Comparison of [68Ga]-FAPI PET/CT and [18F]-FDG PET/CT in Multiple Myeloma: Clinical Experience
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Patients
2.2. Staging in Multiple Myeloma: International Staging System (ISS) and Durie and Salmon PLUS Staging System
2.3. [68. Ga]FAPI-04
2.4. Radiolabeling Procedure
2.5. PET/CT Protocol and Image Analysis
2.6. Reference Standard
2.7. Statistical Analysis
3. Results
4. Discussion
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Terpos, E.; Dimopoulos, M.-A. Myeloma bone disease: Pathophysiology and management. Ann. Oncol. 2005, 16, 1223–1231. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Zamagni, E.; Tacchetti, P.; Cavo, M. Imaging in multiple myeloma: How? When? Blood 2019, 133, 644–651. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Kyle, R.A.; Rajkumar, S.V. Multiple myeloma. N. Engl. J. Med. 2004, 351, 1860–1873. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Roodman, G.D. Pathogenesis of myeloma bone disease. Leukemia 2009, 23, 435–441. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hanrahan, C.J.; Carl, R.C.; Julia, R.C. Current concepts in the evaluation of multiple myeloma with MR imaging and FDG PET/CT 1. Radiographics 2010, 30, 127–142. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hughes, N.M.; Jacene, H.A. PET Imaging for Hematologic Malignancies. Radiol. Clin. N. Am. 2021, 59, 705–723. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Schirrmeister, H.; Bommer, M.; Buck, A.; Müller, S.; Messer, P.; Bunjes, D.; Döhner, H.; Bergmann, L.; Reske, S.N. Initial results in the assessment of multiple myeloma using F-18 FDG PET. Eur. J. Nucl. Med. Mol.Imaging 2002, 29, 361–366. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zamagni, E.; Nanni, C.; Patriarca, F.; Englaro, E.; Castellucci, P.; Geatti, O.; Tosi, P.; Tacchetti, P.; Cangini, D.; Perrone, G.; 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, 50–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Beyer, R.J., 3rd; Mulligan, M.E.; Smith, S.E.; Line, B.R.; Badros, A.Z. Comparison of imaging with FDG PET/CT with other imaging modalities in myeloma. Skeletal Radiol. 2006, 35, 632–640. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rasche, L.; Angtuaco, E.; McDonald, J.E.; Buros, A.; Stein, C.; Pawlyn, C.; Thanendrarajan, S.; Schinke, C.; Samant, R.; Yaccoby, S.; et al. Low expression of hexokinase-2 is associated with false-negative FDG-positron emission tomography in multiple myeloma. Blood 2017, 130, 30–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Jung, S.-H.; Kwon, S.Y.; Min, J.-J.; Bom, H.-S.; Ahn, S.-Y.; Jung, S.-Y.; Lee, S.-S.; Park, M.-R.; Yang, D.-H.; Ahn, J.-S.; et al. 18F-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, 107–115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Zhong, X.; Diao, W.; Zhao, C.; Jia, Z. Fluorodeoxyglucose-avid focal lesions and extramedullary disease on 18F-FDG PET/computed tomography predict the outcomes of newly diagnosed symptomatic multiple myeloma patients. Nucl. Med.Commun. 2020, 41, 950–958. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Scanlan, M.J.; Raj, B.K.; Calvo, B.; Garin-Chesa, P.; Sanz-Moncasi, M.P.; Healey, J.; Old, L.J.; Rettig, W.J. Molecular cloning of fibroblast activation protein alpha, a member of the serine protease family selectively expressed in stromal fibroblasts of epithelial cancers. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci.USA 1994, 91, 5657–5661. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Simková, A.; Busek, P.; Sedo, A.; Konvalinka, J. Molecular recognition of fibroblast activation protein for diagnostic and therapeutic applications. Biochim. Biophys. Acta (BBA)-Proteins Proteom. 