Whole-body low-dose computed tomography and advanced imaging techniques for multiple myeloma bone disease

Clinical Cancer Research

Volumn 20, Issue 23, 2014, Pages 5888-5897

  Pianko, Matthew J ^a   Terpos, Evangelos ^b   Roodman, G David ^c   Divgi, Chaitanya R ^a   Zweegman, Sonja ^d   Hillengass, Jens ^e   Lentzsch, Suzanne ^a  

^a New York Presbyterian Columbia University Medical Center   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF ATHENS MEDICAL SCHOOL   (Greece)

^c INDIANA UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^d VU UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^e UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL HEIDELBERG   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CONTRAST MEDIUM;

BONE ATROPHY; BONE DENSITY; BONE DISEASE; BONE STRUCTURE; CONTRAST ENHANCEMENT; DIAGNOSTIC VALUE; GOLD STANDARD; HUMAN; IMAGE QUALITY; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MULTIPLE MYELOMA; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; POSITRON EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; PROGNOSIS; RADIATION DOSE; REVIEW; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; WHOLE BODY CT; BONE DISEASES; COMPLICATION; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; PROCEDURES; WHOLE BODY IMAGING;

BONE DISEASES; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; HUMANS; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MULTIPLE MYELOMA; POSITRON-EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED; WHOLE BODY IMAGING;

EID: 84918589950     PISSN: 10780432     EISSN: 15573265     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-14-1692     Document Type: Review

References (52)

