Leila S Arani1, Mahdi Zirakchian Zadeh1,2, Babak Saboury1,3, Mona-Elisabeth Revheim1,4,5, Brian Øestergaard6, Austin J Borja1, Davoud Samadi Samarin1, Siavash Mehdizadeh Seraj1, Eman Kalbush1, Cyrus Ayubcha1, Michael A Morris3, Tom J Werner1, Niels Abildgaard6,7, Poul F Høilund-Carlsen8,9, Abass Alavi10. 1. Department of Radiology, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, 3400 Spruce St, Philadelphia, PA, 19104, USA. 2. Dental School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. 3. Department of Radiology and Imaging Sciences, Clinical Center, National Institutes of Health (NIH), Bethesda, MD, USA. 4. Division of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway. 5. Faculty of Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway. 6. Department of Hematology, Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark. 7. Hematology Research Unit, Department of Clinical Research, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark. 8. Department of Nuclear Medicine, Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark. 9. Department of Clinical Research, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark. 10. Department of Radiology, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, 3400 Spruce St, Philadelphia, PA, 19104, USA. abass.alavi@uphs.upenn.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: To compare the NaF uptake in the thoracic aorta and whole heart, as an early indicator of atherosclerosis, in multiple myeloma (MM) and smoldering multiple myeloma (SMM) patients with a healthy control (HC) group. METHODS: Forty-four untreated myeloma patients (35 MM and nine SMM) and twenty-six age and gender-matched HC subjects were collected. Each individual's NaF uptake in three parts of the aorta (AA: ascending aorta, AR: aortic arch, DA: descending aorta) and the whole heart was segmented. Average global standardized uptake value means were derived by sum of the product of each slice area divided by the sum of those slice areas. Results were reported as target to background ratio (TBR). RESULTS: There was a significant difference between the NaF uptake in the thoracic aorta of myeloma and HC groups [AA (myeloma = 1.82 ± 0.21, HC = 1.24 ± 0.02), AR (myeloma = 1.71 ± 0.19, HC = 1.28 ± 0.03) and DA (myeloma = 1.96 ± 0.28, HC = 1.38 ± 0.03); P-values < 0.001]. The difference in the whole heart NaF uptake between two groups was also significant (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: We observed a higher uptake of NaF in the thoracic aorta and whole heart of myeloma patients in comparison to the matched control group.
BACKGROUND: To compare the NaF uptake in the thoracic aorta and whole heart, as an early indicator of atherosclerosis, in multiple myeloma (MM) and smoldering multiple myeloma (SMM) patients with a healthy control (HC) group. METHODS: Forty-four untreated myeloma patients (35 MM and nine SMM) and twenty-six age and gender-matched HC subjects were collected. Each individual's NaF uptake in three parts of the aorta (AA: ascending aorta, AR: aortic arch, DA: descending aorta) and the whole heart was segmented. Average global standardized uptake value means were derived by sum of the product of each slice area divided by the sum of those slice areas. Results were reported as target to background ratio (TBR). RESULTS: There was a significant difference between the NaF uptake in the thoracic aorta of myeloma and HC groups [AA (myeloma = 1.82 ± 0.21, HC = 1.24 ± 0.02), AR (myeloma = 1.71 ± 0.19, HC = 1.28 ± 0.03) and DA (myeloma = 1.96 ± 0.28, HC = 1.38 ± 0.03); P-values < 0.001]. The difference in the whole heart NaF uptake between two groups was also significant (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: We observed a higher uptake of NaF in the thoracic aorta and whole heart of myeloma patients in comparison to the matched control group.
Authors: Siavash Mehdizadeh Seraj; William Y Raynor; Mona-Elisabeth Revheim; Abdullah Al-Zaghal; Mahdi Zirakchian Zadeh; Leila S Arani; Chaitanya Rojulpote; Thomas J Werner; Oke Gerke; Poul F Høilund-Carlsen; Joshua F Baker; Abass Alavi; Stephen J Hunt Journal: Ann Nucl Med Date: 2020-04-10 Impact factor: 2.668
Authors: Leila S Arani; Mohammad H Gharavi; Mahdi Z Zadeh; William Y Raynor; Siavash M Seraj; Caius M Constantinescu; Oke Gerke; Thomas J Werner; Poul F Høilund-Carlsen; Abass Alavi Journal: Hell J Nucl Med Date: 2019-03-07 Impact factor: 1.102
Authors: Mohsen Beheshti; Babak Saboury; Nehal N Mehta; Drew A Torigian; Tom Werner; Emile Mohler; Robert Wilensky; Andrew B Newberg; Sandip Basu; Werner Langsteger; Abass Alavi Journal: Hell J Nucl Med Date: 2011 May-Aug Impact factor: 1.102
Authors: Sung Woo Cho; Taek Kyu Park; Hye Bin Gwag; A Young Lim; Min Seok Oh; Da Hyon Lee; Choong Sil Seong; Jeong Hoon Yang; Young Bin Song; Joo-Yong Hahn; Jin-Ho Choi; Sang Hoon Lee; Hyeon-Cheol Gwon; Seung-Hyuk Choi Journal: J Am Heart Assoc Date: 2016-11-16 Impact factor: 5.501