Developments in the diagnosis and treatment of multiple myeloma over the past 25 years

Czech version

Authors: R. Hájek ^1,2,3,4
Authors‘ workplace: Klinika hematoonkologie, Fakultní nemocnice Ostrava ¹; Lékařská fakulta, Ostravská univerzita, Ostrava ²; Myelomová sekce České hematologické společnosti, Praha ³; Česká myelomová skupina, Brno ⁴
Published in: Transfuze Hematol. dnes,25, 2019, No. 1, p. 96-106.
Category: Review/Educational Papers

Overview

Multiple myeloma is the second most frequent blood malignancy. This review examines developments in diagnostics, prognosis and treatment strategies over the past 25 years. The past decade alone has seen multiple myeloma rank among cancers with the greatest dynamics in treatment strategies. Based on clear progress and long-term results, we may now consider patients with multiple myeloma to be potentially curable. The proportion of curable patients will increase with the availability of the treatment options of proven efficacy in randomized trials.

Keywords:

progress – cure

Sources

1. Hájek R, Krejčí M, Maisnar V, et al. Diagnostika a léčba mnohočetného myelomu. Doporučení vypracované Českou myelomovou skupinou, Myelomovou sekcí České hematologické společnosti a Slovenskou Myelómovou Spoločností pro diagnostiku a léčbu mnohočetného myelomu. Transfuze Hematol dnes 2018;24(Suppl 1):1–157.

2. Hájek R, Adam Z, Maisnar V, et al. Diagnostika a léčba mnohočetného myelomu. Doporučení vypracované Českou myelomovou skupinou, Myelomovou sekcí České hematologické společnosti a Slovenskou Myelómovou Spoločností pro diagnostiku a léčbu mnohočetného myelomu. Transfuze Hematol dnes 2009;15(Suppl 2):1–80.

3. Adam Z, Straub J, Ščudla V. Doporučení České myelomové skupiny (CMG) pro zajištění časné diagnostiky mnohočetného myelomu v podmínkách ambulantní klinické praxe. Transfuze Hematol dnes 2008;14(2):93–94.

4. Malušková D, Svobodová I, Kučerová M, et al. Epidemiology of multiple myeloma in the Czech Republic. Klin Onkol 2017;30:35–42.

5. Landgren O, Kyle RA, Pfeiffer RM, et al. Monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance (MGUS) consistently precedes multiple myeloma: a prospective study. Blood 2009;113:5412–5417.

6. Bradwell AR, Carr-Smith HD, Mead GP, et al. Highly sensitive, automated immunoassay for immunoglobulin free light chains in serum and urine. Clin Chem 2001;47:673–680.

7. Dispenzieri A, Kyle R, Merlini G, et al. International Myeloma Working Group guidelines for serum-free light chain analysis in multiple myeloma and related disorders. Leukemia 2009;23(2):215–224.

8. 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.

9. Bradwell AR, Harding SJ, Fourrier NJ, et al. Assessment of monoclonal gammopathies by nephelometric measurement of individual immunoglobulin kappa/lambda ratios. Clin Chem 2009;55:1646–1655.

10. Ščudla V, Lochman P, Novák M, Pika T, Minařík J, Langová K. Analýza vztahu poměru volných lehkých řetězců (FLC-r, FreeliteTM), párů těžkých/lehkých řetězců imunoglobulinu (HLC-r, HevyliteTM) v séru a výsledků multiparametrické průtokové cytometrie plazmocytů k „progression free survival“ u mnohočetného myelomu. Transfuze Hematol dnes 2016;22(1):14–27.

11. Rajkumar SV, Dimopoulos MA, Palumbo A, et al. International Myeloma Working Group updated criteria for the diagnosis of multiple myeloma. Lancet Oncol 2014;15(12):e538–548.

12. Cavo M, Terpos E, Nanni C, et al. Role of (18)F-FDG PET/CT in the diagnosis and management of multiple myeloma and other plasma cell disorders: a konsensus statement by the International Myeloma Working Group. Lancet Oncol 2017;18(4):e206–e217.

