#PAGE_PARAMS# #ADS_HEAD_SCRIPTS# #MICRODATA#

Monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance with low and high risk degree: outputs from analyses RMG of register of Czech myeloma group for practice


Authors: V. Sandecká 1;  R. Hájek 2;  Z. Adam 1;  I. Špička 3;  V. Ščudla 4;  E. Gregora 5;  J. Radocha 6;  L. Walterová 7;  P. Kessler 8;  D. Adamová 9;  K. Valentová 10;  I. Vonke 11;  L. Ulmanová 12;  D. Starostka 13;  M. Wróbel 14;  L. Brožová 15;  J. Jarkovský 15;  A. Mikulášová 16;  L. Říhová 17;  M. Almaši 17;  S. Ševčíková 16;  M. Krejčí 1;  J. Straub 3;  J. Minařík 4;  P. Pavlíček 5;  L. Pour 1;  P. Všianská 17;  S. Okutabe 16;  M. Penka 17;  V. Maisnar 6*
Authors‘ workplace: Interní hematologická a onkologická klinika FN Brno 1;  Klinika hematoonkologie, FN Ostrava 2;  I. Interní klinika - klinika hematologie, VFN Praha 3;  Hemato-onkologická klinika, FN Olomouc 4;  Interní hematologická klinika, FN Královské Vinohrady Praha 5;  IV. interní hematologická klinika, FN Hradec Králové 6;  Oddělení klinické hematologie, Krajská nemocnice Liberec 7;  Oddělení hematologie a transfuziologie, Nemocnice Pelhřimov 8;  Hematologicko-transfúzní oddělení, Slezská nemocnice v Opavě 9;  Oddělení klinické hematologie, Thomayerova nemocnice Praha 10;  Oddělení klinické hematologie, Nemocnice České Budějovice 11;  Hematologicko-transfúzní oddělení, Klaudiánova nemocnice Mladá Boleslav 12;  Oddělení klinické hematologie, Nemocnice s poliklinikou Havířov 13;  Oddělení klinické hematologie komlexního onkologického centra Nový Jičín 14;  Institut biostatistiky a analýz, Masarykova univerzita Brno 15;  Babak Myeloma Group, Katedra patologické fyziologie, Masarykova Univerzita Brno 16;  Oddělení klinické hematologie, FN Brno 17
Published in: Klin. Biochem. Metab., 23 (44), 2015, No. 2, p. 53-59

* v zastoupení České myelomové skupiny

Overview

Aim:
The primary end point was to estimate the cumulative risk of hematologic disorders occurring during the follow-up of our cohort. The secondary end points were: to validate known clinical models suggested by the Mayo Clinic group and the Spanish PETHEMA group for the risk of progression from MGUS to MM or related malignancies and to establish a new risk model by the Czech Myeloma Group (CMG model) with better prediction of low-risk MGUS group.

Results:
1887 MGUS persons were followed with median 4 years. Malignancies developed in 8.6 % (162/1887) cases; MM occurred in 77.2 % (125/162) of persons. The risk of progression was 1.5 % at 1 year, 7.6 % at 5 years and 16.5 % at 10 years after diagnosis. The key predictors factors of progression were as follows: age ≥ 69 years, serum M- protein concentration ≥ 15 g/L, bone marrow plasma cells > 5 %, pathological sFLC ratio (< 0.26 or >1.65), immunoparesis of polyclonal immunoglobulins and levels of serum hemoglobin at baseline < 120 g/L . Distribution of MGUS persons according to risk groups based on the Mayo Clinic model confirmed predictive power of Mayo Clinic model based on our data although isotype of M- protein was not found as independent predictor. At 10 years, no-risk group had 4.9 % risk of progression compared to 16.3 %, 24.6 %, and 54.9 % in groups with 1, 2 or 3 risk factors, respectively (p< 0.001). Immunoparesis instead of DNA aneuploidy was used together with the presence of abnormal plasma cells (aPCs) to validate the modified PETHEMA model. The rates of progression at 2 years were 1.6 %, 8.1 % and 28.0 % for groups with neither, one or both risk factors, respectively (p< 0.001). Based on the 5 parameters with independent predictive value in the univariate analysis we proposed a new CMG model. At 10 years, risk group with 4-5 risk factors had 1.6 %, 16.9 %, 22.9 %, 39.4 % and 52.3 %, retrospectively (p< 0.001).

Conclusion:
In the large cohort of MGUS persons, we confirmed validity of previously considered clinical models for the risk of progression from MGUS to MM by the Mayo Clinic group and the Spanish PETHEMA group (model used for SMM). New CMG model for the risk of progression from MGUS to MM or related malignancies was established with an advantage for better identification of MGUS persons at low risk (87 % of persons with risk of progression below 10 % in 5 years) as well as few persons at the highest risk of progression.

Keywords:
multiple myeloma, monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance, risk factors.


Sources

1. Kyle, R. A., Therneau, T. M., Rajkumar, S. V. et al. A long- term study of prognosis in monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance. N. Engl. J. Med. 2002, 346(8), p. 564-569.

2. 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(5), p. 749-757.

3. Rajkumar, S. V., Kyle, R. A., Therneau, T. M. et al. Serum free light chain ratio is an independent risk factor for progression in monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance. Blood 2005, 106(3), p. 812-817.

4. Perez-Persona, E., Vidriales, M. B., Mateo, G. et al. New criteria to identify risk of progression in monoclonal gammopathy of uncertain significance and smoldering multiple myeloma based on multiparameter flow cytometry analysis of bone marrow plasma cells. Blood 2007, 110(7), p. 2586-2592.

5. Kyle, R. A., Therneau, T. M., Rajkumar, S. V. et al. Long-term follow-up of 241 patients with monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance: the original Mayo Clinic series 25 years later. Mayo Clin. Proc. 2004, 79(7), p. 859-66.

6. Baldini, L., Guffanti, A., Cesana, B. M. et al. Role of different hematologic variables in defining the risk of malignant transformation in monoclonal gammopathy. Blood 1996, 87, p. 912-918.

7. Cesana, C., Klersy, C., Barbarano, L. et al. Prognostic factors for malignant transformation in monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance and smoldering multiple myeloma. J. Clin. Oncol. 2002, 20, p. 1625–1634.

8. Dispenzieri, A., Kyle, R. A., Therneau, T. M. et al. Immunoglobulin free light chain ratio is an independent risk factor for progression of smoldering (asymptomatic) multiple myeloma. Blood 2008, 111(2), p. 785-789.

Labels
Clinical biochemistry Nuclear medicine Nutritive therapist

Article was published in

Clinical Biochemistry and Metabolism

Issue 2

2015 Issue 2

Most read in this issue
Topics Journals
Login
Forgotten password

Enter the email address that you registered with. We will send you instructions on how to set a new password.

Login

Don‘t have an account?  Create new account

#ADS_BOTTOM_SCRIPTS#