Current concepts in tumor imaging with whole-body MRI with diffusion imaging (WB-MRI-DWI) in multiple myeloma and lymphoma

References

• Eustace SJ, Walker R, Blake M, et al. Whole-body MR imaging. Practical issues, clinical applications, and future directions. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am. 1999;7:209–236.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Takahara T, Imai Y, Yamashita T, et al. Diffusion weighted whole body imaging with background body signal suppression (DWIBS): technical improvement using free breathing, STIR and high resolution 3D display. Radiat Med. 2004;22:275–282.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Stecco A, Romano G, Negru M, et al. Whole-body diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging in the staging of oncological patients: comparison with positron emission tomography computed tomography (PET-CT) in a pilot study. Radiol Med. 2009;114:1–17.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stecco A, Lombardi M, Leva L, et al. Diagnostic accuracy and agreement between whole-body diffusion MRI and bone scintigraphy in detecting bone metastases. Radiol Med. 2013;118:465–475.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stecco A, Buemi F, Quagliozzi M, et al. Staging of primary abdominal lymphomas: comparison of whole-body MRI with diffusion-weighted imaging and (18)F-FDG-PET/CT. Gastroenterol Res Pract. 2015;2015:104794.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Kessler LG, Barnhart HX, Buckler AJ, et al. The emerging science of quantitative imaging biomarkers terminology and definitions for scientific studies and regulatory submissions. Stat Methods Med Res. 2015;24:9–26.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thoeny HC, De Keyzer F. Extracranial applications of diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging. Eur Radiol. 2007;17:1385–1393.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Padhani AR, Liu G, Koh DM, et al. Diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging as a cancer biomarker: consensus and recommendations. Neoplasia. 2009;11:102–125.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ginat DT, Mangla R, Yeaney G, et al. Diffusion-weighted imaging for differentiating benign from malignant skull lesions and correlation with cell density. Am J Roentgenol. 2012;198:W597–W601.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tondo F, Saponaro A, Stecco A, et al. Role of diffusion-weighted imaging in the differential diagnosis of benign and malignant lesions of the chest-mediastinum. Radiol Med. 2011;116:720–733.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bhatia S, Yasui Y, Robison LL, et al. High risk of subsequent neoplasms continues with extended follow-up of childhood Hodgkin's disease: report from the Late Effects Study Group. J Clin Oncol. 2003;21:4386–4394.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• El-Galaly TC, Jakobsen LH, Hutchings M, et al. Routine imaging for diffuse large B-cell lymphoma in first complete remission does not improve post-treatment survival: a Danish-Swedish population-based study. J Clin Oncol. 2015;33:3993–3998.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Picardi M, Pugliese N, Cirillo M, et al. Advanced-stage Hodgkin lymphoma: US/chest radiography for detection of relapse in patients in first complete remission – a randomized trial of routine surveillance imaging procedures. Radiology. 2014;272:262–274.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nanni C, Rubello D, Fanti S, et al. Role of 18F-FDG-PETand PET/CT imaging in thyroid cancer. Biomed Pharmacother. 2006;60:409–413.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Kyle RA, Durie BG, Rajkumar SV, et al. Monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance (MGUS) and smoldering (asymptomatic) multiple myeloma: IMWG consensus perspectives risk factors for progression and guidelines for monitoring and management. Leukemia. 2010;24:1121–1127.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smith D, Yong K. Multiple myeloma. BMJ. 2013;346:f3863.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Wadhera RK, Rajkumar SV. Prevalence of monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance: a systematic review. Mayo Clin Proc. 2010;85:933–942.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Criteria for the classification of monoclonal gammopathies, multiple myeloma and related disorders: a report of the International Myeloma Working Group. Br J Haematol. 2003;121:749–757.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kyle RA, Therneau TM, Rajkumar SV, et al. Prevalence of monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance. N Engl J Med. 2006;354:1362–1369.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kyle RA, Buadi F, Rajkumar SV. Management of monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance (MGUS) and smoldering multiple myeloma (SMM). Oncology (Williston Park). 