Changes in magnetic resonance imaging before and after autologous stem cell transplantation correlate with response and survival in multiple myeloma

Haematologica

Volumn 97, Issue 11, 2012, Pages 1757-1760

  Hillengass, Jens ^a,b   Ayyaz, Sofia ^a   Kilk, Kerstin ^a   Weber, Marc André ^a   Hielscher, Thomas ^b   Shah, Rajiv ^b   Hose, Dirk ^a   Delorme, Stefan ^b   Goldschmidt, Hartmut ^a,c   Neben, Kai ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF HEIDELBERG   (Germany)

^b GERMAN CANCER RESEARCH CENTER DKFZ   (Germany)

^c National Centre for Tumour Diseases   (Germany)

Author keywords

Cytogenetic; Immunophenotype; Mixed phenotype acute leukemia; Mutation; Therapy

Indexed keywords

MELPHALAN;

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; AUTOLOGOUS STEM CELL TRANSPLANTATION; CANCER INFILTRATION; CANCER PROGNOSIS; CANCER RECURRENCE; CANCER REGRESSION; DRUG MEGADOSE; FEMALE; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MINIMAL RESIDUAL DISEASE; MULTIPLE CYCLE TREATMENT; MULTIPLE MYELOMA; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; OVERALL SURVIVAL; PROGRESSION FREE SURVIVAL; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; TREATMENT RESPONSE;

ADULT; AGED; DISEASE-FREE SURVIVAL; FEMALE; HUMANS; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MULTIPLE MYELOMA; RECURRENCE; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; RISK FACTORS; STEM CELL TRANSPLANTATION; SURVIVAL RATE; TRANSPLANTATION, AUTOLOGOUS;

EID: 84868559447     PISSN: 03906078     EISSN: 15928721     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3324/haematol.2012.065359     Document Type: Article

References (22)

1. Durie BG, Harousseau JL, Miguel JS, Blade J, Barlogie B, Anderson K, et al. International uniform response criteria for multiple myeloma. Leukemia. 2006;20(9): 1467-73.
2. 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.
3. Lecouvet FE, Vande Berg BC, Michaux L, Jamart J, Maldague BE, Malghem J. Development of vertebral fractures in patients with multiple myeloma: does MRI enable recognition of vertebrae that will collapse? J Comput Assist Tomogr. 1998;22 (3):430-6.
4. Kusumoto S, Jinnai I, Itoh K, Kawai N, Sakata T, Matsuda A, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging patterns in patients with multiple myeloma. Br J Haematol. 1997; 99(3):649-55.
5. Bauerle 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.
6. Baur-Melnyk A, Buhmann S, Becker C, Schoenberg SO, Lang N, Bartl R, et al. Whole-body MRI versus whole-body MDCT for staging of multiple myeloma. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2008;190(4):1097-104.
7. 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.
8. 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.
9. 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.
10. 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.
11. Mariette X, Zagdanski AM, 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.
12. Neben K, Lokhorst HM, Jauch A, Bertsch U, Hielscher T, van der Holt B, et al. Administration of bortezomib before and after autologous stem cell transplantation improves outcome in multiple myeloma patients with deletion 17p. Blood. 2012; 119(4):940-8.
13. Dimopoulos M, Kyle R, Fermand JP, Rajkumar SV, San MJ, Chanan-Khan A, et al. Consensus recommendations for standard investigative workup: report of the International Myeloma Workshop Consensus Panel 3. Blood. 2011;117(18): 4701-5.
14. 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.
15. Barlogie B, Anaissie E, van Rhee F, Pineda-Roman M, Zangari M, Shaughnessy J, et al. The Arkansas approach to therapy of patients with multiple myeloma. Best Pract Res Clin Haematol. 2007;20(4):761-81.
16. Moulopoulos LA, Dimopoulos MA, Christoulas D, Kastritis E, Anagnostou D, Koureas A, et al. Diffuse MRI marrow pattern correlates with increased angiogenesis, advanced disease features and poor prognosis in newly diagnosed myeloma treated with novel agents. Leukemia. 2010;24(6): 1206-12.
17. 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 up-front autologous transplantation. Blood. 2011;118(23):5989-95.
18. 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.
19. 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.
20. 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.
21. 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.
22. 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.