To evaluate DWI of the bone marrow in the differentiation of monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance (MGUS), smouldering myeloma (SMM) and multiple myeloma (MM).
The retrospective study includes 64 patients with MGUS, 27 with SMM, 64 with new MM and 12 controls. Signal intensity (SI) of spinal SE-MRI and DWI (b0-1000) as well as apparent diffusion coefficients (ADC) were measured in the T10 and L3. Qualitative assessment of b-images was performed by one experienced radiologist.
ADC600 and ADC1000 are the best ADC values in differentiating patient groups (p < 0.030). SIT2, SIb1000 and ADC1000 are higher and SIT1 lower in L3 compared to T10 (p < 0.050). All quantitative parameters of L3 can differentiate significantly between MGUS and MM (p < 0.050) and between patients with percentage plasma cells (PC%) between 0-10 % compared to >50 % (p = 0.001). Only SIT2 for L3 can differentiate MGUS from SMM (p = 0.044) and PC%0-10 from PC%10-25 (p = 0.033). Qualitative interpretation of b1000 images allows differentiating MM patients from those with MGUS or SMM (p < 0.001).
Spinal SE-MRI can differentiate among MGUS, SMM, MM and control subjects. DWI based on the SI on b1000 images and ADC values is increased in MM compared to MGUS and SMM. Qualitative assessment of b-images can differentiate MM from MGUS or SMM.
• ADC values are higher in patients with MM compared to MGUS
• DWI parameters change late in disease evolution
• DWI is sensitive but not specific in diagnosing patients with MM
• Qualitative DWI assessment is good in detecting myeloma patients
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.
Buy single article
Instant access to the full article PDF.
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
Subscribe to journal
Immediate online access to all issues from 2019. Subscription will auto renew annually.
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
International Myeloma Working Group
Magnetic resonance imaging
Positron emission tomography
Apparent diffusion coefficient
Monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance
International Staging System
Hereditary multiple exostoses
Echo planar imaging
Region of interest
Area under the curve
Percentage plasma cells
Fat-suppressed T2 weighted
Turbo spin echo
Shah R, Stieltjes B, Andrulis M et al (2013) Intravoxel incoherent motion imaging for assessment of bone marrow infiltration of monoclonal plasma cell diseases. Ann Hematol 92:1553–1557
Dutoit JC, Vanderkerken MA, Verstraete KL (2013) 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 82:1444–1452
Schmidt GP, Reiser MF, Baur-Melnyk A (2007) Whole-body imaging of the musculoskeletal system: the value of MR imaging. Skelet Radiol 36:1109–1119
Padhani AR, van Ree K, Collins DJ, D'Sa S, Makris A (2013) Assessing the relation between bone marrow signal intensity and apparent diffusion coefficient in diffusion-weighted MRI. AJR Am J Roentgenol 200:163–170
Khoo MM, Tyler PA, Saifuddin A, Padhani AR (2011) Diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) in musculoskeletal MRI: a critical review. Skelet Radiol 40:665–681
Petralia G, Thoeny HC (2010) DW-MRI of the urogenital tract: applications in oncology. Cancer Imaging 10 Spec no A:S112–S123
Kitajima K, Takahashi S, Ueno Y et al (2013) Do apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) values obtained using high b-values with a 3-T MRI correlate better than a transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)-guided biopsy with true Gleason scores obtained from radical prostatectomy specimens for patients with prostate cancer? Eur J Radiol 82:1219–1226
Dietrich O, Biffar A, Reiser MF, Baur-Melnyk A (2009) Diffusion-weighted imaging of bone marrow. Semin Musculoskelet Radiol 13:134–144
Messiou C, Collins DJ, Morgan VA, Desouza NM (2011) Optimising diffusion weighted MRI for imaging metastatic and myeloma bone disease and assessing reproducibility. Eur Radiol 21:1713–1718
Padhani AR, Koh DM, Collins DJ (2011) Whole-body diffusion-weighted MR imaging in cancer: current status and research directions. Radiology 261:700–718
Fenchel M, Konaktchieva M, Weisel K et al (2010) Early response assessment in patients with multiple myeloma during anti-angiogenic therapy using arterial spin labelling: first clinical results. Eur Radiol 20:2899–2906