2020, 1868, 140409. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Chen, X.; Song, E. Turning foes to friends: Targeting cancer-associated fibroblasts. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 2019, 18, 99–115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Loktev, A.; Lindner, T.; Burger, E.M.; Altmann, A.; Giesel, F.; Kratochwil, C.; Debus, J.; Marmé, F.; Jäger, D.; Mier, W.; et al. Development of novel FAP-targeted radiotracers with improved tumor retention. J.Nucl. Med. 2019, 60, 1421–1429. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lindner, T.; Loktev, A.; Altmann, A.; Giesel, F.; Kratochwil, C.; Debus, J.; Jäger, D.; Mier, W.; Haberkorn, U. Development of quinoline-based theranostic ligands for the targeting of fibroblast activation protein. J. Nucl. Med. 2018, 59, 1415–1422. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Giesel, F.L.; Kratochwil, C.; Lindner, T.; Marschalek, M.M.; Loktev, A.; Lehnert, W.; Debus, J.; Jäger, D.; Flechsig, P.; Altmann, A.; et al. 68Ga-FAPI PET/CT: Biodistribution and preliminary dosimetry estimate of 2 DOTA-containing FAPI targeting agents in patients with various cancers. J. Nucl. Med. 2019, 60, 386–392. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Kratochwil, C.; Flechsig, P.; Lindner, T.; Abderrahim, L.; Altmann, A.; Mier, W.; Adeberg, S.; Rathke, H.; Röhrich, M.; Winter, H.; et al. 8Ga-FAPI PET/CT: Tracer uptake in 28 different kinds of cancer. J.Nucl. Med. 2019, 60, 801–805. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Angtuaco, E.J.C.; Fassas, A.B.T.; Walker, R.; Sethi, R.; Barlogie, B. Multiple myeloma: Clinical review and diagnostic imaging. Radiology 2004, 231, 11–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Amos, B.; Agarwal, A.; Kanekar, S. Imaging of Multiple Myeloma. Hematol. Clin. N. Am. 2016, 30, 843–865. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Landgren, O.; Kyle, R.A.; Pfeiffer, R.M.; Katzmann, J.A.; Caporaso, N.E.; Hayes, R.B.; Dispenzieri, A.; Kumar, S.; Clark, R.J.; Baris, D.; et al. Monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance (MGUS) consistently precedes multiple myeloma: A prospective study. Blood 2009, 113, 5412–5417. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Weiss, B.M.; Abadie, J.; Verma, P.; Howard, R.S.; Kuehl, W.M. A monoclonal gammopathy precedes multiple myeloma in most patients. Blood 2009, 113, 5418–5422. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Kyle, R.A.; Remstein, E.D.; Therneau, T.M.; Dispenzieri, A.; Kurtin, P.J.; Hodnefield, J.M.; Larson, D.R.; Plevak, M.F.; Jelinek, D.F.; Fonseca, R.; et al. Clinical course and prognosis of smoldering (asymptomatic) multiple myeloma. N. Engl. J. Med. 2007, 356, 2582–2590. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rajkumar, S.V. Updated Diagnostic Criteria and Staging System for Multiple Myeloma. Am. Soc. Clin. Oncol. Educ. Book 2016, 35, e418–e423. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cavo, M.; Terpos, E.; Nanni, C.; Moreau, P.; Lentzsch, S.; Zweegman, S.; Hillengass, J.; Engelhardt, M.; Usmani, S.Z.; Vesole, D.H.; 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. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, H.; Pang, Y.; Wu, J.; Zhao, L.; Hao, B.; Wu, J.; Wei, J.; Wu, S.; Zhao, L.; Luo, Z.; et al. Comparison of [68Ga]Ga-DOTA-FAPI-04 and [18F] FDG PET/CT for the diagnosis of primary and metastatic lesions in patients with various types of cancer. Eur. J. Nucl. Med. Mol. Imaging 2020, 47, 1820–1832. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, H.; Zhao, L.; Ruan, D.; Pang, Y.; Hao, B.; Dai, Y.; Wu, X.; Guo, W.; Fan, C.; Wu, J.; et al. Usefulness of [68Ga]Ga-DOTA-FAPI-04 PET/CT in patients presenting with inconclusive [18F]FDG PET/CT findings. Eur. J. Nucl. Med. Mol. Imaging 2021, 48, 73–86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lan, L.; Liu, H.; Wang, Y.; Deng, J.; Peng, D.; Feng, Y.; Wang, L.; Chen, Y.; Qin, L. The potential utility of [68Ga]Ga-DOTA-FAPI-04 as a novel broad-spectrum oncological and non-oncological imaging agent-comparison with [18F]FDG. Eur. J. Nucl. Med. Mol. Imaging 2022, 49, 963–979. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
No | A/G | Plasma Cell Percentage | Diagnostic Localization | Subtype of Ig (or Non-Secretory Type) | Type of Light Chain | ISS | LDH | CRP | B2 Microglobulin | Durie Salmon Staging |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | 58/m | 80 | Bone marrow | IgA | Lambda | 1 | 215 | 6.5 | 2.8 | 3 |
2 | 64/f | 80 | Bone marrow | Non-secretory type | Lambda | 3 | 234 | 2.2 | 14.5 | 3 |
3 | 39/m | 80 | Plasmocitoma | IgG | Kappa | 1 | 243 | 2.7 | 3.09 | 3 |
4 | 65/f | 70 | Bone marrow | IgG | Lambda | 3 | 157 | 2.5 | 14.3 | 2 |
5 | 40/f | 40 | Plasmocitoma | IgG | Kappa | 1 | 139 | 2.5 | 2.2 | 2 |
6 | 58/m | 70 | Bone marrow | IgG | Lambda | 1 | 212 | 11.6 | 3.2 | 3 |
7 | 81/m | 50 | Bone marrow | IgG | Kappa | 3 | 1366 | 23.7 | 9.2 | 3 |
8 | 59/f | 80 | Plasmocitoma | IgG | Kappa | 2 | 185 | 77.2 | 3.9 | 3 |
9 | 54/m | 50 | Bone marrow | Non-secretory type | Lambda | 1 | 159 | 14 | 3.1 | 2 |
10 | 55/f | 40 | Bone marrow | IgA | Lambda | 1 | 186 | 6.7 | 1.6 | 1 |
11 | 57/f | 40 | Plasmocitoma | IgG | Kappa | 2 | 146 | 1.6 | 2.7 | 3 |
12 | 69/f | 15 | Bone marrow | IgG | Lambda | 1 | 438 | 1.5 | 3 | 3 |
13 | 58/m | 24 | Bone marrow | IgG | Lambda | 1 | 159 | 77 | 3.1 | 3 |
14 | 66/m | 50 | Bone marrow | IgA | Lambda | 3 | 125 | 1 | 8.3 | 3 |
No | Number of Bone Lesions with FDG | FDG SUVmax Value | Number of Bone Lesions with FAPI | FAPI SUVmax Value | Extramedullary Involvement a | Extramedullary Involvement b |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | 1 | 4.1 | 10 | 13.6 | 8.11 | 131 |
2 | 0 | 0 | 6 | 6.5 | ||
3 | 4 | 5.3 | 13 | 6.6 | 2.72 | 14.72 |
4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
5 | 2 | 2.1 | 2 | 8.4 | ||
6 | 0 | 0 | 8 | 13.1 | ||
7 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
8 | 6 | 5.6 | 7 | 4.6 | 11.73 | 5.73 |
9 | 3 | 15.4 | 3 | 13.6 | ||
10 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
11 | 14 | 6.6 | 4 | 8.1 | ||
12 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
13 | 6 | 5.5 | 9 | 8.2 | ||
14 | 2 | 4.6 | 4 | 10.3 |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Elboga, U.; Sahin, E.; Cayirli, Y.B.; Okuyan, M.; Aktas, G.; Haydaroglu Sahin, H.; Dogan, I.; Kus, T.; Akkurd, D.M.; Cimen, U.; et al. Comparison of [68Ga]-FAPI PET/CT and [18F]-FDG PET/CT in Multiple Myeloma: Clinical Experience. Tomography 2022, 8, 293-302. https://doi.org/10.3390/tomography8010024
Elboga U, Sahin E, Cayirli YB, Okuyan M, Aktas G, Haydaroglu Sahin H, Dogan I, Kus T, Akkurd DM, Cimen U, et al. Comparison of [68Ga]-FAPI PET/CT and [18F]-FDG PET/CT in Multiple Myeloma: Clinical Experience. Tomography. 2022; 8(1):293-302. https://doi.org/10.3390/tomography8010024
Chicago/Turabian StyleElboga, Umut, Ertan Sahin, Yusuf Burak Cayirli, Merve Okuyan, Gokmen Aktas, Handan Haydaroglu Sahin, Ilkay Dogan, Tulay Kus, Dervis Murat Akkurd, Ufuk Cimen, and et al. 2022. "Comparison of [68Ga]-FAPI PET/CT and [18F]-FDG PET/CT in Multiple Myeloma: Clinical Experience" Tomography 8, no. 1: 293-302. https://doi.org/10.3390/tomography8010024