br different conditions to study the value of whole


different conditions to study the value of whole-body MRI in its two most validated indications. These findings should not be extrapolated to other cancers involving the skeleton [52,53]. A third limitation is the inclusion of patients at relatively early stages of skeletal dissemination so that our results might not be applied to patients with more advanced disease [54]. Finally, we did not obtain histolog-ical confirmation and positive findings were considered as bone metastases or MM foci at MRI [55].
In conclusion, our results suggest a cranio-caudal increase in the prevalence of bone metastases in PCa, whereas the distribution of lesions in MM is more homo-geneous, with no gradient. The assessment of the axial skeleton using MRI (thoraco-lumbar spine and pelvis) is suf-ficient to detect bone metastases in PCa, whereas coverage of the entire Fulvestrant with whole-body MRI seems nec-essary to detect MM involvement.
Disclosure of interest
The authors declare that they have no competing interest.
References
[1] Cornford P, Bellmunt J, Bolla M, Briers E, De Santis M, Gross T, et al. EAU-ESTRO-SIOG Guidelines on prostate cancer. Part II: treatment of relapsing, metastatic, and castration-resistant prostate cancer. Eur Urol 2017;71:630—42.
[2] Durie BG. The role of anatomic and functional staging in myeloma: description of Durie/Salmon plus staging system. Eur J Cancer 2006;42:1539—43. [3] Coleman R, Body JJ, Aapro M, Hadji P, Herrstedt J. Bone health in cancer patients: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines. Ann Oncol 2014;25:124—37. [4] Tosoian JJ, Gorin MA, Ross AE, Pienta KJ, Tran PT, Schaef-fer EM. Oligometastatic prostate cancer: definitions, clinical outcomes, and treatment considerations. Nat Rev Urol 2017;14:15—25.
[5] deSouza NM, Liu Y, Chiti A, Oprea-Lager D, Gebhart G, Van Beers BE, et al. Strategies and technical challenges for imaging oligometastatic disease: recommendations from the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer imaging group. Eur J Cancer 2018;91:153—63.
Whole-body MRI of bones lesions 301
[7] Garnon J, Koch G, Caudrelier J, Tsoumakidou G, Cazzato RL, Gangi A. Expanding the borders: image-guided procedures for the treatment of musculoskeletal tumors. Diagn Interv Imaging 2017;98:635—44.
[8] 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 sur-vival. Cancer 1975;36:842—54.
[9] Lauenstein TC, Goehde SC, Herborn CU, Goyen M, Oberhoff C, Debatin JF, et al. Whole-body MR imaging: evaluation of patients for metastases. Radiology 2004;233:139—48. [10] Messiou C, Kaiser M. Whole body diffusion weighted MRI–a new view of myeloma. Br J Haematol 2015;171:29—37. [11] Gutzeit A, Doert A, Froehlich JM, Eckhardt BP, Meili A, Scherr P, et al. Comparison of diffusion-weighted whole body MRI and skeletal scintigraphy for the detection of bone metastases in patients with prostate or breast carcinoma. Skeletal Radiol 2010;39:333—43.
[12] Lecouvet FE. Whole-body MR imaging: musculoskeletal appli-cations. Radiology 2016;279:345—65. [13] Padhani AR, Koh DM, Collins DJ. Whole-body diffusion-weighted MR imaging in cancer: current status and research directions. Radiology 2011;261:700—18. [14] Lecouvet FE, El Mouedden J, Collette L, Coche E, Danse E, Jamar F, et al. Can whole-body magnetic resonance imaging with diffusion-weighted imaging replace Tc 99m bone scan-ning and computed tomography for single-step detection of metastases in patients with high-risk prostate cancer? Eur Urol 2012;62:68—75.