Korean Journal of Radiology

The Korean Society of Radiology (대한영상의학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Comprehensive Updates in the Role of Imaging for Multiple Myeloma Management Based on Recent International Guidelines

  • Koeun Lee (Department of Radiology, Asan Image Metrics, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine) ;
  • Kyung Won Kim (Department of Radiology, Asan Image Metrics, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine) ;
  • Yousun Ko (Biomedical Research Center, Asan Institute for Life Sciences, Asan Medical Center) ;
  • Ho Young Park (Department of Radiology, Asan Image Metrics, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine) ;
  • Eun Jin Chae (Department of Radiology, Asan Image Metrics, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine) ;
  • Jeong Hyun Lee (Department of Radiology, Asan Image Metrics, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine) ;
  • Jin-Sook Ryu (Department of Nuclear Medicine, Asan Image Metrics, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine) ;
  • Hye Won Chung (Department of Radiology, Asan Image Metrics, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine)
  • Received : 2019.05.14
  • Accepted : 2021.01.31
  • Published : 2021.09.01
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

The diagnostic and treatment methods of multiple myeloma (MM) have been rapidly evolving owing to advances in imaging techniques and new therapeutic agents. Imaging has begun to play an important role in the management of MM, and international guidelines are frequently updated. Since the publication of 2015 International Myeloma Working Group (IMWG) criteria for the diagnosis of MM, whole-body magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) or low-dose whole-body computed tomography (CT) and 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/CT have entered the mainstream as diagnostic and treatment response assessment tools. The 2019 IMWG guidelines also provide imaging recommendations for various clinical settings. Accordingly, radiologists have become a key component of MM management. In this review, we provide an overview of updates in the MM field with an emphasis on imaging modalities.

Keywords

Acknowledgement

This work was supported by the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) grant funded by the Korea government (MSIT) (No. NRF-2020R1F1A1048267), and Dong Kook Lifescience (DK-IIT-2019-14).

References

  1. Siegel RL, Miller KD, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2017. CA Cancer J Clin 2017;67:7-30
  2. Jung KW, Won YJ, Kong HJ, Lee ES; Community of Population-Based Regional Cancer Registries. Cancer statistics in Korea: incidence, mortality, survival, and prevalence in 2015. Cancer Res Treat 2018;50:303-316
  3. Moreau P, San Miguel J, Sonneveld P, Mateos MV, Zamagni E, Avet-Loiseau H, et al. Multiple myeloma: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol 2017;28:iv52-iv61
  4. Kumar SK, Callander NS, Alsina M, Atanackovic D, Biermann JS, Chandler JC, et al. Multiple myeloma, version 3.2017, NCCN clinical practice guidelines in oncology. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 2017;15:230-269
  5. Dimopoulos MA, Hillengass J, Usmani S, Zamagni E, Lentzsch S, Davies FE, et al. Role of magnetic resonance imaging in the management of patients with multiple myeloma: a consensus statement. J Clin Oncol 2015;33:657-664
  6. Cavo M, Terpos E, Nanni C, Moreau P, Lentzsch S, Zweegman S, et al. Role of 18F-FDG PET/CT in the diagnosis and management of multiple myeloma and other plasma cell disorders: a consensus statement by the International Myeloma Working Group. Lancet Oncol 2017;18:e206-e217
  7. Hillengass J, Usmani S, Rajkumar SV, Durie BGM, Mateos MV, Lonial S, et al. International myeloma working group consensus recommendations on imaging in monoclonal plasma cell disorders. Lancet Oncol 2019;20:e302-e312
  8. Ailawadhi S. The changing face of multiple myeloma. Am J Hematol Oncol 2015;11:21-25
  9. Rollig C, Knop S, Bornhauser M. Multiple myeloma. Lancet 2015;385:2197-2208
  10. Rajkumar SV, Landgren O, Mateos MV. Smoldering multiple myeloma. Blood 2015;125:3069-3075
  11. Eslick R, Talaulikar D. Multiple myeloma: from diagnosis to treatment. Aust Fam Physician 2013;42:684-688
  12. Koutoulidis V, Papanikolaou N, Moulopoulos LA. Functional and molecular MRI of the bone marrow in multiple myeloma. Br J Radiol 2018;91:20170389
  13. Terpos E, Moulopoulos LA, Dimopoulos MA. Advances in imaging and the management of myeloma bone disease. J Clin Oncol 2011;29:1907-1915
  14. Raza S, Leng S, Lentzsch S. The critical role of imaging in the management of multiple myeloma. Curr Hematol Malig Rep 2017;12:168-175
  15. Gariani J, Westerland O, Natas S, Verma H, Cook G, Goh V. Comparison of whole body magnetic resonance imaging (WBMRI) to whole body computed tomography (WBCT) or 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/ CT (18F-FDG PET/CT) in patients with myeloma: systematic review of diagnostic performance. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol 2018;124:66-72
  16. Brioli A, Melchor L, Walker BA, Davies FE, Morgan GJ. Biology and treatment of myeloma. Clin Lymphoma Myeloma Leuk 2014;14 Suppl:S65-S70
  17. Al Hamed R, Bazarbachi AH, Malard F, Harousseau JL, Mohty M. Current status of autologous stem cell transplantation for multiple myeloma. Blood Cancer J 2019;9:44
  18. Facon T, Mary JY, Hulin C, Benboubker L, Attal M, Pegourie B, et al. Melphalan and prednisone plus thalidomide versus melphalan and prednisone alone or reduced-intensity autologous stem cell transplantation in elderly patients with multiple myeloma (IFM 99-06): a randomised trial. Lance 2007;370:1209-1218
  19. Cavo M, Terpos E, Bargay J, Einsele H, Cavet J, Greil R, et al. The multiple myeloma treatment landscape: international guideline recommendations and clinical practice in Europe. Expert Rev Hematol 2018;11:219-237
  20. Pandit-Taskar N. Functional imaging methods for assessment of minimal residual disease in multiple myeloma: current status and novel immunoPET based methods. Semin Hematol 2018;55:22-32
  21. Chantry A, Kazmi M, Barrington S, Goh V, Mulholland N, Streetly M, et al. Guidelines for the use of imaging in the management of patients with myeloma. Br J Haematol 2017;178:380-393
  22. Kumar S, Paiva B, Anderson KC, Durie B, Landgren O, Moreau P, et al. International Myeloma Working Group consensus criteria for response and minimal residual disease assessment in multiple myeloma. Lancet Oncol 2016;17:e328-e346
  23. Dutoit JC, Claus E, Offner F, Noens L, Delanghe J, Verstraete KL. Combined evaluation of conventional MRI, dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI and diffusion weighted imaging for response evaluation of patients with multiple myeloma. Eur J Radiol 2016;85:373-382
  24. Hillengass J, Moulopoulos LA, Delorme S, Koutoulidis V, Mosebach J, Hielscher T, et al. Whole-body computed tomography versus conventional skeletal survey in patients with multiple myeloma: a study of the International Myeloma Working Group. Blood Cancer J 2017;7:e599
  25. Edelstyn GA, Gillespie PJ, Grebbell FS. The radiological demonstration of osseous metastases. Experimental observations. Clin Radiol 1967;18:158-162
  26. Hillengass J, Moulopoulos LA, Delorme S, Koutoulidis V, Hielscher T, Engelhart J, et al. Findings of whole body computed tomography compared to conventional skeletal survey in patients with monoclonal plasma cell disorders-a study of the International Myeloma Working Group. Blood 2016;128:4468
  27. Cretti F, Perugini G. Patient dose evaluation for the whole-body low-dose multidetector CT (WBLDMDCT) skeleton study in multiple myeloma (MM). Radiol Med 2016;121:93-105
  28. Terpos E, Dimopoulos MA, Moulopoulos LA. The role of imaging in the treatment of patients with multiple myeloma in 2016. Am Soc Clin Oncol Educ Book 2016;35:e407-e417
  29. Lacognata C, Crimi F, Guolo A, Varin C, De March E, Vio S, et al. Diffusion-weighted whole-body MRI for evaluation of early response in multiple myeloma. Clin Radiol 2017;72:850-857
  30. Brioli A, Morgan GJ, Durie B, Zamagni E. The utility of newer imaging techniques as predictors of clinical outcomes in multiple myeloma. Expert Rev Hematol 2014;7:13-16
  31. Hillengass J, Fechtner K, Weber MA, Bauerle T, Ayyaz S, Heiss C, et al. Prognostic significance of focal lesions in whole-body magnetic resonance imaging in patients with asymptomatic multiple myeloma. J Clin Oncol 2010;28:1606-1610
  32. Walker R, Barlogie B, Haessler J, Tricot G, Anaissie E, Shaughnessy JD Jr, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging in multiple myeloma: diagnostic and clinical implications. J Clin Oncol 2007;25:1121-1128
  33. Moulopoulos LA, Varma DG, Dimopoulos MA, Leeds NE, Kim EE, Johnston DA, et al. Multiple myeloma: spinal MR imaging in patients with untreated newly diagnosed disease. Radiology 1992;185:833-840
  34. Baur-Melnyk A, Buhmann S, Durr HR, Reiser M. Role of MRI for the diagnosis and prognosis of multiple myeloma. Eur J Radiol 2005;55:56-63
  35. Dutoit JC, Vanderkerken MA, Anthonissen J, Dochy F, Verstraete KL. The diagnostic value of SE MRI and DWI of the spine in patients with monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance, smouldering myeloma and multiple myeloma. Eur Radiol 2014;24:2754-2765
  36. Messiou C, Giles S, Collins DJ, West S, Davies FE, Morgan GJ, et al. Assessing response of myeloma bone disease with diffusion-weighted MRI. Br J Radiol 2012;85:e1198-e1203
  37. Park HY, Kim KW, Yoon MA, Lee MH, Chae EJ, Lee JH, et al. Role of whole-body MRI for treatment response assessment in multiple myeloma: comparison between clinical response and imaging response. Cancer Imaging 2020;20:14
  38. Koutoulidis V, Fontara S, Terpos E, Zagouri F, Matsaridis D, Christoulas D, et al. Quantitative diffusion-weighted imaging of the bone marrow: an adjunct tool for the diagnosis of a diffuse MR imaging pattern in patients with multiple myeloma. Radiology 2017;282:484-493
  39. Udd KA, Spektor TM, Berenson JR. Monitoring multiple myeloma. Clin Adv Hematol Oncol 2017;15:951-961
  40. McCudden C, Axel AE, Slaets D, Dejoie T, Clemens PL, Frans S, et al. Monitoring multiple myeloma patients treated with daratumumab: teasing out monoclonal antibody interference. Clin Chem Lab Med 2016;54:1095-1104
  41. Dutoit JC, Vanderkerken MA, Verstraete KL. Value of whole body MRI and dynamic contrast enhanced MRI in the diagnosis, follow-up and evaluation of disease activity and extent in multiple myeloma. Eur J Radiol 2013;82:1444-1452
  42. Weng WW, Dong MJ, Zhang J, Yang J, Xu Q, Zhu YJ, et al. A systematic review of MRI, scintigraphy, FDG-PET and PET/CT for diagnosis of multiple myeloma related bone disease--which is best? Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 2014;15:9879-9884
  43. Shah SN, Oldan JD. PET/MR imaging of multiple myeloma. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 2017;25:351-365