Messiou C, Giles S, Collins DJ et al (2012) Assessing response of myeloma bone disease with diffusion-weighted MRI. Br J Radiol 85:e1198–e1203
Hillengass J, Bauerle T, Bartl R et al (2011) Diffusion-weighted imaging for non-invasive and quantitative monitoring of bone marrow infiltration in patients with monoclonal plasma cell disease: a comparative study with histology. Br J Haematol 153:721–728
Hillengass J, Stieltjes B, Bauerle T et al (2011) Dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (DCE-MRI) and diffusion-weighted imaging of bone marrow in healthy individuals. Acta Radiol 52:324–330
International Myeloma Working G (2003) Criteria for the classification of monoclonal gammopathies, multiple myeloma and related disorders: a report of the International Myeloma Working Group. Br J Haematol 121:749–757
Landgren O, Korde N (2011) Multiple myeloma precursor disease: current clinical and epidemiological insights and future opportunities. Oncology (Williston Park) 25:589–590
Landgren O, Waxman AJ (2010) Multiple myeloma precursor disease. Jama 304:2397–2404
Narquin S, Ingrand P, Azais I et al (2013) Comparison of whole-body diffusion MRI and conventional radiological assessment in the staging of myeloma. Diagn Interv Imaging 94:629–636
Koh DM (2010) Qualitative and quantitative analyses: image evaluation and interpretation. In: Koh DM, Thoeny HC (eds) Diffusion-weighted MR imaging applications in the body. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 33–47
Padhani AR, Khan AA (2010) Diffusion-weighted (DW) and dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for monitoring anticancer therapy. Target Oncol 5:39–52
Landgren O (2010) Monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance and smoldering myeloma: new insights into pathophysiology and epidemiology. Hematol Am Soc Hematol Educ Program 2010:295–302
Silva JR Jr, Hayashi D, Yonenaga T et al (2013) MRI of bone marrow abnormalities in hematological malignancies. Diagn Interv Radiol 19:393–399
Herrmann J, Krstin N, Schoennagel BP et al (2012) Age-related distribution of vertebral bone-marrow diffusivity. Eur J Radiol 81:4046–4049
Savvopoulou V, Maris TG, Vlahos L, Moulopoulos LA (2008) Differences in perfusion parameters between upper and lower lumbar vertebral segments with dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI (DCE MRI). Eur Radiol 18:1876–1883
Nakanishi K, Gutzeit A (2010) Evaluation of malignant bone disease using DW-MRI. In: Koh DM, Thoeny HC (eds) Diffusion-weighted MR imaging applications in the body. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 207–226
Vande Berg BC, Malghem J, Lecouvet FE, Maldague B (1998) Magnetic resonance imaging of the normal bone marrow. Skelet Radiol 27:471–483
Lecouvet FE, Larbi A, Pasoglou V et al (2013) MRI for response assessment in metastatic bone disease. Eur Radiol 23:1986–1997
Nonomura Y, Yasumoto M, Yoshimura R et al (2001) Relationship between bone marrow cellularity and apparent diffusion coefficient. J Magn Reson Imaging 13:757–760
Padhani AR, Gogbashian A (2011) Bony metastases: assessing response to therapy with whole-body diffusion MRI. Cancer Imaging 11 Spec No A:S129–S145
The scientific guarantor of this publication is Koenraad Verstraete. The authors of this manuscript declare no relationships with any companies, whose products or services may be related to the subject matter of the article. The authors state that this work has not received any funding. One of the authors has significant statistical expertise. Institutional Review Board approval was obtained. Written informed consent was waived by the Institutional Review Board. Some study subjects or cohorts have been previously reported in Euro J Radiol, A correlation was made between data of conventional whole-body MRI and dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI. Methodology: retrospective, diagnostic or prognostic study/observational, performed at one institution.
About this article
Cite this article
Dutoit, J.C., Vanderkerken, M.A., Anthonissen, J. et al. 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 24, 2754–2765 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-014-3324-5
- Diffusion-weighted imaging
- Magnetic resonance imaging
- Multiple myeloma
- Monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance