Whole-body low-dose computed tomography in primary patients with multiple myeloma
https://doi.org/10.20340/vmi-rvz.2023.2.CLIN.5
Abstract
Imaging of bone lesions has an important role in diagnosis of multiple myeloma (MM) and evaluating the response to treatment. Computed tomography scan (CT) allows to detect osteolysis, plasmacytoma and the risk of fractures with high sensitivity. In the National Research Center For Hematologysince 2014 all patients with MM are diagnosed with the whole-body low-dose CT.
The aim of the study was to demonstrate the sensitivity of the whole-body low-dose CT and to characterize localization, number and size of bone lesions in primary MM patients.
Materials and methods. 50 patients with newly diagnosed MM were enrolled in the study. The diagnosis was established in accordance with international diagnostic criteria. All patients received the whole-body low-dose CT. According to the Durie-Salmon and ISS staging systems 62% and 66% of patients had stage III, respectively.
Results. 96% of MM patients had bone lesions. In 30% of patients, bone involvement was the only criterion for CRAB. Pelvic bone lesions was most often diagnosed (92%). The destruction of the long bones of the arms and legs were most rarely detected (42% of patients) and mostly small. The presence of intraosseous plasmocytoma was noted in 40% of cases.
Conclusion. The whole-body low dose CT was found to be the most sensitive modality for detection osteolytic bone lesions. Low-dose CT is available in MM case with bone disease only, for establish symptomatic stage. This patients require immedate antimyeloma treatment.
About the Authors
A. M. Danilina
National Medical Research Center for Hematology
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Anzhelika M. Danilina, Hematologist, Department of Chemotherapy for Hematological Diseases,
4 Novy Zykovsky pr., Moscow, 125167
L. P. Mendeleeva
National Medical Research Center for Hematology
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Larisa P. Mendeleeva, Dr. Sci. (Med.), Professor, Head of the Department for Scientific and Educational Work, Head of the Department of Chemotherapy for Paraproteinemic Hemoblastoses, Hematologist,
4 Novy Zykovsky pr., Moscow, 125167
I. E. Kostina
National Medical Research Center for Hematology
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Irina E. Kostina, Cand. Sci. (Med.), Head of the X-ray Department, Radiologist,
4 Novy Zykovsky pr., Moscow, 125167
E. O. Gribanova
National Medical Research Center for Hematology
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Elena O. Gribanova, Cand. Sci. (Med.), Head of the Department of Chemotherapy for Hematological Diseases, Hematologist,
4 Novy Zykovsky pr., Moscow, 125167
V. V. Ryzhko
National Medical Research Center for Hematology
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Vyacheslav V. Ryzhko, Cand. Sci. (Med.), Hematologist, Department of Chemotherapy for Hematological Diseases,
4 Novy Zykovsky pr., Moscow, 125167
Ya. B. Bal'zhanova
National Medical Research Center for Hematology
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Yanzhima B. Balzhanova, Cand. Sci. (Med.), Researcher, Hematologist, Department of Chemotherapy of Hematological Diseases,
4 Novy Zykovsky pr., Moscow, 125167
References
1. 1 Solly S. Remarks on the pathology of mollities ossium; with cases. Medical and Chirurgical Transactions of London. 1844;27:435–464. https://doi.org/10.1177/095952874402700129
2. 2 Rustizky J. Multipl es myelom. Deutsche Zeitschrift fur Chirurgie. 1873;3(1–2):162–72. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02911073
3. 3 Ramon y Cajal S. Estudios histologicos sarbe los tumores epiteliales. Revista de Trimest Microgr. 1986;1:83.
4. 4 Marschalkó, T.v. Ueber die sogenannten Plasmazellen, ein Beitrag zur Kenntniss der Herkunft der entzündlichen Infiltrationszellen. Arch. f. Dermat. 1895;30:241–282. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02111311
5. 5 Wright J.H. A case of multiple myeloma. Transactions of the Association of American Physicians. 1900;15:137–147.
6. 6 Weber F.P. Multiple myeloma (myelomatosis) with Bence-Jones proteid in the urine (myelopathic albumosuria of Bradshaw, Kahler's disease). J. Pathol. 1904;9:172–191. https://doi.org/10.1002/path.1700090205
7. 7 Coleman R, Hadji P, Body JJ, Santini D, Chow E, Terpos E et al. ESMO Guidelines Committee. Electronic address: clinicalguidelines@esmo.org. Bone health in cancer: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines. Ann Oncol. 2020 Dec;31(12):1650–1663. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annonc.2020.07.019. Epub 2020 Aug 12. PMID: 32801018
8. 8 Terpos E, Morgan G, Dimopoulos MA, et al. International Myeloma Working Group recommendations for the treatment of multiple myeloma– related bone disease. JCO. 2013;31:2347–2357. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2012.47.7901
9. 9 Kyle, R., Rajkumar, S. Criteria for diagnosis, staging, risk stratification and response assessment of multiple myeloma. Leukemia. 2009;236:3–9. https://doi.org/10.1038/leu.2008.291
10. 10 Rajkumar V., Meletios A., Dimopoulos М., Palumbo А. et al. and the IMWG. International Myeloma Working Group updated criteria for the diagnosis of multiple myeloma. Lancet Oncol. 2014;15 e538–48. https://doi.org/10.3109/10428194.2012.740559
11. 11 Hillengass J., Landgren O. Challenges and opportunities of novel imaging techniques in monoclonal plasma cell disorders: imaging “early myeloma”. Leuk Lymphoma. 2013;54:1355–63. https://doi.org/10.3109/10428194.2012.740559
12. 12 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 Jun;121(5):749–57. PMID: 12780789 https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2141.2003.04355.x
13. 13 Petrik, Vladimir F.R.C.S.; Apok, Vinothini B.Sc.; Britton, Juliet A. F.R.C.R, F.R.C.P.; Bell, B Anthony M.D.; Papadopoulos, Marios C. M.D. Godfrey Hounsfield and the Dawn of Computed Tomography. Neurosurgery. 2006 April;58(4):780–787. https://doi.org/ 10.1227/01.NEU.0000204309.91666.06
14. 14 Holger Schirrmeister, Andreas K. Buck, Lothar Bergmann, Sven N. Reske, and Martin Bommer. Cancer Biotherapy and Radiopharmaceuticals.Oct 2003:841-845. http://doi.org/10.1089/108497803770418382
15. 15 Bredella M.A., Steinbach L., Caputo G., Segall G. & Hawkins R. Value of FDG PET in the assessment of patients with multiple myeloma. AJR American Journal of Rentgenology. 2005;184:1199–1204.
16. 16 Walker R., Barlogie B., Haessler J., Tricot G., Anaissie E., Shaughnessy J.D.J., et al. Magnetic resonance imaging in multiple myeloma: diagnostic and clinical implications. Journal of Clinical Oncology. 2007;25:1121–1128.
17. 17 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(1):50-55. https://doi.org/10.3324/haematol.10554
18. 18 Gleeson, T.G., Moriarty, J., Shortt, C.P. et al. Accuracy of whole-body low-dose multidetector CT (WBLDCT) versus skeletal survey in the detection of myelomatous lesions, and correlation of disease distribution with whole-body MRI (WBMRI). Skeletal Radiol. 2009;38:225–236. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00256-008-0607-4
19. 19 Regelink, J.C., Minnema, M.C., Terpos, E., et al. Comparison of modern and conventional imaging techniques in establishing multiple myeloma-related bone disease: a systematic review. Br J Haematol. 2013;162:50–61. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjh.12346
20. 20 Dimopoulos М., Terpos Е., Comenzo R.L., Tosi Р., Beksac М., Sezer О., Siegel D., Lokhorst H., Kumar S., Rajkumar S.V., Niesvizky R., Moulopoulos L.A. и Durie BGM On behalf of the IMWG. International myeloma working group consensus statement and guidelines regarding the current role of imaging techniques in the diagnosis and monitoring of multiple Myeloma. Leukemia. 2009;23:1545–1556.
21. 21 Mahnke A.H., Wildberger J.E., Gehbauer G. et al. Multidetector CT of the spine in multiple myeloma: comparison with MR imaging and radiography. AJR 2002;178:1429–36. https://doi.org/10.2214/ajr.178.6.1781429
22. 22 Chassang M., Grimaud A., Cucchi J.M., Novellas S., Amoretti N., Chevallier P. et al. Can low-dose computed tomographic scan of the spine replace conventional radiography? An evaluation based on imaging myelomas, bone metastases, and fractures from osteoporosis. Clin Imaging. 2007;31:225–227. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clinimag.2007.04.005
23. 23 Horger M., Claussen C.D., Bross-Bach U. et al. Whole-body low-dose multidetector row-CT in the diagnosis of multiple myeloma: an alternative to conventional radiography. European Journal of Radiology. 2005;54:289–297. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2004.04.015
24. 24 Zwierewich C.V., Mayo J.R., Müller N.L. Low-dose high-resolution CT of lung parenchyma Radiology. 1991;180:413–417. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiology.180.2.2068303
25. 25 Lee S., Primack S.L., Staples C.A. et al. Chronic infiltrative lung disease: comparison of diagnosis accuracies of radiography and low- and conventional-dose thin-section CT Radiology. 1994;191:669–673. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiology.191.3.8184044
26. 26 Majurin L., Valavaara R., Varpula M. et al. Low-dose and conventional-dose high-resolution CT of pulmonary changes in breast cancer patients treated by tangential field radiotherapy. Eur. J. Radiol. 1995;20:114–119.
27. 27 Horger M., Pereira P., Claussen C.D. et al. Hyperattenuating bone marrow abnormalities in myeloma patients using whole-body non-enhanced low-dose MDCT: correlation with haematological parameters. British Journal of Radiology. 2008;81(965):386–96. https://doi.org/10.1259/bjr/21850180
28. 28 Kröpil, P., Fenk, R., Fritz, L.B. et al. Comparison of whole-body 64-slice multidetector computed tomography and conventional radiography in staging of multiple myeloma. Eur Radiol. 2008;18:51–58. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-007-0738-3
29. 29 Princewill K., Kyere S., Awan O., Mulligan M. Multiple myeloma lesion detection with whole body CT versus radiographic skeletal survey. Cancer Invest. 2013;31:206-11.
30. 30 Mangiacavalli S., Pezzatti S., Rossini F., Donib E., Cocito F., Silvia B. and Corso A. Implemented myeloma management with whole-body lowdose CT scan: a real life experience. LEUKEMIA & LYMPHOMA, 2016.
31. 31 Russian clinical guidelines on the diagnosis and treatment of lymphoproliferative diseases / under the supervision of Prof. I.V. Poddubnaya, Prof. V.G. Savchenko. 2018:356. (In Russ.)
32. 32 Baldi D, Tramontano L, Alfano V, Punzo B, Cavaliere C, Salvatore M. Whole Body Low Dose Computed Tomography Using Third-Generation Dual-Source Multidetector With Spectral Shaping: Protocol Optimization and Literature Review. Dose-Response. October 2020. https://doi.org/10.1177/1559325820973131
33. 33 Kostina I.E., Gitis M.K., Mendeleeva L.P., Bagramyan A.Yu., Solovyev M.V., Gribanova E.O., Savchenko V.G. СOMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY IN THE DIAGNOSIS AND MONITORING OF BONE LESIONS IN MULTIPLE MYELOMA USING LOW-DOSE AND STANDARD SCANNING PROTOCOLS. Russian journal of hematology and transfusiology. 2018;63(2):113-123. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.25837/HAT.2018.13..2..002
34. 34 Ola Landgren, S. Vincent Rajkumar; New Developments in Diagnosis, Prognosis, and Assessment of Response in Multiple Myeloma. Clin Cancer Res. 2016, 15 November;22(22):5428–5433. https://doi.org/10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-16-0866
35. 35 Ippolito, D., Giandola, T., Maino, C. et al Whole-body low-dose computed tomography (WBLDCT) in staging and re-staging of multiple myeloma. Ann Hematol. 2021;100:1241–1249. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00277-021-04468-1
Supplementary files
Review
For citations:
Danilina A.M., Mendeleeva L.P., Kostina I.E., Gribanova E.O., Ryzhko V.V., Bal'zhanova Ya.B. Whole-body low-dose computed tomography in primary patients with multiple myeloma. Bulletin of the Medical Institute "REAVIZ" (REHABILITATION, DOCTOR AND HEALTH). 2023;13(2):62-69. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.20340/vmi-rvz.2023.2.CLIN.5
Views:
622
Email this article 