Zamagni E, Patriarca F, Nanni C, Zannetti B, Englaro E, Pezzi A, et al. Prognostic relevance of 18-F FDG PET/CT in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma patients treated with upfront autologous transplantation. Blood. 2011; 118(23):5989-95.
Bartel TB, Haessler J, Brown TL, Shaughnessy JD Jr, van Rhee F, Anaissie E, et al. F18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in the context of other imaging techniques and prognostic factors in multiple myeloma. Blood. 2009;114(10):2068-76.
Moulopoulos LA, Dimopoulos MA, Weber D, Fuller L, Libshitz HI, Alexanian R. Magnetic resonance imaging in the staging of solitary plasmacytoma of bone. J Clin Oncol. 1993;11(7):1311-5.
Nanni C, Zamagni E, Farsad M, Castellucci P, Tosi P, Cangini D, et al. Role of 18F-FDG PET/CT in the assessment of bone involvement in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma: preliminary results. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2006;33(5):525-31.
Schirrmeister H, Bommer M, Buck AK, Muller S, Messer P, Bunjes D, et al. Initial results in the assessment of multiple myeloma using 18F-FDG PET. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2002;29(3):361-6.
Nanni C, Rubello D, Zamagni E, Castellucci P, Ambrosini V, Montini G, et al. 18F-FDG PET/CT in myeloma with presumed solitary plasmocytoma of bone. In Vivo. 2008; 22(4):513-7.
Terpos E, Berenson J, Cook RJ, Lipton A, Coleman RE. Prognostic variables for survival and skeletal complications in patients with multiple myeloma osteolytic bone disease. Leukemia. 2010;24(5):1043-9.
Waheed S, Mitchell A, Usmani S, Epstein J, Yaccoby S, Nair B, et al. Standard and novel imaging methods for multiple myeloma: correlates with prognostic laboratory variables including gene expression profiling data. Haematologica. 2013;98(1):71-8.
Adam Z, Bolcak K, Stanicek J, Buchler T, Pour L, Krejci M, et al. Fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in multiple myeloma, solitary plasmocytoma and monoclonal gammapathy of unknown significance. Neoplasma. 2007;54(6):536-40.
Hur J, Yoon CS, Ryu YH, Yun MJ, Suh JS. Comparative study of fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography and magnetic resonance imaging for the detection of spinal bone marrow infiltration in untreated patients with multiple myeloma. Acta Radiol. 2008;49(4):427-35.
Salaun P-Y, Gastinne T, Frampas E, Bodet-Milin C, Moreau P, Bodéré-Kraeber F. FDGpositron-emission tomography for staging and therapeutic assessment in patients with plasmacytoma. Haematologica. 2008; 93(8):1269-71.
Shortt CP, Gleeson TG, Breen KA, McHugh J, O'Connell MJ, O'Gorman PJ, et al. Whole-Body MRI Versus PET in Assessment of Multiple Myeloma Disease Activity. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2009;192(4):980-6.
Sager S, Ergül N, Ciftci H, Cetin G, Güner S, Cermik T. The value of FDG PET/CT in the initial staging and bone marrow involvement of patients with multiple myeloma. Skeletal Radiol. 2011;40(7):843-7.
Spinnato P, Bazzocchi A, Brioli A, Nanni C, Zamagni E, Albisinni U, et al. Contrast enhanced MRI and 18F-FDG PET-CT in the assessment of multiple myeloma: A comparison of results in different phases of the disease. Eur J Radiol. 2012;81(12):4013-8.
Fonti R, Salvatore B, Quarantelli M, Sirignano C, Segreto S, Petruzziello F, et al. 18F-FDG PET/CT, 99mTc-MIBI, and MRI in evaluation of patients with multiple myeloma. J Nucl Med. 2008;49(2):195-200.
Breyer R, III, Mulligan M, Smith S, Line B, Badros A. Comparison of imaging with FDG PET/CT with other imaging modalities in myeloma. Skeletal Radiol. 2006;35(9):632-40.
Durie BG, Salmon SE. A clinical staging system for multiple myeloma. Correlation of measured myeloma cell mass with presenting clinical features, response to treatment, and survival. Cancer. 1975;36(3):842-54.
Greipp PR, San Miguel J, Durie BG, Crowley JJ, Barlogie B, Blade J, et al. International staging system for multiple myeloma. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23(15):3412-20.
Durie BG, Kyle RA, Belch A, Bensinger W, Blade J, Boccadoro M, et al. Myeloma management guidelines: a consensus report from the Scientific Advisors of the International Myeloma Foundation. Hematol J. 2003; 4(6):379-98.
Usmani SZ, Heuck C, Mitchell A, Szymonifka J, Nair B, Hoering A, et al. Extramedullary disease portends poor prognosis in multiple myeloma and is over-represented in high-risk disease even in the era of novel agents. Haematologica. 2012;97(11): 1761-7
Moulopoulos LA, Gika D, Anagnostopoulos A, Delasalle K, Weber D, Alexanian R, et al. Prognostic significance of magnetic resonance imaging of bone marrow in previously untreated patients with multiple myeloma. Ann Oncol. 2005;16(11):1824-8.
Usmani SZ, Mitchell A, Waheed S, Crowley J, Hoering A, Petty N, et al. Prognostic implications of serial 18-fluoro-deoxyglucose emission tomography in multiple myeloma treated with total therapy 3. Blood. 2013; 121(10):1819-23.
Lin C, Luciani A, Belhadj K, Deux JF, Kuhnowski F, Maatouk M, et al. Multiple myeloma treatment response assessment with whole-body dynamic contrastenhanced MR imaging. Radiology. 2010; 254(2):521-31.
Cherry BM, Korde N, Kwok M, Manasanch EE, Bhutani M, Mulquin M, et al. Modeling progression risk for smoldering multiple myeloma: results from a prospective clinical study. Leuk Lymphoma. 2013;54(10): 2215-8.
Bannas P, Hentschel H, Bley T, Treszl A, Eulenburg C, Derlin T, et al. Diagnostic performance of whole-body MRI for the detection of persistent or relapsing disease in multiple myeloma after stem cell transplantation. Eur Radiol. 2012;22(9):2007-12.
Derlin T, Peldschus K, Munster S, Bannas P, Herrmann J, Stubig T, et al. Comparative diagnostic performance of (18)F-FDG PET/CT versus whole-body MRI for determination of remission status in multiple myeloma after stem cell transplantation. Eur Radiol. 2013;23(2):570-8.
