» Articles » PMID: 28686535

Prospective Evaluation of Magnetic Resonance Imaging and [F]Fluorodeoxyglucose Positron Emission Tomography-Computed Tomography at Diagnosis and Before Maintenance Therapy in Symptomatic Patients With Multiple Myeloma Included in the IFM/DFCI 2009...

Abstract

Purpose Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and positron emission tomography-computed tomography (PET-CT) are important imaging techniques in multiple myeloma (MM). We conducted a prospective trial in patients with MM aimed at comparing MRI and PET-CT with respect to the detection of bone lesions at diagnosis and the prognostic value of the techniques. Patients and Methods One hundred thirty-four patients received a combination of lenalidomide, bortezomib, and dexamethasone (RVD) with or without autologous stem-cell transplantation, followed by lenalidomide maintenance. PET-CT and MRI were performed at diagnosis, after three cycles of RVD, and before maintenance therapy. The primary end point was the detection of bone lesions at diagnosis by MRI versus PET-CT. Secondary end points included the prognostic impact of MRI and PET-CT regarding progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Results At diagnosis, MRI results were positive in 127 of 134 patients (95%), and PET-CT results were positive in 122 of 134 patients (91%; P = .33). Normalization of MRI after three cycles of RVD and before maintenance was not predictive of PFS or OS. PET-CT became normal after three cycles of RVD in 32% of the patients with a positive evaluation at baseline, and PFS was improved in this group (30-month PFS, 78.7% v 56.8%, respectively). PET-CT normalization before maintenance was described in 62% of the patients who were positive at baseline. This was associated with better PFS and OS. Extramedullary disease at diagnosis was an independent prognostic factor for PFS and OS, whereas PET-CT normalization before maintenance was an independent prognostic factor for PFS. Conclusion There is no difference in the detection of bone lesions at diagnosis when comparing PET-CT and MRI. PET-CT is a powerful tool to evaluate the prognosis of de novo myeloma.

Citing Articles

Extramedullary disease in multiple myeloma at diagnosis and over the course of the disease.

Guliyev M, Tunc A, Yilmaz U, Kucukyurt S, Ozmen D, Elverdi T Int J Hematol. 2025; .

PMID: 40032738 DOI: 10.1007/s12185-025-03958-6.


Assessment of the Prognostic Importance of The Revised International Staging System Based on Plasmacytoma Presentation in Recently Diagnosed Patients with Multiple Myeloma.

Ciftciler R, Ciftciler A, Dagli M Indian J Hematol Blood Transfus. 2025; 41(1):31-37.

PMID: 39917495 PMC: 11794743. DOI: 10.1007/s12288-024-01820-z.


Refining High-Risk Multiple Myeloma: Advancements in Genomic, Clinical, and Prognostic Criteria.

Martino E, Mele G, Vigna E, Morabito F, Gentile M Mediterr J Hematol Infect Dis. 2025; 17(1):e2025006.

PMID: 39830800 PMC: 11740893. DOI: 10.4084/MJHID.2025.006.


Plasma Cell Neoplasms with Spreading in the Blood and Tissues: Extramedullary Myeloma Disease, a Rare Aggressive Form of Multiple Myeloma (First of Two Parts).

Testa U, Leone G Mediterr J Hematol Infect Dis. 2025; 17(1):e2025005.

PMID: 39830797 PMC: 11740910. DOI: 10.4084/MJHID.2025.005.


Bortezomib-releasing silica-collagen xerogels for local treatment of osteolytic bone- and minimal residual disease in multiple myeloma.

Hose D, Ray S, Rossler S, Thormann U, Schnettler R, de Veirman K J Hematol Oncol. 2024; 17(1):128.

PMID: 39695697 PMC: 11657678. DOI: 10.1186/s13045-024-01636-4.


References
1.
Roussel M, Lauwers-Cances V, Robillard N, Hulin C, Leleu X, Benboubker L . Front-line transplantation program with lenalidomide, bortezomib, and dexamethasone combination as induction and consolidation followed by lenalidomide maintenance in patients with multiple myeloma: a phase II study by the Intergroupe Francophone du.... J Clin Oncol. 2014; 32(25):2712-7. DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2013.54.8164. View

2.
Bartel T, Haessler J, Brown T, Shaughnessy Jr J, van Rhee F, Anaissie E . F18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in the context of other imaging techniques and prognostic factors in multiple myeloma. Blood. 2009; 114(10):2068-76. PMC: 2744568. DOI: 10.1182/blood-2009-03-213280. View

3.
Baur-Melnyk A, Buhmann S, Becker C, Schoenberg S, Lang N, Bartl R . Whole-body MRI versus whole-body MDCT for staging of multiple myeloma. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2008; 190(4):1097-104. DOI: 10.2214/AJR.07.2635. View

4.
Kumar S, Paiva B, Anderson K, Durie B, Landgren O, Moreau P . International Myeloma Working Group consensus criteria for response and minimal residual disease assessment in multiple myeloma. Lancet Oncol. 2016; 17(8):e328-e346. DOI: 10.1016/S1470-2045(16)30206-6. View

5.
Terpos E, Kleber M, Engelhardt M, Zweegman S, Gay F, Kastritis E . European Myeloma Network guidelines for the management of multiple myeloma-related complications. Haematologica. 2015; 100(10):1254-66. PMC: 4591757. DOI: 10.3324/haematol.2014.117176. View