Literature DB >> 21649546

Current and future imaging modalities for multiple myeloma and its precursor states.

Esther Tan1, Brendan M Weiss, Esther Mena, Neha Korde, Peter L Choyke, Ola Landgren.   

Abstract

Traditionally, the skeletal survey has been the standard modality for the detection of osteolytic bone disease in multiple myeloma. In addition to its poor sensitivity for the detection of osteolytic lesions, this modality is not able to identify extramedullary lesions and focal bone marrow involvement, nor measure response to therapy. The application of novel imaging techniques such as computed tomography (CT), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and molecular imaging such as fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography CT ((18)F-FDG PET/CT) and fluorine-18 sodium fluoride positron emission tomography CT ((18)F-NaF PET/CT) has the potential to overcome these limitations as well as provide prognostic information in precursor states and multiple myeloma. Also promising is the use of dynamic contrast enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (DCE MRI) to measure vascular permeability, an important feature of myelomagenesis. This review summarizes the current status and possible future role of novel imaging modalities in multiple myeloma and its precursor states.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21649546      PMCID: PMC3518908          DOI: 10.3109/10428194.2011.573036

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Leuk Lymphoma        ISSN: 1026-8022


  58 in total

1.  Bone marrow microvessel density is a prognostic factor for survival in patients with multiple myeloma.

Authors:  O Sezer; K Niemöller; J Eucker; C Jakob; O Kaufmann; I Zavrski; M Dietel; K Possinger
Journal:  Ann Hematol       Date:  2000-10       Impact factor: 3.673

2.  Initial results in the assessment of multiple myeloma using 18F-FDG PET.

Authors:  H Schirrmeister; M Bommer; A K Buck; S Müller; P Messer; D Bunjes; H Döhner; L Bergmann; S N Reske
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2002-03       Impact factor: 9.236

3.  Increased bone marrow microvessel density in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma carries a poor prognosis.

Authors:  N C Munshi; C Wilson
Journal:  Semin Oncol       Date:  2001-12       Impact factor: 4.929

4.  Prognostic value of bone marrow angiogenesis in multiple myeloma.

Authors:  S V Rajkumar; T Leong; P C Roche; R Fonseca; A Dispenzieri; M Q Lacy; J A Lust; T E Witzig; R A Kyle; M A Gertz; P R Greipp
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2000-08       Impact factor: 12.531

Review 5.  The role of whole-body imaging in the diagnosis, staging, and follow-up of multiple myeloma.

Authors:  Conor P Shortt; Fiona Carty; John G Murray
Journal:  Semin Musculoskelet Radiol       Date:  2010-03-12       Impact factor: 1.777

6.  A long-term study of prognosis in monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance.

Authors:  Robert A Kyle; Terry M Therneau; S Vincent Rajkumar; Janice R Offord; Dirk R Larson; Matthew F Plevak; L Joseph Melton
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2002-02-21       Impact factor: 91.245

Review 7.  Monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance (MGUS) and smoldering (asymptomatic) multiple myeloma: IMWG consensus perspectives risk factors for progression and guidelines for monitoring and management.

Authors:  R A Kyle; B G M Durie; S V Rajkumar; O Landgren; J Blade; G Merlini; N Kröger; H Einsele; D H Vesole; M Dimopoulos; J San Miguel; H Avet-Loiseau; R Hajek; W M Chen; K C Anderson; H Ludwig; P Sonneveld; S Pavlovsky; A Palumbo; P G Richardson; B Barlogie; P Greipp; R Vescio; I Turesson; J Westin; M Boccadoro
Journal:  Leukemia       Date:  2010-04-22       Impact factor: 11.528

8.  F18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in the context of other imaging techniques and prognostic factors in multiple myeloma.

Authors:  Twyla B Bartel; Jeff Haessler; Tracy L Y Brown; John D Shaughnessy; Frits van Rhee; Elias Anaissie; Terri Alpe; Edgardo Angtuaco; Ronald Walker; Joshua Epstein; John Crowley; Bart Barlogie
Journal:  Blood       Date:  2009-05-14       Impact factor: 22.113

9.  Multiple myeloma treatment response assessment with whole-body dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging.

