[68Ga]Pentixafor PET/CT for staging and prognostic assessment of newly diagnosed multiple myeloma: comparison to [18F]FDG PET/CT

• DOI: 10.1007/s00259-024-06621-0
• Publication Date: 2024-01-30T03:02:35Z
• Authors: Zhenying Chen; Apeng Yang; Aihong Chen; Jinfeng Dong; Junfang Lin; Chao Huang; Jiaying Zhang; Huimin Liu; Zhiyong Zeng; Weibing Miao
• Keywords: PET-CT

To evaluate the prognostic performance of [68Ga]Pentixafor PET/CT at baseline for staging of patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (MM) and to compare it with [18F]FDG PET/CT and the Revised-International Staging System (R-ISS).Patients who underwent [68Ga]Pentixafor and [18F]FDG PET/CT imaging were retrospectively included. Patient staging was performed according to the Durie-Salmon PLUS staging system based on [68Ga]Pentixafor PET/CT and [18F]FDG PET/CT images, and the R-ISS. Progression-free survival (PFS) at patient follow-up was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier estimator and compared using the log-rank test. Area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) was calculated to assess predictive performance.Fifty-five MM patients were evaluated. Compared with [18F]FDG PET, [68Ga]Pentixafor PET detected 25 patients as the same stage, while 26 patients were upstaged and 4 patients were downstaged (P = 0.001). After considering the low-dose CT data, there was no statistically significant difference in the number of patients classified in each stage using [68Ga]Pentixafor PET/CT and [18F]FDG PET/CT (P = 0.091). [68Ga]Pentixafor PET/CT-based staging discriminated PFS outcomes in patients with different disease stages (stage I vs. stage II, stage I vs. stage III, and stage II vs. stage III; all P < 0.05), whereas for [18F]FDG PET/CT, there was only a difference in median PFS between stage I and III (P = 0.021). When staged by R-ISS, the median PFS for stage III was significantly lower than that for stage I and II (P = 0.008 and 0.035, respectively). When predicting 2-year PFS based on staging, the AUC of [68Ga]Pentixafor PET/CT was significantly higher than that of [68Ga]Pentixafor PET (0.923 vs. 0.821, P = 0.002), [18F]FDG PET (0.923 vs. 0.752 P = 0.002), and R-ISS (0.923 vs. 0.776, P = 0.005).[68Ga]Pentixafor PET/CT-based staging possesses substantial potential to predict disease progression in newly diagnosed MM patients.