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

Chen, Zhenying; Yang, Apeng; Chen, Aihong; Dong, Jinfeng; Lin, Junfang; Huang, Chao; Zhang, Jiaying; Liu, Huimin et al. · Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging · 2024

retrospective_cohort · Level III

Where this comes from

Abstract

To evaluate the prognostic performance of [<sup>68</sup>Ga]Pentixafor PET/CT at baseline for staging of patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (MM) and to compare it with [<sup>18</sup>F]FDG PET/CT and the Revised-International Staging System (R-ISS). Patients who underwent [<sup>68</sup>Ga]Pentixafor and [<sup>18</sup>F]FDG PET/CT imaging were retrospectively included. Patient staging was performed according to the Durie-Salmon PLUS staging system based on [<sup>68</sup>Ga]Pentixafor PET/CT and [<sup>18</sup>F]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 [<sup>18</sup>F]FDG PET, [<sup>68</sup>Ga]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 [<sup>68</sup>Ga]Pentixafor PET/CT and [<sup>18</sup>F]FDG PET/CT (P = 0.091). [<sup>68</sup>Ga]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 [<sup>18</sup>F]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 [<sup>68</sup>Ga]Pentixafor PET/CT was significantly higher than that of [<sup>68</sup>Ga]Pentixafor PET (0.923 vs. 0.821, P = 0.002), [<sup>18</sup>F]FDG PET (0.923 vs. 0.752 P = 0.002), and R-ISS (0.923 vs. 0.776, P = 0.005). [<sup>68</sup>Ga]Pentixafor PET/CT-based staging possesses substantial potential to predict disease progression in newly diagnosed MM patients.

Medical subject headings