nach oben

European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging

Erschienen in:

27.11.2019 | Original Article

Chemokine receptor-4 targeted PET/CT with ⁶⁸Ga-Pentixafor in assessment of newly diagnosed multiple myeloma: comparison to ¹⁸F-FDG PET/CT

verfasst von: Qingqing Pan, Xinxin Cao, Yaping Luo, Jian Li, Jun Feng, Fang Li

Erschienen in: European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging | Ausgabe 3/2020

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Purpose

¹⁸F-FDG PET/CT has some limitations in the evaluation of multiple myeloma (MM). Since chemokine receptor-4 is overexpressed in MM, we perform a prospective cohort study to compare the performance of ⁶⁸Ga-Pentixafor and ¹⁸F-FDG PET/CT in newly diagnosed MM.

Methods

Thirty patients with newly diagnosed MM were recruited. All patients underwent ⁶⁸Ga-Pentixafor and¹⁸F-FDG PET/CT within 1 week after enrollment. A positive PET/CT was defined as the presence of focal PET-positive lesions in bone marrow or diffuse bone marrow patterns (uptake > liver). Bone marrow uptake values in ⁶⁸Ga-Pentixafor and¹⁸F-FDG PET/CT (total bone marrow glycolysis [TBmG_FDG], total bone marrow uptake with ⁶⁸Ga-Pentixafor [TBmU_CXCR4], total bone marrow volume [TBmV], SUVmean, and SUVmax) were obtained by drawing total bone marrow volume of interest on PET/CT. The positive rates of the PET/CT scans were statistically compared, and the correlation between quantitative bone marrow uptake values and clinical characteristics, laboratory findings, and staging was analyzed.

Results

⁶⁸Ga-Pentixafor PET/CT had a higher positive rate than ¹⁸F-FDG PET/CT in recruited patients (93.3 vs. 53.3%, p = 0.0005). In quantitative analysis, bone marrow uptake values in ⁶⁸Ga-Pentixafor (TBmU_CXCR4, SUVmax, and SUVmean) were positively correlated with end organ damage, staging, and laboratory biomarkers related to tumor burden including serum β2-microglobulin, serum free light chain, and 24-h urine light chain (p < 0.05). In ¹⁸F-FDG PET/CT, only the SUVmean of total bone marrow was positively correlated with serum free light chain and 24-h urine light chain (p < 0.05).

Conclusions

⁶⁸Ga-Pentixafor PET/CT is promising in assessment of newly diagnosed MM.

Trial registration number

NCT 03436342

Nur mit Berechtigung zugänglich

Two patients (patients 2 and 5) had bone marrow plasma cells lower than 10%. Patient 2 was presented with biopsy-proven plasmacytoma in T3 vertebra. In patient 5, the plasma cells in bone marrow core biopsy were 70% (however, 4% in bone marrow aspirates).

Walker RC, Brown TL, Jones-Jackson LB, De Blanche L, Bartel T. Imaging of multiple myeloma and related plasma cell dyscrasias. J Nucl Med. 2012;53:1091–101. https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.111.098830.CrossRefPubMed

Cavo M, Terpos E, Nanni C, Moreau P, Lentzsch S, Zweegman S, et al. Role of (18)F-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–e17. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1470-2045(17)30189-4.CrossRefPubMed

Fonti R, Larobina M, Del Vecchio S, De Luca S, Fabbricini R, Catalano L, et al. Metabolic tumor volume assessed by 18F-FDG PET/CT for the prediction of outcome in patients with multiple myeloma. J Nucl Med. 2012;53:1829–35. https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.112.106500.CrossRefPubMed

McDonald JE, Kessler MM, Gardner MW, Buros AF, Ntambi JA, Waheed S, et al. Assessment of total lesion glycolysis by (18)F FDG PET/CT significantly improves prognostic value of GEP and ISS in myeloma. Clin Cancer Res. 2017;23:1981–7. https://doi.org/10.1158/1078-0432.ccr-16-0235.CrossRefPubMed

Jung SH, Kwon SY, Min JJ, Bom HS, Ahn SY, Jung SY, et al. (18)F-FDG PET/CT is useful for determining survival outcomes of patients with multiple myeloma classified as stage II and III with the Revised International Staging System. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2019;46:107–15. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-018-4114-0.CrossRefPubMed

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.CrossRef

Spinnato P, Bazzocchi A, Brioli A, Nanni C, Zamagni E, Albisinni U, et al. Contrast enhanced MRI and (1)(8)F-FDG PET-CT in the assessment of multiple myeloma: a comparison of results in different phases of the disease. Eur J Radiol. 2012;81:4013–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2012.06.028.CrossRefPubMed

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. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-005-0004-3.CrossRefPubMed

Rasche L, Angtuaco E, McDonald JE, Buros A, Stein C, Pawlyn C, et al. Low expression of hexokinase-2 is associated with false-negative FDG-positron emission tomography in multiple myeloma. Blood. 2017;130:30–4. https://doi.org/10.1182/blood-2017-03-774422.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

10.

Nanni C, Zamagni E, Versari A, Chauvie S, Bianchi A, Rensi M, et al. Image interpretation criteria for FDG PET/CT in multiple myeloma: a new proposal from an Italian expert panel. IMPeTUs (Italian Myeloma criteria for PET USe). Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2016;43:414–21. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-015-3200-9.CrossRefPubMed

11.

Philipp-Abbrederis K, Herrmann K, Knop S, Schottelius M, Eiber M, Luckerath K, et al. In vivo molecular imaging of chemokine receptor CXCR4 expression in patients with advanced multiple myeloma. EMBO Mol Med. 2015;7:477–87. https://doi.org/10.15252/emmm.201404698.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

12.

Lapa C, Schreder M, Schirbel A, Samnick S, Kortum KM, Herrmann K, et al. [(68)Ga]Pentixafor-PET/CT for imaging of chemokine receptor CXCR4 expression in multiple myeloma - Comparison to [(18)F]FDG and laboratory values. Theranostics. 2017;7:205–12. https://doi.org/10.7150/thno.16576.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

13.

Pan Q, Luo Y, Cao X, Ma Y, Li F. Multiple myeloma presenting as a superscan on 68Ga-Pentixafor PET/CT. Clin Nucl Med. 2018;43:462–3. https://doi.org/10.1097/rlu.0000000000002067.CrossRefPubMed

14.

Rajkumar SV, Dimopoulos MA, Palumbo A, Blade J, Merlini G, Mateos MV, et al. International Myeloma Working Group updated criteria for the diagnosis of multiple myeloma. Lancet Oncol. 2014;15:e538–48. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1470-2045(14)70442-5.CrossRef

15.

Luo Y, Cao X, Pan Q, Li J, Feng J, Li F. (68)Ga-pentixafor PET/CT for imaging of chemokine receptor-4 expression in Waldenstrom macroglobulinemia/lymphoplasmacytic lymphoma: comparison to (18)F-FDG PET/CT. J Nucl Med. 2019. https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.119.226134.CrossRef

16.

Nanni C, Versari A, Chauvie S, Bertone E, Bianchi A, Rensi M, et al. Interpretation criteria for FDG PET/CT in multiple myeloma (IMPeTUs): final results. IMPeTUs (Italian myeloma criteria for PET USe). Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2018;45:712–9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-017-3909-8.CrossRefPubMed

17.

Greipp PR, San Miguel J, Durie BG, Crowley JJ, Barlogie B, Blade J, et al. International staging system for multiple myeloma. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23:3412–20. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2005.04.242.CrossRefPubMed

18.

Palumbo A, Avet-Loiseau H, Oliva S, Lokhorst HM, Goldschmidt H, Rosinol L, et al. Revised international staging system for multiple myeloma: a report from International Myeloma Working Group. J Clin Oncol. 2015;33:2863–9. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2015.61.2267.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

19.

Dolcino M, Patuzzo G, Barbieri A, Tinazzi E, Rizzi M, Beri R, et al. Gene expression profiling in peripheral blood mononuclear cells of patients with common variable immunodeficiency: modulation of adaptive immune response following intravenous immunoglobulin therapy. PLoS One. 2014;9:e97571. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0097571.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

20.

Alsayed Y, Ngo H, Runnels J, Leleu X, Singha UK, Pitsillides CM, et al. Mechanisms of regulation of CXCR4/SDF-1 (CXCL12)-dependent migration and homing in multiple myeloma. Blood. 2007;109:2708–17. https://doi.org/10.1182/blood-2006-07-035857.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

21.

Stessman HA, Mansoor A, Zhan F, Janz S, Linden MA, Baughn LB, et al. Reduced CXCR4 expression is associated with extramedullary disease in a mouse model of myeloma and predicts poor survival in multiple myeloma patients treated with bortezomib. Leukemia. 2013;27:2075–7. https://doi.org/10.1038/leu.2013.148.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

22.

Kyle RA, Rajkumar SV. Criteria for diagnosis, staging, risk stratification and response assessment of multiple myeloma. Leukemia. 2009;23:3–9. https://doi.org/10.1038/leu.2008.291.CrossRefPubMed

23.

Cytawa W, Kircher S, Schirbel A, Shirai T, Fukushima K, Buck AK, et al. Chemokine receptor 4 expression in primary Sjogren’s syndrome. Clin Nucl Med. 2018;43:835–6. https://doi.org/10.1097/rlu.0000000000002258.CrossRefPubMed

24.

Derlin T, Gueler F, Brasen JH, Schmitz J, Hartung D, Herrmann TR, et al. Integrating MRI and chemokine receptor CXCR4-targeted PET for detection of leukocyte infiltration in complicated urinary tract infections after kidney transplantation. J Nucl Med. 2017;58:1831–7. https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.117.193037.CrossRefPubMed

25.

Margaritopoulos GA, Antoniou KM, Lasithiotaki I, Proklou A, Soufla G, Siafakas NM. Expression of SDF-1/CXCR4 axis in bone marrow mesenchymal stem cells derived from rheumatoid arthritis-usual interstitial pneumonia. Clin Exp Rheumatol. 2013;31:610–1.PubMed

26.

Wester HJ, Keller U, Schottelius M, Beer A, Philipp-Abbrederis K, Hoffmann F, et al. Disclosing the CXCR4 expression in lymphoproliferative diseases by targeted molecular imaging. Theranostics. 2015;5:618–30. https://doi.org/10.7150/thno.11251.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

27.

Lapa C, Herrmann K, Schirbel A, Hanscheid H, Luckerath K, Schottelius M, et al. CXCR4-directed endoradiotherapy induces high response rates in extramedullary relapsed multiple myeloma. Theranostics. 2017;7:1589–97. https://doi.org/10.7150/thno.19050.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

28.

Lapa C, Luckerath K, Kircher S, Hanscheid H, Grigoleit GU, Rosenwald A, et al. Potential influence of concomitant chemotherapy on CXCR4 expression in receptor directed endoradiotherapy. Br J Haematol. 2019;184:440–3. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjh.15096.CrossRefPubMed

Titel: Chemokine receptor-4 targeted PET/CT with 68Ga-Pentixafor in assessment of newly diagnosed multiple myeloma: comparison to 18F-FDG PET/CT
verfasst von: Qingqing Pan
Xinxin Cao
Yaping Luo
Jian Li
Jun Feng
Fang Li
Publikationsdatum: 27.11.2019
Verlag: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Erschienen in: European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging / Ausgabe 3/2020
Print ISSN: 1619-7070
Elektronische ISSN: 1619-7089
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-019-04605-z

Live-Webinar: Aktuelle Leitlinien bei Herz-Kreislauf-Erkrankungen

Springer Medizin

Chemokine receptor-4 targeted PET/CT with ⁶⁸Ga-Pentixafor in assessment of newly diagnosed multiple myeloma: comparison to ¹⁸F-FDG PET/CT

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Trial registration number

Live-Webinar: Aktuelle Leitlinien bei Herz-Kreislauf-Erkrankungen

Springer Medizin

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Trial registration number

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 3/2020

Zirconium-89 labelled rituximab PET-CT imaging of Graves’ orbitopathy

Impact of 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET staging on clinical decision-making in patients with intermediate or high-risk prostate cancer

18F-PSMA-1007 multiparametric, dynamic PET/CT in biochemical relapse and progression of prostate cancer

Errare humanum est, sed in errare perseverare diabolicum: methodological errors in the assessment of the relationship between I-131 therapy and possible increases in the incidence of malignancies

ATLAS OF PET-CT, A Quick Guide to Image Interpretation

Clinicopathologic risk factors of radioactive iodine therapy based on response assessment in patients with differentiated thyroid cancer: a multicenter retrospective cohort study