Authors:  Chieh Lin; Alain Luciani; Karim Belhadj; Jean-François Deux; Frédérique Kuhnowski; Mezri Maatouk; Pauline Beaussart; Charles A Cuenod; Corinne Haioun; Alain Rahmouni
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2010-02       Impact factor: 11.105

Review 10.  International myeloma working group consensus statement and guidelines regarding the current role of imaging techniques in the diagnosis and monitoring of multiple Myeloma.

Authors:  M Dimopoulos; E Terpos; R L Comenzo; P Tosi; M Beksac; O Sezer; D Siegel; H Lokhorst; S Kumar; S V Rajkumar; R Niesvizky; L A Moulopoulos; B G M Durie
Journal:  Leukemia       Date:  2009-05-07       Impact factor: 11.528

View more
  13 in total

1.  Minimal residual disease in multiple myeloma.

Authors:  Nikhil C Munshi; Kenneth C Anderson
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2013-06-03       Impact factor: 44.544

2.  Quantitative analysis of 18F-NaF dynamic PET/CT cannot differentiate malignant from benign lesions in multiple myeloma.

Authors:  Christos Sachpekidis; Jens Hillengass; Hartmut Goldschmidt; Hoda Anwar; Uwe Haberkorn; Antonia Dimitrakopoulou-Strauss
Journal:  Am J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2017-09-01

Review 3.  An Evidence-Based Approach to Myeloma Bone Disease.

Authors:  Nicholas Bingham; Antonia Reale; Andrew Spencer
Journal:  Curr Hematol Malig Rep       Date:  2017-04       Impact factor: 3.952

4.  Plumbagin inhibits cell proliferation and promotes apoptosis in multiple myeloma cells through inhibition of the PI3K/Akt-mTOR pathway.

Authors:  Hongwei Wu; Xiaozhen Dai; Enren Wang
Journal:  Oncol Lett       Date:  2016-08-26       Impact factor: 2.967

5.  Bone marrow angiogenesis in myeloma and its precursor disease: a prospective clinical trial.

Authors:  M Bhutani; B Turkbey; E Tan; T J Kemp; L A Pinto; A R Berg; N Korde; A R Minter; B M Weiss; E Mena; L Lindenberg; O Aras; M P Purdue; J N Hofmann; S M Steinberg; K R Calvo; P L Choyke; I Maric; K Kurdziel; O Landgren
Journal:  Leukemia       Date:  2013-09-18       Impact factor: 11.528

6.  Treatment response evaluation with 18F-FDG PET/CT and 18F-NaF PET/CT in multiple myeloma patients undergoing high-dose chemotherapy and autologous stem cell transplantation.

Authors:  Christos Sachpekidis; J Hillengass; H Goldschmidt; B Wagner; U Haberkorn; K Kopka; A Dimitrakopoulou-Strauss
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2016-08-29       Impact factor: 9.236

Review 7.  ¹⁸F-FDG PET/CT: a review of diagnostic and prognostic features in multiple myeloma and related disorders.

Authors:  Franco Dammacco; Giuseppe Rubini; Cristina Ferrari; Angelo Vacca; Vito Racanelli
Journal:  Clin Exp Med       Date:  2014-09-14       Impact factor: 3.984

Review 8.  [Hemato-oncological imaging : Importance of hybrid procedures].

Authors:  M E Mayerhoefer; A Haug
Journal:  Radiologe       Date:  2016-07       Impact factor: 0.635

9.  Osteolytic lesions, cytogenetic features and bone marrow levels of cytokines and chemokines in multiple myeloma patients: Role of chemokine (C-C motif) ligand 20.

Authors:  B Dalla Palma; D Guasco; M Pedrazzoni; M Bolzoni; F Accardi; F Costa; G Sammarelli; L Craviotto; M De Filippo; L Ruffini; P Omedè; R Ria; F Aversa; N Giuliani
Journal:  Leukemia       Date:  2015-09-30       Impact factor: 11.528

10.  Predictive value of longitudinal whole-body magnetic resonance imaging in patients with smoldering multiple myeloma.

Authors:  M Merz; T Hielscher; B Wagner; S Sauer; S Shah; M S Raab; A Jauch; K Neben; D Hose; G Egerer; M A Weber; S Delorme; H Goldschmidt; J Hillengass
Journal:  Leukemia       Date:  2014-02-18       Impact factor: 11.528

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.