4.6 Article

The Prognostic Value of F-18 Fluorodeoxyglucose Bone Marrow Uptake in Patients With Recent Diagnosis of Multiple Myeloma A Comparative Study With Tc-99m Sestamibi

期刊

CLINICAL NUCLEAR MEDICINE
卷 35, 期 1, 页码 1-5

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/RLU.0b013e3181c3619c

关键词

multiple myeloma; FDG-PET; MIBI scintigraphy

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose: We assessed the prognostic value of F-18 fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) uptake in the bone marrow of patients with multiple myeloma (MM) in comparison with Tc-99m methoxy-isobutyl-isonitrile (MIBI). Methods: The extent and intensity of FDG and MIBI uptake in the bone marrow of 18 patients with a recent diagnosis of MM were assessed by visual score and by calculating the mean SUV (mSUV) for FDG and the femora/thigh ratio (TG/BKG, [Target/Background ratio]) for MIBI images. These parameters were correlated with clinical indexes of disease using hemoglobin and beta-2-microglobulin levels and plasma cell infiltrate (PCI) percentage. The mean values of the visual score, mSUV, and TG/BKG levels were compared in patients deceased after a relatively short follow-up (n = 9; groupA)and in patients with a longer survival or were alive at the end of the study (n = 9; group B). Results: Significant correlations of mSUV and TG/BKG values with PCI percentages and beta-2-microglobulin were found (P < 0.05). The extent of FDG and MIBI bone marrow uptake was greater in patients of group A (P < 0.01). Higher values of mSUV (P < 0.01) and TG/BKG (P < 0.05) were also observed in patients of group A. These results were consistent with the differences (not statistically significant) in hemoglobin, albumin, beta-2-microglobulin levels, and PCI percentages observed in the 2 groups. Conclusion: Our study demonstrates that an increase of FDG bone marrow uptake may predict a more aggressive disease, as much as MIBI uptake. Therefore, an additional analysis of FDG bone marrow images should be performed in patients undergoing PET studies during the initial staging of MM.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据