2011;25:578–586.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rajkumar SV, Dimopoulos MA, Palumbo A, et al. International myeloma working group updated criteria for the diagnosis of multiple myeloma. Lancet Oncol. 2014;15:e538–e548.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rajkumar SV. Myeloma today: disease definitions and treatment advances. Am J Hematol. 2016;91:90–100.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pratt G, Bowcock S, Chantry A, et al. Time to redefine myeloma. Br J Haematol. 2015;171:1–10.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Collins CD. Multiple myeloma. Cancer Imaging. 2004;4:S47–S53.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Hillengass J, Landgren O. Challenges and opportunities of novel imaging techniques in monoclonal plasma cell disorders: imaging “early myeloma”. Leuk Lymphoma. 2013;54:1355–1363.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zamagni E, Nanni C, Patriarca F, et al. Frequency, distribution and clinical management of incidental findings and extramedullary plasmacytomas in whole body diffusion weighted magnetic resonance imaging in patients with multiple myeloma. Haematologica. 2007;92:50–55.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lu YY1, Chen JH, Lin WY, et al. FDG PET or PET/CT for detecting intramedullary and extramedullary lesions in multiple Myeloma: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Nucl Med. 2012;37:833–837.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dimopoulos M, Terpos E, Comenzo RL, et al. and the IMWG. International myeloma working group consensus statement and guidelines regarding the current role of imaging techniques in the diagnosis and monitoring of multiple Myeloma. Leukemia. 2009;23:1545–1556.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moulopoulos LA, Dimopoulos MA, Smith TL, et al. Prognostic significance of magnetic resonance imaging in patients with asymptomatic multiple myeloma. J Clin Oncol. 1995;13:251–256.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mariette X, Zagdanski AM, Guermazi A, et al. Prognostic value of vertebral lesions detected by magnetic resonance imaging in patients with stage I multiple myeloma. Br J Haematol. 1999;104:723–729.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang M, Alexa nian R, Delasalle K, Weber D. Abnormal MRI of spine is the dominant risk factor for early progression of asymptomatic multiple myeloma. Blood. 2003;102:687a.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hillengass J, Fechtner K, Weber MA, et al. Prognostic significance of focal lesions in whole-body magnetic resonance imaging in patients with asymptomatic multiple myeloma. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28:1606–1610.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kastritis E, Moulopoulos LA, Terpos E, et al. The prognostic importance of the presence of more than one focal lesion in spine MRI of patients with asymptomatic (smoldering) multiple myeloma. Leukemia. 2014;28:2402–2403.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Merz M, Hielscher T, Wagner B, et al. Predictive value of longitudinal whole-body magnetic resonance imaging in patients with smoldering multiple myeloma. Leukemia. 2014;28:1902–1908.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Terpos E, Kleber M, Engelhardt M, et al. European Myeloma Network guidelines for the management of multiple myeloma-related complications. Haematologica. 2015;100:1254–1266.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Del Grande Farahani SJ, Carrino JA. Bone marrow lesions: a systematic diagnostic approach. Indian J Radiol Imaging. 2014;24:279–287.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Zampa V, Cosottini M, Michelassi C, et al. Value of opposed-phase gradient-echo technique in distinguishing between benign and malignant vertebral lesions. Eur Radiol. 2002;12:1811–1818.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• El-Samie HAE-KA, El-Ghany HSA. The value of added opposed/in phase MRI sequences in characterization of the focal vertebral bone marrow lesions in oncology patients. Egypt J Radiol Nucl Med. 2015;46:727–732.
   Google Scholar
• Dutoit JC, Vanderkerken MA, 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. 2014;24:2754–2765.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Khoo MM, Tyler PA, Saifuddin A, et al. Diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) in musculoskeletal MRI: a critical review. Skeletal Radiol. 2011;40:665–681.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Koh DM, Qualitative and quantitative analyses: image evaluation and interpretation. In: Koh DMTH, editor. Diffusion-weighted MR imaging applications in the body. Heidelberg: Springer; 2010. p. 33–47.
   Google Scholar
• Dutoit JC, Verstraete KL. MRI in multiple myeloma: a pictorial review of diagnostic and post-treatment findings. Insights Imaging. 2016;7:553–569.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Messiou C, Giles S, Collins DJ, et al. Assessing response of myeloma bone disease with diffusion-weighted MRI. Br J Radiol. 2012;85:e1198–e1203.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Verstraete KL, Van der Woude HJ, Hogendoorn PC, et al. Dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging of musculoskeletal tumors: basic principles and clinical applications. J Magn Reson Imaging. 1996;6:311–321.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Verstraete KL, Dutoit JC, Vanderkerken MA, et al. 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. 2013;82:1444–1452.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dimopoulos MA, Hillengas J, Usmani S, et al. Role of magnetic resonance imaging in the management of patients with multiple myeloma: a consensus statement. J Clin Oncol. 2015;33:657–664.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Durie BG, Kyle RA, Belch A, et al. Myeloma management guidelines: a consensus report from the scientific advisors of the International Myeloma Foundation. Hematol J. 2003;4:379–398.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Durie BG, Salmon SE. A clinical staging system for multiple myeloma: correlation of measured myeloma cell mass with presenting clinical features, response to treatment, and survival. Cancer. 1975;36:842–854.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baur A, Stäbler A, Nagel D, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging as a supplement for the clinical staging system of Durie und Salmon?. Cancer. 2002;95:1334–1345.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kumar S, Dispenzieri A, Lacy MQ, et al. Continued improvement in survival in multiple myeloma: changes in early mortality and outcomes in older patients. Leukemia. 2013;28:1122–1108.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kapoor P, Kumar SK, Dispenzieri A, et al. Importance of achieving stringent complete response after autologous stem-cell transplantation in multiple myeloma. J Clin Oncol. 2013;31:4529–4535.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Durie BG, Harousseau JL, Miguel JS, for the International Myeloma Working Group, et al. International uniform response criteria for multiple myeloma. Leukemia. 2006;20:1467–1473.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chee CE, Kumar S, Larson DR, et al. The importance of bone marrow examination in determining complete response to therapy in patients with multiple myeloma. Blood. 2009;114:2617–2618.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Attal M, Lauwers-Cances V, Marit G, et al. Lenalidomide maintenance after stem-cell transplantation for multiple myeloma. N Engl J Med. 2012;366:1782–1791.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McCarthy PL, Owzar K, Hofmeister CC, et al. Lenalidomide after stem-cell transplantation for multiple myeloma . N Engl J Med. 2012;366:1770–1781.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jakubowiak AJ, Dytfeld D, Griffi th KA, et al. A phase 1/2 study of carfilzomib in combination with lenalidomide and low-dose dexamethasone as a frontline treatment for multiple myeloma. Blood. 2012;120:1801–1809.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kumar S, Flinn I, Richardson PG, et al. Randomized, multicenter, phase 2 study (EVOLUTION) of combinations of bortezomib, dexamethasone, cyclophosphamide, and lenalidomide in previously untreated multiple myeloma. Blood. 2012;119:4375–4382.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cavo M, Tacchetti P, Patriarca F, et al. for the GIMEMA Italian Myeloma Network. Bortezomib with thalidomide plus dexamethasone compared with thalidomide plus dexamethasone as induction therapy before, and consolidation therapy after, double autologous stem-cell transplantation in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma: a randomised phase 3 study. Lancet. 2010;376:2075–2085.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kumar S, Paiva B, Anderson KC, et al. International Myeloma Working Group consensus criteria for response and minimal residual disease assessment in multiple myeloma. Lancet Oncol. 2016;17:e328–e346.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walker R, Barlogie B, Haessler J, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging in multiple myeloma: diagnostic and clinical implications. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25:1121–1128.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Derlin T, Peldschus K, Münster S, et al. Comparative diagnostic performance of 18FFDG PET/CT versus whole-body MRI for determination of remission status in multiple myeloma after stem cell transplantation. Eur Radiol. 2013;23:570–578.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Derlin T, Weber C, Habermann CR, et al. 18F-FDG PET/CT for detection and localization of residual or recurrent disease in patients with multiple myeloma after stem cell transplantation. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2012;39:493–500.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shortt CP, Gleeson TG, Breen KA, etet al. Whole-body MRI versus PET in assessment of multiple myeloma disease activity. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2009;192:980–986.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Spinnato P, Bazzocchi A, Brioli A, et al. Contrast enhanced MRI and 18F-FDG PETCT in the assessment of multiple myeloma: a comparison of results in different phases of the disease. Eur J Radiol. 2012;81:4013–4018.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Caldarella C, Treglia G, Isgrò MA, et al. The role of fluorine-18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in evaluating the response to treatment in patients with multiple myeloma. Int J Mol Imaging. 2012;2012:175803.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Zamagni E, Tacchetti P, Terragna C, et al. Multiple myeloma: disease response assessment. Expert Rev Hematol. 2016;9:831–837.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nanni C, Zamagni E, et al. Image interpretation criteria for FDG PET/CT in multiple myeloma: a new proposal from an Italian expert panel. IMPeTUs (Italian Myeloma criteria for PET USe). Eur. J. Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2016;43:414–421.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lecouvet FE, Larbi A, Pasoglou V, et al. MRI for response assessment in metastatic bone disease. Eur Radiol. 2013;23:1986–1997.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hillengass J, Ayyaz S, Kilk K, et al. Changes in magnetic resonance imaging before and after autologous stem cell transplantation correlate with response and survival in multiple myeloma. Haematologica. 2012;97:1757–1760.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moreau P, Attal M, Karlin L, et al. Prospective evaluation of MRIand PET-CT at diagnosis and before maintenance therapy in symptomatic patients with multiple myeloma included in the IFM/DFCI 2009 trial [abstract ASH 57th Annual Meeting & Exposition, Orlando, FL]. Blood. 2015;126:395.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fraioli F, Punwani S. Clinical and research applications of simultaneous positron emission toography and MRI. Br J Radiol. 2014;87:20130464.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cheson BD, Fisher RI, Barrington SF, et al. Recommendations for initial evaluation, staging and response assessment of Hodgkin and Non-Hodgkin lymphoma: the Lugano classification. J Clin Oncol. 2014;32:3059–3068.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barrington SF, Mikhaeel GN, KostaKoglu L, et al. Role of imaging in the staging and response assessment of lymphoma: consensus of the international conference on malignant lymphomas imaging working group. J Clin Oncol. 2014;32:3048–3058.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• King AD, Ahuja AT, Yeung DK, et al. Malignant cervical lymphadenopathy: diagnostic accuracy of diffusion-weighted MR imaging. Radiology. 2007;245:806–813.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Holzapfel K, Duetsch S, Fauser C, et al. Value of diffusion-weighted MR imaging in the differentiation between benign and malignant cervical lymph nodes. Eur J Radiol. 2009;72:381–387.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wu X, Pertovaara H, Dastidar P, et al. ADC measurements in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma and follicular lymphoma: a DWI and cellularity study. Eur J Radiol. 2013;82:e158–e164.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Ufford HM, Kwee TC, Beek FJ, et al. Newly diagnosed lymphoma: initial results with whole-body T1-weighted, STIR, and diffusion-weighted MRI compared with 18F-FDG PET/CT. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2011;196:662–669.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Abdulqadhr G, Molin D, Astrom G, et al. Whole-body diffusion-weighted imaging compared with FDG-PET/CT in staging of lymphoma patients. Acta Radiol. 2011;52:173–180.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mayerhoefer ME, Karanikas G, Kletter K, et al. Evaluation of diffusion-weighted MRI for pretherapeutic assessment and staging of lymphoma: results of a prospective study in 140 patients. Clin Cancer Res. 2014;20:2984–2993.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lin C, Luciani A, Itti E, et al. Whole-body diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging with apparent diffusion coefficient mapping for staging patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma. Eur Radiol. 2010;20:2027–2038.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stecco A, Buemi F, Quagliozzi M, et al. Staging of primary abdominal lymphomas: comparison of whole-body MRI with diffusion-weighted imaging and 18F-FDG-PET/CT. Gastroenterol Res Pract. 2015;2015:104794.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Lin C, Itti E, Luciani A, et al. Whole-body diffusion-weighted imaging in lymphoma. Cancer Imaging. 2010;10:S172–S178.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Albano D, Patti C, La Grutta L, et al. Comparison between whole-body MRI with diffusion-weighted imaging and PET/CT in staging newly diagnosed FDG-avid lymphomas. Eur J Radiol. 2016;85:313–318.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Toledano-Massiah S, Luciani A, Itti E, et al. Whole-body diffusion-weighted imaging in Hodgkin lymphoma and diffuse large B-cell lymphoma. Radiographics. 2015;35:747–764.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cheson BD. Staging and response assessment in lymphomas: the new Lugano classification. Chin Clin Oncol. 2015;4:5.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Disler DG, McCauley TR, Ratner LM, et al. In-phase and out-of-phase MR imaging of bone marrow: Prediction of neoplasia based on the detection of coexistent fat and water. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1997;169:1439–1447.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hanrahan CJ, Shah LM. MRI of spinal bone marrow: part 2, T1-weighted imaging-based differential diagnosis. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2011;197:1309–1321.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tsuji K, Kishi S, Tsuchida T, et al. Evaluation of staging and early response to chemotherapy with whole-body diffusion-weighted MRI in malignant lymphoma patients: a comparison with FDG-PET/CT. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2015;41:1601–1607.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Therasse P, Arbuck SG, Eisenhauer EA, et al. New guidelines to evaluate the response to treatment in solid tumors. European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer, National Cancer Institute of the United States, National Cancer Institute of Canada. J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 2000;92:205–216.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wahl RL, Jacene H, Kasamon Y, et al. From RECIST to PERCIST: evolving considerations for PET response criteria in solid tumors. J Nucl Med. 2009;50:122S–150S.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weber WA. Assessing tumor response to therapy. J Nucl Med. 2009;50:1S–10S.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hutchings M, Loft A, Hansen M, et al. FDG-PET after two cycles of chemotherapy predicts treatment failure and progression-free survival in Hodgkin lymphoma. Blood. 2006;107:52–59.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kostakoglu L, Goldsmith SJ, Leonard JP, Christos P, et al. FDG-PET after 1 cycle of therapy predicts outcome in diffuse large cell lymphoma and classic Hodgkin disease. Cancer. 2006;107:2678–2687.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gallamini A, Hutchings M, Rigacci L, et al. Early interim 2-[18F]fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose positron emission tomography is prognostically superior to international prognostic score in advanced-stage Hodgkin's lymphoma: a report from a joint Italian-Danish study. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25:3746–3752.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kostakoglu L, Evens AM. FDG-PET imaging for hodgkin lymphoma: current use and future applications. Clin Adv Hematol Oncol. 2014;12:20–35. 1
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Kwee TC, Ludwig I, Uiterwaal CS, et al. ADC measurements in the evaluation of lymph nodes in patients with non-Hodgkin lymphoma: feasibility study. Magma. 2011;24:1–8.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Meleshko AN, Kharuzhyk SA, Piatrouskaya NA. Response monitoring in follicular lymphoma by synchronous evaluation of minimal residual disease and diffusion-weighted MRI. Exp Oncol. 2015;37:295–297.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Punwani S, Prakash V, Bainbridge A. Quantitative diffusion weighted MRI: a functional biomarker of nodal disease in Hodgkin lymphoma?. Cancer Biomark. 2010;7:249–259.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Malyarenko D, Galbán CJ, Londy FJ, et al. Multi-system repeatability and reproducibility of apparent diffusion coefficient measurement using an ice-water phantom. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2013;37:1238–1246.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• De Paepe K, Bevernage C, De Keyzer F, et al. Whole-body diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging at 3 Tesla for early assessment of treatment response in non-Hodgkin lymphoma: a pilot study. Cancer Imaging. 2013;13:53–62.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reichardt W, Juettner E, Uhl M, et al. Diffusion-weighted imaging as predictor of therapy response in an animal model of Ewing sarcoma. Investig Radiol. 2009;44:298–303.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Horger M, Claussen C, Kramer U, et al. Very early indicators of response to systemic therapy in lymphoma patients based on alterations in water diffusivity: a preliminary experience in 20 patients undergoing whole-body diffusion-weighted imaging. Eur J Radiol. 2014;83:1655–1664.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen Y, Zhong J, Wu H, et al. The clinical application of whole-body diffusion-weighted imaging in the early assessment of chemotherapeutic effects in lymphoma: the initial experience. Magn Reson Imaging. 2012;30:165–170.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wu X, Nerisho S, Dastidar P, et al. Comparison of different MRI sequences in lesion detection and early response evaluation of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma: a whole-body MRI and diffusion-weighted imaging study. NMR Biomed. 2013;26:1186–1194.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wu X, Kellokumpu-Lehtinen PL, Pertovaara H, et al. Diffusion-weighted MRI in early chemotherapy response evaluation of patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma: a pilot study—comparison with 2-deoxy-2-fluoro-d-glucose-positron emission tomography/computed tomography. NMR Biomed. 2011;24:1181–1190.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lin C, Itti E, Luciani A, et al. Whole-body diffusion-weighted imaging with apparent diffusion coefficient mapping for treatment response assessment in patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma: pilot study. Investig Radiol. 2011;46:341–349.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Littooij AS, Kwee TC, et al. Whole-body MRI-DWI for assessment of residual disease after completion of therapy in lymphoma: a prospective multicenter study. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2015;42:1646–1655.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sasaki M, Yamada K, Watanabe Y, et al. Variability in absolute apparent diffusion coefficient values across different platforms may be substantial: a multivendor, multi-institutional comparison study. Radiology. 2008;249:624–630.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Padhani AR, Gogbashian A. Bony metastases: assessing response to therapy with whole-body diffusion MRI. Cancer Imaging. 2011;11:(Spec No A):S129–S145.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Sun M, Cheng J, Zhang Y, et al. Application value of diffusion weighted whole body imaging with background body signal suppression in monitoring the response to treatment of bone marrow involvement in lymphoma. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2016;44:1522–1529.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar