S C Brandelik1, J Krzykalla2, T Hielscher2, J Hillengass3, J K Kloth4, H U Kauczor5, M A Weber5,6. 1. Diagnostische und Interventionelle Radiologie, Universitätsklinikum Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 110, 69120, Heidelberg, Deutschland. simone.brandelik@med.uni-heidelberg.de. 2. Biostatistik, Deutsches Krebsforschungszentrum (dkfz), Heidelberg, Deutschland. 3. Hämatologie und Onkologie, Universitätsklinikum Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Deutschland. 4. Radiologie Löbau, Löbau, Deutschland. 5. Diagnostische und Interventionelle Radiologie, Universitätsklinikum Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 110, 69120, Heidelberg, Deutschland. 6. Diagnostische und Interventionelle Radiologie, Universitätsmedizin Rostock, Rostock, Deutschland.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: In this study, we evaluated methods of quantification of tumor mass in whole-body MRI (wb-MRI) in multiple myeloma and correlated these with disease-related parameters in serum and bone marrow. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated wb-MRIs of 52 patients with focal infiltration pattern and a total of 700 focal lesions (subsequently called lesions). We determined the longest diameter (LD), the segmented volume (SV), and the morphology (spherical or non-spherical). We correlated total number/volume of the lesions with clinical parameters and prognosis and furthermore LD with SV. After that we analyzed the agreement of SV and estimated volume (EV) using the volume formula of a sphere based on LD. RESULTS: Results showed no significant correlations of total number/volume with prognosis or clinical parameters. The latter were situated predominantly in the normal range. Furthermore, 10% of lesions were spherical. SV and LD correlated significantly in single lesions and on patient level. SV was in lesions <6 cm3 systematically larger and in lesions ≥6 cm3 smaller than EV. In 95%, we found in small lesions a deviation of EV versus SV from +0.9 cm3 to -4.6 cm3 and in large lesions from +160 cm3 to -111 cm3 (EV-SV). CONCLUSIONS: Quantification of tumor mass in the focal infiltration pattern is performed more accurately by volumetry than LD due to the predominant existence of non-spherical lesions. The patient cohort with clinical parameters predominantly in the normal range is distributed to ISS stage I and partly pretreated, a fact that makes interpretation of absent correlations more difficult. Consider also a variation in activitiy of lesions and a diffuse infiltration not detectable by MRI.
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: In this study, we evaluated methods of quantification of tumor mass in whole-body MRI (wb-MRI) in multiple myeloma and correlated these with disease-related parameters in serum and bone marrow. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated wb-MRIs of 52 patients with focal infiltration pattern and a total of 700 focal lesions (subsequently called lesions). We determined the longest diameter (LD), the segmented volume (SV), and the morphology (spherical or non-spherical). We correlated total number/volume of the lesions with clinical parameters and prognosis and furthermore LD with SV. After that we analyzed the agreement of SV and estimated volume (EV) using the volume formula of a sphere based on LD. RESULTS: Results showed no significant correlations of total number/volume with prognosis or clinical parameters. The latter were situated predominantly in the normal range. Furthermore, 10% of lesions were spherical. SV and LD correlated significantly in single lesions and on patient level. SV was in lesions <6 cm3 systematically larger and in lesions ≥6 cm3 smaller than EV. In 95%, we found in small lesions a deviation of EV versus SV from +0.9 cm3 to -4.6 cm3 and in large lesions from +160 cm3 to -111 cm3 (EV-SV). CONCLUSIONS: Quantification of tumor mass in the focal infiltration pattern is performed more accurately by volumetry than LD due to the predominant existence of non-spherical lesions. The patient cohort with clinical parameters predominantly in the normal range is distributed to ISS stage I and partly pretreated, a fact that makes interpretation of absent correlations more difficult. Consider also a variation in activitiy of lesions and a diffuse infiltration not detectable by MRI.
Authors: Jens Hillengass; Kerstin Fechtner; Marc-André Weber; Tobias Bäuerle; Sofia Ayyaz; Christiane Heiss; Thomas Hielscher; Thomas M Moehler; Gerlinde Egerer; Kai Neben; Anthony D Ho; Hans-Ulrich Kauczor; Stefan Delorme; Hartmut Goldschmidt Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2010-02-22 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Savannah C Partridge; Jessica E Gibbs; Ying Lu; Laura J Esserman; Debasish Tripathy; Dulcy S Wolverton; Hope S Rugo; E Shelley Hwang; Cheryl A Ewing; Nola M Hylton Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2005-06 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: Philip R Greipp; Jesus San Miguel; Brian G M Durie; John J Crowley; Bart Barlogie; Joan Bladé; Mario Boccadoro; J Anthony Child; Herve Avet-Loiseau; Jean-Luc Harousseau; Robert A Kyle; Juan J Lahuerta; Heinz Ludwig; Gareth Morgan; Raymond Powles; Kazuyuki Shimizu; Chaim Shustik; Pieter Sonneveld; Patrizia Tosi; Ingemar Turesson; Jan Westin Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2005-04-04 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Shaji Kumar; Rafael Fonseca; Rhett P Ketterling; Angela Dispenzieri; Martha Q Lacy; Morie A Gertz; Suzanne R Hayman; Francis K Buadi; David Dingli; Ryan A Knudson; Alexandra Greenberg; Stephen J Russell; Steven R Zeldenrust; John A Lust; Robert A Kyle; Leif Bergsagel; S Vincent Rajkumar Journal: Blood Date: 2012-01-10 Impact factor: 22.113
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: Sikander Ailawadhi; Ahmed N Abdelhalim; Lyudmyla Derby; Terry L Mashtare; Kena C Miller; Gregory E Wilding; Ronald A Alberico; Ronald Gottlieb; Donald L Klippenstein; Kelvin Lee; Asher A Chanan-Khan Journal: Cancer Date: 2010-01-01 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: P Spinnato; A Bazzocchi; A Brioli; C Nanni; E Zamagni; U Albisinni; M Cavo; S Fanti; G Battista; E Salizzoni Journal: Eur J Radiol Date: 2012-08-24 Impact factor: 3.528
Authors: Jost K Kloth; Jens Hillengass; Karin Listl; Kerstin Kilk; Thomas Hielscher; Ola Landgren; Stefan Delorme; Hartmut Goldschmidt; Hans-Ulrich Kauczor; Marc-André Weber Journal: Int J Cancer Date: 2014-04-17 Impact factor: 7.396
Authors: Markus Wennmann; Laurent Kintzelé; Marie Piraud; Bjoern H Menze; Thomas Hielscher; Johannes Hofmanninger; Barbara Wagner; Hans-Ulrich Kauczor; Maximilian Merz; Jens Hillengass; Georg Langs; Marc-André Weber Journal: Oncotarget Date: 2018-05-18