Marius Horger1, Wolfgang M Thaiss1, Hendrik Ditt2, Katja Weisel3, Jan Fritz4, Konstantin Nikolaou1, Shu Liao5, Christopher Kloth6. 1. Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Eberhard-Karls-University Tübingen, Hoppe-Seyler-Str.3, D-72076, Tuebingen, Germany. 2. Siemens AG Healthcare, Sector Imaging and Interventional Radiology, Siemensstr. 1, D-91301, Forchheim, Germany. 3. Department of Internal Medicine II, Eberhard-Karls-University Tübingen, D-72076, Tübingen, Germany. 4. Russell H. Morgan Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, Johns Hopkins University School of Medcine, 601 N. Caroline Street, JHOC 3142, Baltimore, MD, 21287, USA. 5. Siemens Medical Solutions, Malvern, PA, 19355, USA. 6. Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Eberhard-Karls-University Tübingen, Hoppe-Seyler-Str.3, D-72076, Tuebingen, Germany. christopher.kloth@med.uni-tuebingen.de.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To evaluate the diagnostic performance of a novel CT post-processing software that generates subtraction maps of baseline and follow-up CT examinations in the course of myeloma bone lesions. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study included 61 consecutive myeloma patients who underwent repeated whole-body reduced-dose MDCT at our institution between November 2013 and June 2015. CT subtraction maps classified a progressive disease (PD) vs. stable disease (SD)/remission. Bone subtraction maps (BSMs) only and in combination with 1-mm (BSM+) source images were compared with 5-mm axial/MPR scans. RESULTS: Haematological response categories at follow-up were: complete remission (n = 9), very good partial remission (n = 2), partial remission (n = 17) and SDh (n = 19) vs. PDh (n = 14). Five-millimetre CT scan yielded PD (n = 14) and SD/remission (n = 47) whereas bone subtraction + 1-mm axial scans (BSM+) reading resulted in PD (n = 18) and SD/remission (n = 43). Sensitivity/ specificity/accuracy for 5-mm/1-mm/BSM(alone)/BSM + in "lesion-by-lesion" reading was 89.4 %/98.9 %/98.3 %/ 99.5 %; 69.1 %/96.9 %/72 %/92.1 % and 83.8 %/98.4 %/92.1 %/98.3 %, respectively. The use of BSM+ resulted in a change of response classification in 9.8 % patients (n = 6) from SD to PD. CONCLUSION: BSM reading is more accurate for monitoring myeloma compared to axial scans whereas BSM+ yields similar results with 1-mm reading (gold standard) but by significantly reduced reading time. KEY POINTS: • CT evaluation of myeloma bone disease using a longitudinal bone subtraction post-processing algorithm. • Bone subtraction post-processing algorithm is more accurate for assessment of therapy. • Bone subtraction allowed improved and more efficient detection of myeloma bone lesions. • Post-processing tool demonstrating a change in response classification in 9.8 % patients (all showing PD). • Reading time could be substantially shortened as compared to regular CT assessment.
PURPOSE: To evaluate the diagnostic performance of a novel CT post-processing software that generates subtraction maps of baseline and follow-up CT examinations in the course of myeloma bone lesions. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study included 61 consecutive myelomapatients who underwent repeated whole-body reduced-dose MDCT at our institution between November 2013 and June 2015. CT subtraction maps classified a progressive disease (PD) vs. stable disease (SD)/remission. Bone subtraction maps (BSMs) only and in combination with 1-mm (BSM+) source images were compared with 5-mm axial/MPR scans. RESULTS: Haematological response categories at follow-up were: complete remission (n = 9), very good partial remission (n = 2), partial remission (n = 17) and SDh (n = 19) vs. PDh (n = 14). Five-millimetre CT scan yielded PD (n = 14) and SD/remission (n = 47) whereas bone subtraction + 1-mm axial scans (BSM+) reading resulted in PD (n = 18) and SD/remission (n = 43). Sensitivity/ specificity/accuracy for 5-mm/1-mm/BSM(alone)/BSM + in "lesion-by-lesion" reading was 89.4 %/98.9 %/98.3 %/ 99.5 %; 69.1 %/96.9 %/72 %/92.1 % and 83.8 %/98.4 %/92.1 %/98.3 %, respectively. The use of BSM+ resulted in a change of response classification in 9.8 % patients (n = 6) from SD to PD. CONCLUSION: BSM reading is more accurate for monitoring myeloma compared to axial scans whereas BSM+ yields similar results with 1-mm reading (gold standard) but by significantly reduced reading time. KEY POINTS: • CT evaluation of myeloma bone disease using a longitudinal bone subtraction post-processing algorithm. • Bone subtraction post-processing algorithm is more accurate for assessment of therapy. • Bone subtraction allowed improved and more efficient detection of myeloma bone lesions. • Post-processing tool demonstrating a change in response classification in 9.8 % patients (all showing PD). • Reading time could be substantially shortened as compared to regular CT assessment.
Entities:
Keywords:
Bone subtraction maps; CT imaging; Lytic bone lesions; Multiple myeloma; Pelvic bones
Authors: Georg Homann; Deedar F Mustafa; Hendrik Ditt; Werner Spengler; Hans-Georg Kopp; Konstantin Nikolaou; Marius Horger Journal: Acad Radiol Date: 2015-01-10 Impact factor: 3.173
Authors: M Zacchino; P A Bonaffini; A Corso; V Minetti; A Nasatti; C Tinelli; R Dore; F Calliada; S Sironi Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2015-05-20 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Andrea Baur-Melnyk; Sonja Buhmann; Christoph Becker; Stefan Oswald Schoenberg; Nicola Lang; Reiner Bartl; Maximilian Ferdinand Reiser Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2008-04 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: Antonio Palumbo; Hervé Avet-Loiseau; Stefania Oliva; Henk M Lokhorst; Hartmut Goldschmidt; Laura Rosinol; Paul Richardson; Simona Caltagirone; Juan José Lahuerta; Thierry Facon; Sara Bringhen; Francesca Gay; Michel Attal; Roberto Passera; Andrew Spencer; Massimo Offidani; Shaji Kumar; Pellegrino Musto; Sagar Lonial; Maria T Petrucci; Robert Z Orlowski; Elena Zamagni; Gareth Morgan; Meletios A Dimopoulos; Brian G M Durie; Kenneth C Anderson; Pieter Sonneveld; Jésus San Miguel; Michele Cavo; S Vincent Rajkumar; Philippe Moreau Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2015-08-03 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: T G Gleeson; J Moriarty; C P Shortt; J P Gleeson; P Fitzpatrick; B Byrne; J McHugh; M O'Connell; P O'Gorman; S J Eustace Journal: Skeletal Radiol Date: 2008-11-14 Impact factor: 2.199
Authors: H R Evans; T Karmakharm; M A Lawson; R E Walker; W Harris; C Fellows; I D Huggins; P Richmond; A D Chantry Journal: Bone Date: 2015-10-08 Impact factor: 4.398