Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Is fluorine-18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography useful in monitoring the response to treatment in patients with multiple myeloma?

  • Review Article
  • Published:
International Journal of Hematology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Fluorine-18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) is a useful diagnostic tool for the staging of patients with multiple myeloma (MM). The aim of this study is to perform a systematic review of the usefulness of FDG-PET or PET/CT in monitoring response to treatment in patients with MM. A comprehensive computer literature search of the PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus and Embase databases was carried out to identify relevant peer-reviewed articles on the use of FDG-PET or PET/CT in monitoring the response to treatment in patients with MM. Ten studies described investigations of the role of FDG-PET or PET/CT in monitoring the response to treatment in 690 patients with MM or solitary plasmacytoma: six of these were conducted prospectively, while four studies were retrospective. These articles were retrieved in full-text version and analyzed. Based on these findings from the literature, FDG-PET or PET/CT appear to be useful in the assessment of treatment response in patients with MM.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Raab MS, Podar K, Breitkreutz I, Richardson PG, Anderson KC. Multiple myeloma. Lancet. 2009;374:324–39.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Issa ZA, Zantout MS, Azar ST. Multiple myeloma and diabetes. ISRN Endocrinol. 2011;2011:815013.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Coleman EA, Senner JW, Edwards BK. Does multiple myeloma incidence vary by geographic area? J Ark Med Soc. 2008;105:89–91.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Dimopoulos MA, Terpos E. Multiple myeloma. Ann Oncol. 2010;21:143–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Kyle RA, Rajkumar SV. Multiple myeloma. N Engl J Med. 2004;351:1060–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Landis SH, Murray T, Bolden S, Wingo PA. Cancer statistics, 1998. CA Cancer J Clin. 1998;48:6–29.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. International Myeloma Working Group. Criteria for the classification of monoclonal gammopathies, multiple myeloma and related disorders: a report of the International Myeloma Working Group. Br J Haematol. 2003;121:749–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Kyle RA, Rajkumar SV. Criteria for diagnosis, staging, risk stratification and response assessment of multiple myeloma. Leukemia. 2009;23:3–9.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Greipp PR, San Miguel J, Durie BG, Crowley JJ, Barlogie B, Bladé J, et al. International staging system for multiple myeloma. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23:3412–20.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Durie BG, Salmon SE. A clinical staging system for multiple myeloma. Correlation of measured myeloma cell mass with presenting clinical features, response to treatment, and survival. Cancer. 1975;36:842–54.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Kröpil P, Fenk R, Fritz LB, Blondin D, Kobbe G, Mödder U, et al. Comparison of whole-body 64-slice multidetector computed tomography and conventional radiography in staging of multiple myeloma. Eur Radiol. 2008;18:51–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. van Lammeren-Venema D, Regelink JC, Riphagen II, Zweegeman S, Hoekstra OS, Zijlstra JM. 18F-fluoro-deoxyglucose positron emission tomography in assessment of myeloma-related bone disease: a systematic review. Cancer. 2012;118:1971–81.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Zamagni E, Cavo M. The role of imaging techniques in the management of multiple myeloma. Br J Haematol. 2012. doi:10.1111/bjh.12007.

  14. Fonti R, Salvatore B, Quarantelli M, Sirignano C, Segreto S, Petruzziello F, et al. 18F-FDG PET/CT, 99mTc-MIBI, and MRI in evaluation of patients with multiple myeloma. J Nucl Med. 2008;49:195–200.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Nanni C, Zamagni E, Farsad M, Castellucci P, Tosi P, Cangini D, et al. Role of 18F-FDG PET/CT in the assessment of bone involvement in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma: preliminary results. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2006;33:525–31.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Wang K, Allen L, Fung E, Chan CC, Chan JC, Griffith JF. Bone scintigraphy in common tumors with osteolytic components. Clin Nucl Med. 2005;30:655–71.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Lu YY, Chen JH, Lin WY, Liang JA, Wang HY, Tsai SC, et al. FDG PET or PET/CT for detecting intramedullary and extramedullary lesions in multiple myeloma: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Nucl Med. 2012;37:833–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Schirrmeister H, Bommer M, Buck AK, Müller S, Messer P, Bunjes D, et al. Initial results in the assessment of multiple myeloma using 18F-FDG PET. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2002;29:361–6.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Durie BG, Waxman AD, D’Agnolo A, Williams CM. Whole-body (18)F-FDG PET identifies high-risk myeloma. J Nucl Med. 2002;43:1457–63.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Haznedar R, Akı SZ, Akdemir OU, Ozkurt ZN, Ceneli O, Yağcı M, et al. Value of 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose uptake in positron emission tomography/computed tomography in predicting survival in multiple myeloma. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2011;38:1046–53.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. El-Shirbiny AM, Yeung H, Imbriaco M, Michaeli J, Macapinlac H, Larson SM. Technetium-99m-MIBI versus fluorine-18-FDG in diffuse multiple myeloma. J Nucl Med. 1997;38:1208–10.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Cascini GL, Cuccurullo V, Tamburrini O, Mansi L, Rotondo A. Nuclear medicine in multiple myeloma—more than diagnosis. Nucl Med Rev Cent East Eur. 2010;13:32–8.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Bredella MA, Steinbach L, Caputo G, Segall G, Hawkins R. Value of FDG PET in the assessment of patients with multiple myeloma. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2005;184:1199–204.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Lütje S, de Rooy JW, Croockewit S, Koedam E, Oyen WJ, Raymakers RA. Role of radiography, MRI and FDG-PET/CT in diagnosing, staging and therapeutical evaluation of patients with multiple myeloma. Ann Hematol. 2009;88:1161–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Evangelista L, Panunzio A, Polverosi R, Ferretti A, Chondrogiannis S, Pomerri F, et al. Early bone marrow metastasis detection: the additional value of FDG-PET/CT vs CT imaging. Biomed Pharmacother. 2012;66:448–53.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Zamagni E, Nanni C, Patriarca F, Englaro E, Castellucci P, Geatti O, et al. A prospective comparison of 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography-computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging and whole-body planar radiographs in the assessment of bone disease in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. Haematologica. 2007;92:50–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Shortt CP, Gleeson TG, Breen KA, McHugh J, O’Connell MJ, O’Gorman PJ, et al. Whole-body MRI versus PET in assessment of multiple myeloma disease activity. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2009;192:980–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Bartel TB, Haessler J, Brown TL, Shaughnessy JD Jr, van Rhee F, Anaissie E, et al. F18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in the context of other imaging techniques and prognostic factors in multiple myeloma. Blood. 2009;114:2068–76.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Kim PJ, Hicks RJ, Wirth A, Ryan G, Seymour JF, Prince HM, et al. Impact of 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography before and after definitive radiation therapy in patients with apparently solitary plasmacytoma. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2009;74:740–6.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Sager S, Ergül N, Ciftci H, Cetin G, Güner SI, Cermik TF. The value of FDG PET/CT in the initial staging and bone marrow involvement of patients with multiple myeloma. Skeletal Radiol. 2011;40:843–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Derlin T, Weber C, Habermann CR, Herrmann J, Wisotzki C, Ayuk F, et al. 18F-FDG PET/CT for detection and localization of residual or recurrent disease in patients with multiple myeloma after stem cell transplantation. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2012;39:493–500.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Durie BG, Harousseau JL, Miguel JS, Bladé J, Barlogie B, Anderson K, et al. International Myeloma Working Group. International uniform response criteria for multiple myeloma. Leukemia. 2006;20:1467–73.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Jadvar H, Conti PS. Diagnostic utility of FDG PET in multiplemyeloma. Skeletal Radiol. 2002;31:690–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Zamagni E, Patriarca F, Nanni C, Zannetti B, Englaro E, Pezzi A, et al. Prognostic relevance of 18-F FDG PET/CT in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma patients treated with up-front autologous transplantation. Blood. 2011;118:5989–95.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Barlogie B, Anaissie E, van Rhee F, Haessler J, Hollmig K, Pineda-Roman M, et al. Incorporating bortezomib into upfront treatment for multiple myeloma: early results of total therapy 3. Br J Haematol. 2007;138:176–85.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Dimitrakopoulou-Strauss A, Hoffmann M, Bergner R, Uppenkamp M, Haberkorn U, Strauss LG. Prediction of progression-free survival in patients with multiple myeloma following anthracycline-based chemotherapy based on dynamic FDG-PET. Clin Nucl Med. 2009;34:576–84.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Mileshkin L, Blum R, Seymour JF, Patrikeos A, Hicks RJ, Prince HM. A comparison of fluorine-18 fluoro-deoxyglucose PET and technetium-99m sestamibi in assessing patients with multiple myeloma. Eur J Haematol. 2004;72:32–7.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interest

None.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Bioimaging and Radiological Sciences, Institute of Nuclear Medicine, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Largo Gemelli, 8, 00168, Rome, Italy

    Carmelo Caldarella & Giorgio Treglia

  2. Institute of Biochemistry and Clinical Biochemistry, Catholic University of the Sacred Heart, Rome, Italy

    Maria Antonietta Isgrò

  3. School of Biotechnology, Catholic University of the Sacred Heart, Rome, Italy

    Ivan Treglia

Authors
  1. Carmelo Caldarella
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Maria Antonietta Isgrò
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Ivan Treglia
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Giorgio Treglia
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Giorgio Treglia.

About this article

Cite this article

Caldarella, C., Isgrò, M.A., Treglia, I. et al. Is fluorine-18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography useful in monitoring the response to treatment in patients with multiple myeloma?. Int J Hematol 96, 685–691 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12185-012-1215-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12185-012-1215-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation