BACKGROUND: Multiple Myeloma (MM) is a B cell neoplasm causing lytic or osteopenic bone abnormalities. Whole body skeletal survey (WBSS), Magnetic resonance (MR) and 18F-FDG PET/CT are imaging techniques routinely used for the evaluation of bone involvement in MM patients. AIM: As MM bone lesions may present low 18F-FDG uptake; the aim of this study was to assess the possible added value and limitations of 11C-Choline to that of 18F-FDG PET/CT in patients affected with MM. METHODS: Ten patients affected with MM underwent a standard 11C-Choline PET/CT and an 18F-FDG PET/CT within one week. The results of the two scans were compared in terms of number, sites and SUVmax of lesions. RESULTS: Four patients (40%) had a negative concordant 11C-Choline and 18F-FDG PET/CT scans. Two patients (20%) had a positive 11C-Choline and 18F-FDG PET/CT scans that identified the same number and sites of bone lesions. The remaining four patients (40%) had a positive 11C-Choline and 18F-FDG PET/CT scan, but the two exams identified different number of lesions. Choline showed a mean SUVmax of 5 while FDG showed a mean SUVmax of 3.8 (P = 0.042). Overall, 11C-Choline PET/CT scans detected 37 bone lesions and 18F-FDG PET/CT scans detected 22 bone lesions but the difference was not significant (P = 0.8). CONCLUSION: According to these preliminary data, 11C-Choline PET/CT appears to be more sensitive than 18F-FDG PET/CT for the detection of bony myelomatous lesions. If these data are confirmed in larger series of patients, 11C-Choline may be considered a more appropriate functional imaging in association with MRI for MM bone staging.

11C-choline vs. 18F-FDG PET/CT in assessing bone involvement in patients with multiple myeloma.

ZAMAGNI, ELENA;CAVO, MICHELE;TACCHETTI, PAOLA;AMBROSINI, VALENTINA;FANTI, STEFANO
2007

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Multiple Myeloma (MM) is a B cell neoplasm causing lytic or osteopenic bone abnormalities. Whole body skeletal survey (WBSS), Magnetic resonance (MR) and 18F-FDG PET/CT are imaging techniques routinely used for the evaluation of bone involvement in MM patients. AIM: As MM bone lesions may present low 18F-FDG uptake; the aim of this study was to assess the possible added value and limitations of 11C-Choline to that of 18F-FDG PET/CT in patients affected with MM. METHODS: Ten patients affected with MM underwent a standard 11C-Choline PET/CT and an 18F-FDG PET/CT within one week. The results of the two scans were compared in terms of number, sites and SUVmax of lesions. RESULTS: Four patients (40%) had a negative concordant 11C-Choline and 18F-FDG PET/CT scans. Two patients (20%) had a positive 11C-Choline and 18F-FDG PET/CT scans that identified the same number and sites of bone lesions. The remaining four patients (40%) had a positive 11C-Choline and 18F-FDG PET/CT scan, but the two exams identified different number of lesions. Choline showed a mean SUVmax of 5 while FDG showed a mean SUVmax of 3.8 (P = 0.042). Overall, 11C-Choline PET/CT scans detected 37 bone lesions and 18F-FDG PET/CT scans detected 22 bone lesions but the difference was not significant (P = 0.8). CONCLUSION: According to these preliminary data, 11C-Choline PET/CT appears to be more sensitive than 18F-FDG PET/CT for the detection of bony myelomatous lesions. If these data are confirmed in larger series of patients, 11C-Choline may be considered a more appropriate functional imaging in association with MRI for MM bone staging.
Nanni C; Zamagni E; Cavo M; Rubello D; Tacchetti P; Pettinato C; Farsad M; Castellucci P; Ambrosini V; Montini GC; Al-Nahhas A; Franchi R; Fanti S.
File in questo prodotto:
Eventuali allegati, non sono esposti

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11585/51336
 Attenzione

Attenzione! I dati visualizzati non sono stati sottoposti a validazione da parte dell'ateneo

Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 76
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? ND
social impact