13. 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(8):e328–e346.

14. Minařík J, Hrbek J, Mysliveček M, et al. Racionální algoritmus zobrazovacích vyšetření u mnohočetného myelomu v podmínkách České republiky. Transfuze Hematol dnes 2015;21(4):200–205.

15. 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.

16. Munshi NC, Avet-Loiseau H, Rawstron AC, et al. Association of minimal residual disease with superior survival outcomes in patients with multiple myeloma: a meta-analysis. JAMA Oncol 2017;3:28–35.

17. Shaughnessy JD Jr, Haessler J, van Rhee F, et al. Testing standard and genetic parameters in 220 patients with multiple myeloma with complete data sets: superiority of molecular genetics. Br J Haematol 2007;137(6):530–536.

18. Chng WJ, Dispenzieri A, Chim CS, et al. IMWG consensus on risk stratification in multiple myeloma. Leukemia 2014;28:269–277.

19. Sonneveld P, Avet-Loiseau H, Lonial S, et al. Treatment of multiple myeloma with high-risk cytogenetics: a consensus of the International Myeloma Working Group. Blood 2016;127:2955–2962.

20. Ross FM, Avet-Loiseau H, Ameye G, et al. European Myeloma Network. Report from the European Myeloma Network on interphase FISH in multiple myeloma and related disorders. Haematologica 2012;97(8):1272–1277.

21. 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.

22. Bladé J, Samson D, Reece D, et al. Criteria for evaluating disease response and progression in patients with multiple myeloma treated by high-dose therapy and haemopoietic stem cell transplantation. Myeloma Subcommittee of the EBMT. European Group for Blood and Marrow Transplant. Br J Haematol 1998;102(5):1115–1123.

23. Durie BG, Harousseau JL, Miguel JS, et al. International Myeloma Working Group. International uniform response criteria for multiple myeloma. Leukemia 2006;20(9):1467–1473.

24. 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.

25. Rajkumar SV. Harousseau J-L, Durie B, et al. Consensus recommendations for the uniform reporting of clinical trials: report of the International Myeloma Workshop Consensus Panel 1. Blood 2011;117:4691–4695.

26. Durie BGM, Salmon SE. A clinical staging system for multiple myeloma cell mass with presenting clinical features, response to treatment and survival. Cancer 1975;36:842–854.

27. Greipp PR, San Miguel JF, Durie BGM, et al. International staging system for multiple myeloma. J Clin Oncol 2005;23:3412–3420.

28. Palumbo A, Avet-Loiseau H, Oliva S, et al. Revised international staging system for multiple myeloma: a report from International Myeloma Working Group. J Clin Oncol 2015;33:2863–2869.

29. Sandecká V, Hájek R, Pour L, et al. Czech Myeloma Group. A first Czech analysis of 1887 cases with monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance. Eur J Haematol 2017; 99(1):80–90.

30. Hájek R, Pour L, Hose D, et al. The road to identification of patients with smoldering multiple myeloma at ultra-high risk of progression to symptomatic disease (manuskript v přípravě).

31. Hájek R, Delforge M, Raab MS, et al. A novel risk-stratification algorithm for relapsed multiple myeloma (RMM): Assessment of performance and validation using real-world patient data from France, Germany and the United Kingdom. (zasláno k tisku 2018).

32. Cohen AD. CAR T cells and other cellular therapies for multiple myeloma: 2018 update. Am Soc Clin Oncol Educ Book 2018;38:6–15.

33. Attal M, Lauwers-Cances V, Hulin C, et al. Study IFM. Lenalidomide, bortezomib, and dexamethasone with transplantation for myeloma. N Engl J Med 2017;376:1311–1320.

34. Barlogie B, Mitchell A, van Rhee F, Epstein J, et al. Curing myeloma at last: defining criteria and providing the evidence. Blood 2014;124(20):3043–3051.