Literature DB >> 32966607

Diagnostic performance of 18 F-FDG-PET/CT compared to standard skeletal survey for detecting bone destruction in smouldering multiple myeloma: time to move forward.

Elizabeth Hill1, Esther Mena2, Candis Morrison1, Alexander Dew1,3, Peter Choyke2, Liza Lindenberg2, Dickran Kazandjian1.   

Abstract

Skeletal survey (SS) continues to be used in the community to detect bone disease in patients with multiple myeloma (MM). While the false-negative rate is high, the specificity of SS is less well characterised. Here, we compare the diagnostic accuracy of SS compared to 18 F-FDG-PET/CT (positron emission tomography/computed tomography) in 79 patients referred to our tertiary centre with a diagnosis of smouldering MM. SS had a specificity of 83·1% (95% confidence interval: 72·0-90·5%). This study reinforces the importance of using more specific imaging techniques to avoid inaccurate diagnosis that could lead to the risks associated with unnecessary therapy in patients with smouldering MM. Published 2020. This article is a U.S. Government work and is in the public domain in the USA.

Entities:  

Keywords:  lytic lesions; myeloma imaging; positron emission tomography/computed tomography; skeletal survey; smouldering multiple myeloma

Mesh：

Substances：

Year:  2020        PMID： 32966607      PMCID： PMC9310660          DOI： 10.1111/bjh.17088

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Br J Haematol        ISSN： 0007-1048            Impact factor:   8.615


  17 in total

1.  Baseline bone involvement in multiple myeloma - a prospective comparison of conventional X-ray, low-dose computed tomography, and 18flourodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in previously untreated patients.

Authors:  Maja Hinge; Kristian T Andersen; Thomas Lund; Henrik B Jørgensen; Paw C Holdgaard; Tina E Ormstrup; Lone L Østergaard; Torben Plesner
Journal:  Haematologica       Date:  2016-07-06       Impact factor: 9.941

2.  MRI versus 18F-FDG-PET/CT for detecting bone marrow involvement in multiple myeloma: diagnostic performance and clinical relevance.

Authors:  Frédéric E Lecouvet; Dimitar Boyadzhiev; Laurence Collette; Maude Berckmans; Nicolas Michoux; Perrine Triqueneaux; Vassiliki Pasoglou; François Jamar; Marie-Christiane Vekemans
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2019-12-16       Impact factor: 5.315

3.  Multidetector CT of the spine in multiple myeloma: comparison with MR imaging and radiography.

Authors:  A H Mahnken; J E Wildberger; G Gehbauer; T Schmitz-Rode; M Blaum; U Fabry; R W Günther
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2002-06       Impact factor: 3.959

Review 4.  Molecular imaging in myeloma precursor disease.

Authors:  Esther Mena; Peter Choyke; Esther Tan; Ola Landgren; Karen Kurdziel
Journal:  Semin Hematol       Date:  2011-01       Impact factor: 3.851

Review 5.  Role of 18F-FDG PET/CT in the diagnosis and management of multiple myeloma and other plasma cell disorders: a consensus statement by the International Myeloma Working Group.

Authors:  Michele Cavo; Evangelos Terpos; Cristina Nanni; Philippe Moreau; Suzanne Lentzsch; Sonja Zweegman; Jens Hillengass; Monika Engelhardt; Saad Z Usmani; David H Vesole; Jesus San-Miguel; Shaji K Kumar; Paul G Richardson; Joseph R Mikhael; Fernando Leal da Costa; Meletios-Athanassios Dimopoulos; Chiara Zingaretti; Niels Abildgaard; Hartmut Goldschmidt; Robert Z Orlowski; Wee Joo Chng; Hermann Einsele; Sagar Lonial; Bart Barlogie; Kenneth C Anderson; S Vincent Rajkumar; Brian G M Durie; Elena Zamagni
Journal:  Lancet Oncol       Date:  2017-04       Impact factor: 41.316

Review 6.  International myeloma working group consensus recommendations on imaging in monoclonal plasma cell disorders.

Authors:  Jens Hillengass; Saad Usmani; S Vincent Rajkumar; Brian G M Durie; María-Victoria Mateos; Sagar Lonial; Cristina Joao; Kenneth C Anderson; Ramón García-Sanz; Eloísa Riva; Juan Du; Niels van de Donk; Jesús G Berdeja; Evangelos Terpos; Elena Zamagni; Robert A Kyle; Jesús San Miguel; Hartmut Goldschmidt; Sergio Giralt; Shaji Kumar; Noopur Raje; Heinz Ludwig; Enrique Ocio; Rik Schots; Hermann Einsele; Fredrik Schjesvold; Wen-Ming Chen; Niels Abildgaard; Brea C Lipe; Dominik Dytfeld; Baldeep Mona Wirk; Matthew Drake; Michele Cavo; Juan José Lahuerta; Suzanne Lentzsch
Journal:  Lancet Oncol       Date:  2019-06       Impact factor: 41.316

7.  Monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance (MGUS) consistently precedes multiple myeloma: a prospective study.

Authors:  Ola Landgren; Robert A Kyle; Ruth M Pfeiffer; Jerry A Katzmann; Neil E Caporaso; Richard B Hayes; Angela Dispenzieri; Shaji Kumar; Raynell J Clark; Dalsu Baris; Robert Hoover; S Vincent Rajkumar
Journal:  Blood       Date:  2009-01-29       Impact factor: 22.113

8.  Review of 1027 patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma.

Authors:  Robert A Kyle; Morie A Gertz; Thomas E Witzig; John A Lust; Martha Q Lacy; Angela Dispenzieri; Rafael Fonseca; S Vincent Rajkumar; Janice R Offord; Dirk R Larson; Matthew E Plevak; Terry M Therneau; Philip R Greipp
Journal:  Mayo Clin Proc       Date:  2003-01       Impact factor: 7.616

9.  Multiple myeloma: evaluation by CT.

Authors:  J S Schreiman; R A McLeod; R A Kyle; J W Beabout
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1985-02       Impact factor: 11.105

10.  Whole-Body MRI versus PET in assessment of multiple myeloma disease activity.

Authors:  Conor P Shortt; Tadhg G Gleeson; Karen A Breen; John McHugh; Martin J O'Connell; Peter J O'Gorman; Stephen J Eustace
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2009-04       Impact factor: 3.959
View more
  1 in total

Review 1.  Metabolic Volume Measurements in Multiple Myeloma.

Authors:  Maria Emilia Seren Takahashi; Irene Lorand-Metze; Carmino Antonio de Souza; Claudio Tinoco Mesquita; Fernando Amorim Fernandes; José Barreto Campello Carvalheira; Celso Dario Ramos
Journal:  Metabolites       Date:  2021-12-16
  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.