18F‐fluoro‐deoxyglucose positron emission tomography in assessment of myeloma‐related bone disease: A systematic review

The goal of this study was to conduct a comparative analysis of whole body X‐ray (WBXR) and 18F‐fluoro‐deoxyglucose positron emission tomography (18FDG PET) in staging and response assessment of multiple myeloma.

[1]  M. Yun,et al.  Comparative study of fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography and magnetic resonance imaging for the detection of spinal bone marrow infiltration in untreated patients with multiple myeloma , 2008, Acta radiologica.

[2]  H. Döhner,et al.  Initial results in the assessment of multiple myeloma using 18F-FDG PET , 2002, European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging.

[3]  R. Fanin,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. , 2007, Haematologica.

[4]  L. Baldini,et al.  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 , 2010, Clinical nuclear medicine.

[5]  Ludwig G Strauss,et al.  Prediction of Progression-Free Survival in Patients With Multiple Myeloma Following Anthracycline-Based Chemotherapy Based on Dynamic FDG-PET , 2009, Clinical nuclear medicine.

[6]  Ronald Boellaard,et al.  The Netherlands protocol for standardisation and quantification of FDG whole body PET studies in multi-centre trials , 2008, European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging.

[7]  B. Line,et al.  Comparison of imaging with FDG PET/CT with other imaging modalities in myeloma , 2006, Skeletal Radiology.

[8]  C. Nanni,et al.  Role of 18F-FDG PET/CT in the assessment of bone involvement in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma: preliminary results , 2006, European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging.

[9]  P. Conti,et al.  Diagnostic utility of FDG PET in multiple myeloma , 2002, Skeletal Radiology.

[10]  P. Bossuyt,et al.  Development and validation of methods for assessing the quality of diagnostic accuracy studies. , 2004, Health technology assessment.

[11]  G. Hung,et al.  Comparison of Tc-99m sestamibi and F-18 FDG-PET in the assessment of multiple myeloma. , 2005, Anticancer research.

[12]  L. Mileshkin,et al.  A comparison of fluorine‐18 fluoro‐deoxyglucose PET and technetium‐99m sestamibi in assessing patients with multiple myeloma , 2004, European journal of haematology.

[13]  M. Yun,et al.  Efficacy of Multidetector Row Computed Tomography of the Spine in Patients With Multiple Myeloma: Comparison With Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Fluorodeoxyglucose-Positron Emission Tomography , 2007, Journal of computer assisted tomography.

[14]  H. Schirrmeister,et al.  Positron emission tomography (PET) for staging of solitary plasmacytoma. , 2003, Cancer biotherapy & radiopharmaceuticals.

[15]  Lotty Hooft,et al.  How to perform a comprehensive search for FDG-PET literature , 2000, European Journal of Nuclear Medicine.

[16]  A. Waxman,et al.  Whole-body (18)F-FDG PET identifies high-risk myeloma. , 2002, Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine.

[17]  P. Moreau,et al.  FDG-positron-emission tomography for staging and therapeutic assessment in patients with plasmacytoma , 2008, Haematologica.

[18]  M. M. Mac Manus,et al.  Impact of 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography before and after definitive radiation therapy in patients with apparently solitary plasmacytoma. , 2009, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[19]  S. Salmon,et al.  A clinical staging system for multiple myeloma correlation of measured myeloma cell mass with presenting clinical features, response to treatment, and survival , 1975, Cancer.

[20]  E Terpos,et al.  International myeloma working group consensus statement and guidelines regarding the current role of imaging techniques in the diagnosis and monitoring of multiple Myeloma , 2009, Leukemia.

[21]  W. Oyen,et al.  FDG PET and PET/CT: EANM procedure guidelines for tumour PET imaging: version 1.0 , 2009, European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging.

[22]  T. Buchler,et al.  Fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in multiple myeloma, solitary plasmocytoma and monoclonal gammapathy of unknown significance. , 2007, Neoplasma.

[23]  S S Gambhir,et al.  PET in oncology: will it replace the other modalities? , 1997, Seminars in nuclear medicine.

[24]  M. Salvatore,et al.  18F-FDG PET/CT, 99mTc-MIBI, and MRI in Evaluation of Patients with Multiple Myeloma , 2008, Journal of Nuclear Medicine.

[25]  Gary Caputo,et al.  Value of FDG PET in the assessment of patients with multiple myeloma. , 2005, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[26]  B. Barlogie,et al.  F18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in the context of other imaging techniques and prognostic factors in multiple myeloma. , 2009, Blood.

[27]  M. Černý,et al.  Synthesis of 2-deoxy-2-fluoro-D-glucose , 1969 .

[28]  S. Eustace,et al.  Whole-Body MRI versus PET in assessment of multiple myeloma disease activity. , 2009, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.