1. Siegel R, Naishadham D, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2013. CA Cancer J Clin 2013;63:11-30.
2. 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: 1545-56.
3. Durie BGM. The role of anatomic and functional staging in myeloma: Description of Durie/Salmon PLUS staging system. Eur J Cancer 2006;42:1539-43.
4. Fechtner K, Hillengass J, Delorme S, Heiss C, Neben K, Goldschmidt H, et al. Staging monoclonal plasma cell disease: comparison of the Durie-Salmon and the Durie-Salmon PLUS staging systems. Radiology 2010;257:195-204.
5. Wolf MB, Murray F, Kilk K, Hillengass J, Delorme S, Heiss C, et al. Sensitivity of whole-body CT and MRI versus projection radiography in the detection of osteolyses in patients with monoclonal plasma cell disease. Eur J Radiol 2014;83:1222-30.
6. Edelstyn GA, Gillespie PJ, Grebbell FS. The radiological demonstration of osseous metastases. Experimental observations. Clin Radiol 1967;18:158-62.
7. Terpos E, Moulopoulos LA, Dimopoulos MA. Advances in imaging and the management of myeloma bone disease. J Clin Oncol 2011;29: 1907-15.
8. Helms CA, Genant HK. Computed tomography in the early detection of skeletal involvement with multiple myeloma. JAMA 1982;248:2886-7.
9. 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;190:1097-104.
10. 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;162:50-61.
11. 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;25:1121-8.
12. Schreiman JS, McLeod RA, Kyle RA, Beabout JW. Multiple myeloma: evaluation by CT. Radiology 1985;154:483-6.
13. 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;54:289-97.
14. Kropil P, Fenk R, Fritz LB, Blondin D, Kobbe G, Modder U, et al. Comparison of whole-body 64-slice multidetector computed tomography and conventional radiography in staging of multiple myeloma. European Radiol 2008;18:51-8.
15. 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 whole-body MRI (WBMRI). Skeletal Radiol 2009;38:225-36.
16. Princewill K, Kyere S, Awan O, Mulligan M. Multiple myeloma lesion detection with whole body CT versus radiographic skeletal survey. Cancer Invest 2013;31:206-11.
17. Kloth JK, Hillengass J, Listl K, Kilk K, Hielscher T, Landgren O, et al. Appearance of monoclonal plasma cell diseases in whole-body magnetic resonance imaging and correlation with parameters of disease activity. Int J Cancer 2014;135:2380-6.
18. Caers J, Withofs N, Hillengass J, Simoni P, Zamagni E, Hustinx R, et al. The role of positron emission tomography-computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging in diagnosis and follow up of multiple myeloma. Haematologica 2014;99:629-37.
19. Hillengass J, Landgren O. Challenges and opportunities of novel imaging techniques in monoclonal plasma cell disorders: imaging "early myeloma". Leuk Lymphoma 2013;54:1355-63.
20. Hillengass J, Weber MA, Kilk K, Listl K, Wagner-Gund B, Hillengass M, et al. Prognostic significance of whole-body MRI in patients with monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance. Leukemia 2014;28:174-8.
21. Lutje S, de Rooy JW, Croockewit S, Koedam E, Oyen WJ, Raymakers RA. Role of radiography, MRI and FDG-PET/CT in diagnosing, staging and therapeutical evaluation of patients with multiple myeloma. Ann Hematol 2009;88:1161-8.
22. Zamagni E, Cavo M. The role of imaging techniques in the management of multiple myeloma. Br J Haematol 2012;159:499-513.
23. Castellani M, Carletto M, Baldini L, Calori R, Longari V, Soligo D, et al. The prognostic value of F-18 fluorodeoxyglucose bone marrow uptake in patients with recent diagnosis of multiple myeloma: a comparative study with Tc-99m sestamibi. Clinical Nucl Med 2010; 35:1-5.
24. Haznedar R, Aki SZ, Akdemir OU, Ozkurt ZN, Ceneli O, Yagci M, et al. Value of 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose uptake in positron emission tomography/ computed tomography in predicting survival in multiple myeloma. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2011;38:1046-53.
25. Cook GJ, Wegner EA, Fogelman I. Pitfalls and artifacts in 18FDG PET and PET/CT oncologic imaging. Semin Nucl Med 2004;34:122-33.
26. Healy CF, Murray JG, Eustace SJ, Madewell J, O'Gorman PJ, O'Sullivan P. Multiple myeloma: a review of imaging features and radiological techniques. Bone Marrow Research 2011;2011:583439.
27. 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;92:50-5.
28. Dankerl A, Liebisch P, Glatting G, Friesen C, Blumstein NM, Kocot D, et al. Multiple myeloma: molecular imaging with 11C-methionine PET/ CT-initial experience. Radiology 2007;242:498-508.
29. Agool A, Schot BW, Jager PL, Vellenga E. 18F-FLT PET in hematologic disorders: a novel technique to analyze the bone marrow compartment. J Nucl Med 2006;47:1592-8.
30. Bartel TB, Haessler J, Brown TL, Shaughnessy JD Jr, van Rhee F, Anaissie E, et al. F18-fl uorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in the context of other imaging techniques and prognostic factors in multiple myeloma. Blood 2009;114:2068-76.
31. Horger M, Kanz L, Denecke B, Vonthein R, Pereira P, Claussen CD, et al. The benefit of using whole-body, low-dose, nonenhanced, multidetector computed tomography for follow-up and therapy response monitoring in patients with multiple myeloma. Cancer 2007;109:1617-26.
32. Mahnken AH, Wildberger JE, Gehbauer G, Schmitz-Rode T, Blaum M, Fabry U, et al. Multidetector CT of the spine in multiple myeloma: comparison with MR imaging and radiography. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2002;178:1429-36.
33. Hillengass J, Fechtner K, Weber MA, Bauerle T, Ayyaz S, Heiss C, et al. Prognostic signifi cance of focal lesions in whole-body magnetic resonance imaging in patients with asymptomatic multiple myeloma. J Clin Oncol 2010;28:1606-10.
34. Mulligan ME, Badros AZ. PET/CT and MR imaging in myeloma. Skeletal Radiol 2007;36:5-16.
35. 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;97:1761-7.
36. Wu P, Davies FE, Boyd K, Thomas K, Dines S, Saso RM, et al. The impact of extramedullary disease at presentation on the outcome of myeloma. Leuk Lymphoma 2009;50:230-5.
37. 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;4:379-98.
38. Spira D, Weisel K, Brodoefel H, Schulze M, Kaufmann S, Horger M. Can whole-body low-dose multidetector CT exclude the presence of myeloma bone disease in patients with monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance (MGUS)? Acad Radiol 2012;19:89-94.
39. Mateos MV, Hernandez MT, Giraldo P, de la Rubia J, de Arriba F, Lopez Corral L, et al. Lenalidomide plus dexamethasone for high-risk smoldering multiple myeloma. N Engl J Med 2013;369:438-47.
40. 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;22:513-7.
41. 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 Mole Imaging 2006;33:525-31.
42. 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;95:1334-45.
43. 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: 35-9.
44. Agren B, Rudberg U, Isberg B, Svensson L, Aspelin P. MR imaging of multiple myeloma patients with bone-marrow transplants. Acta Radiol 1998;39:36-42.
45. 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;99:649-55.
46. Tertti R, Alanen A, Remes K. The value of magnetic resonance imaging in screening myeloma lesions of the lumbar spine. Br J Haematol 1995;91:658-60.
47. Ludwig H, Fruhwald F, Tscholakoff D, Rasoul S, Neuhold A, Fritz E. Magnetic resonance imaging of the spine in multiple myeloma. Lancet 1987;2:364-6.
48. Ghanem N, Lohrmann C, Engelhardt M, Pache G, Uhl M, Saueressig U, et al. Whole-body MRI in the detection of bone marrow infiltration in patients with plasma cell neoplasms in comparison to the radiological skeletal survey. Eur Radiol 2006;16:1005-14.
49. Bredella MA, Steinbach L, Caputo G, Segall G, Hawkins R. Value of FDGPET in the assessment of patients with multiple myeloma.AJRAm J Roentgenol 2005;184:1199-204.
50. Hur J, Yoon CS, Ryu YH, Yun MJ, Suh JS. Efficacy of multidetector row computed tomography of the spine in patients with multiple myeloma: comparison with magnetic resonance imaging and fluorodeoxyglu-cose- positron emission tomography. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2007; 31:342-7.
51. Horger M, Pereira P, Claussen CD, Kanz L, Vonthein R, Denecke B, et al. Hyperattenuating bone marrow abnormalities in myeloma patients using whole-body non-enhanced low-dose MDCT: correlation with haematological parameters. Br J Radiol 2008;81:386-96.
52. Ippolito D, Besostri V, Bonaffini PA, Rossini F, Di Lelio A, Sironi S. Diagnostic value of whole-body low-dose computed tomography (WBLDCT) in bone lesions detection in patients with multiple myeloma (multiple myeloma). Eur J Radiol 2013;82:2322-7.