OBJECTIVES: To compare the diagnostic performance of whole-body magnetic resonance imaging (WBMRI) versus (18)F-fluorodeoxyglucose ((18)F-FDG) positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) for determination of remission status in patients with multiple myeloma (MM) after stem cell transplantation (SCT). METHODS: Thirty-one patients were examined by both WBMRI and PET/CT after SCT. Imaging results and clinical remission status as determined by the clinical gold standard (Uniform Response Criteria) were compared. RESULTS: One hundred four lesions were detected in 21 patients. PET/CT had a sensitivity of 50.0 %, a specificity of 85.7 %, a positive predictive value of 62.5 %, a negative predictive value of 78.3 %, and an overall accuracy of 74.2 % for determination of remission status. MRI had a sensitivity of 80.0 %, a specificity of 38.1 %, a positive predictive value of 38.1 %, a negative predictive value of 80 %, and an overall accuracy of 51.6 %. Concordant results were observed in only 12 (11.5 %) of the 104 lesions. CONCLUSIONS: In the post-treatment setting, both FDG PET/CT and WBMRI provide information about the extent of disease, allowing for a more comprehensive evaluation of persisting or recurrent myeloma. MRI may often be false positive because of persistent non-viable lesions. Therefore, PET/CT might be more suitable than MRI for determination of remission status.
OBJECTIVES: To compare the diagnostic performance of whole-body magnetic resonance imaging (WBMRI) versus (18)F-fluorodeoxyglucose ((18)F-FDG) positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) for determination of remission status in patients with multiple myeloma (MM) after stem cell transplantation (SCT). METHODS: Thirty-one patients were examined by both WBMRI and PET/CT after SCT. Imaging results and clinical remission status as determined by the clinical gold standard (Uniform Response Criteria) were compared. RESULTS: One hundred four lesions were detected in 21 patients. PET/CT had a sensitivity of 50.0 %, a specificity of 85.7 %, a positive predictive value of 62.5 %, a negative predictive value of 78.3 %, and an overall accuracy of 74.2 % for determination of remission status. MRI had a sensitivity of 80.0 %, a specificity of 38.1 %, a positive predictive value of 38.1 %, a negative predictive value of 80 %, and an overall accuracy of 51.6 %. Concordant results were observed in only 12 (11.5 %) of the 104 lesions. CONCLUSIONS: In the post-treatment setting, both FDG PET/CT and WBMRI provide information about the extent of disease, allowing for a more comprehensive evaluation of persisting or recurrent myeloma. MRI may often be false positive because of persistent non-viable lesions. Therefore, PET/CT might be more suitable than MRI for determination of remission status.
Authors: Alexander Becherer; Maria De Santis; Georgios Karanikas; Monica Szabó; Carsten Bokemeyer; Bernhard M Dohmen; Jörg Pont; Robert Dudczak; Christian Dittrich; Kurt Kletter Journal: Eur J Radiol Date: 2005-05 Impact factor: 3.528
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
Authors: Tobias Bäuerle; Jens Hillengass; Kerstin Fechtner; Christian M Zechmann; Lars Grenacher; Thomas M Moehler; Heiss Christiane; Barbara Wagner-Gund; Kai Neben; Hans-Ulrich Kauczor; Hartmut Goldschmidt; Stefan Delorme Journal: Radiology Date: 2009-08 Impact factor: 11.105
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
Authors: Evangelos Terpos; Martina Kleber; Monika Engelhardt; Sonja Zweegman; Francesca Gay; Efstathios Kastritis; Niels W C J van de Donk; Benedetto Bruno; Orhan Sezer; Annemiek Broijl; Sara Bringhen; Meral Beksac; Alessandra Larocca; Roman Hajek; Pellegrino Musto; Hans Erik Johnsen; Fortunato Morabito; Heinz Ludwig; Michele Cavo; Hermann Einsele; Pieter Sonneveld; Meletios A Dimopoulos; Antonio Palumbo Journal: Haematologica Date: 2015-10 Impact factor: 9.941
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