Literature DB >> 15767267

Utility of testing for monoclonal bands in serum of patients with suspected osteoporosis: retrospective, cross sectional study.

Bo Abrahamsen1, Ivan Andersen, Susanne S Christensen, Jonna Skov Madsen, Kim Brixen.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether measuring monoclonal bands (M component) in serum should be part of the investigation of patients referred to osteoporosis clinics.
DESIGN: Retrospective, cross sectional, observational study.
SETTING: Referral centre for osteoporosis in a university hospital, Denmark. PARTICIPANTS: 799 people (685 women) aged 19 to 94 years newly referred with suspected osteoporosis. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Proportion of patients fulfilling the Nordic Myeloma Study Group definition for target condition and proportion of patients with other important haematological conditions.
RESULTS: 4.9% (18 of 366) of patients with osteoporosis and 2.2% (9 of 408) of patients without osteoporosis had M component in serum (chi2 = 3.66, P = 0.04). Multiple myeloma was diagnosed in three patients with osteoporosis (absolute risk 0.8%, 95% confidence interval 0.11% to 1.7%). The relative risk of multiple myeloma in patients presenting with osteoporosis was 75 (10 to 160). As a diagnostic test for multiple myeloma in patients with osteoporosis, M component in serum had a specificity of 95.0% and a positive predictive value of 17.6%. 122 blood electrophoreses were carried out for each case of multiple myeloma diagnosed. All patients with multiple myeloma had a history of fragility fractures. If lymphoma was included as a target condition, the specificity increased to 95.3% and the positive predictive value increased to 23.5%. Monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance was diagnosed in 13 (3.6%) participants with osteoporosis and in eight (2.0%) participants with normal bone mineral density or osteopenia.
CONCLUSIONS: Patients presenting with osteoporosis should be tested for M component in serum, as 1 in 20 patients with newly diagnosed osteoporosis had multiple myeloma or monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15767267      PMCID: PMC556071          DOI: 10.1136/bmj.38376.401701.8F

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  BMJ        ISSN: 0959-8138


  16 in total

1.  Lifetime risks of hip, Colles', or vertebral fracture and coronary heart disease among white postmenopausal women.

Authors:  S R Cummings; D M Black; S M Rubin
Journal:  Arch Intern Med       Date:  1989-11

2.  Assessment of fracture risk and its application to screening for postmenopausal osteoporosis: synopsis of a WHO report. WHO Study Group.

Authors:  J A Kanis
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  1994-11       Impact factor: 4.507

3.  Assessment of bone involvement in patients with multiple myeloma using bone densitometry.

Authors:  N Abildgaard; K Brixen; J E Kristensen; T Vejlgaard; P Charles; J L Nielsen
Journal:  Eur J Haematol       Date:  1996-11       Impact factor: 2.997

4.  Tolerability of the cytoprotective agent amifostine in elderly patients receiving chemotherapy: a comparative study.

Authors:  I Genvresse; C Lange; J Schanz; M Schweigert; H Harder; K Possinger; E Späth-Schwalbe
Journal:  Anticancer Drugs       Date:  2001-04       Impact factor: 2.248

5.  Expert physician recommendations and current practice patterns for evaluating and treating men with osteoporotic hip fracture.

Authors:  C Colón-Emeric; L Yballe; R Sloane; C F Pieper; K W Lyles
Journal:  J Am Geriatr Soc       Date:  2000-10       Impact factor: 5.562

6.  Comparison of melphalan and prednisone with vincristine, carmustine, melphalan, cyclophosphamide, and prednisone in the treatment of multiple myeloma: results of Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Study E2479.

Authors:  M M Oken; D P Harrington; N Abramson; R A Kyle; W Knospe; J H Glick
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  1997-04-15       Impact factor: 6.860

7.  Interest of a prescreening questionnaire to reduce the cost of bone densitometry.

Authors:  W Ben Sedrine; P Broers; J P Devogelaer; G Depresseux; J M Kaufman; S Goemaere; J Y Reginster
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2002-05       Impact factor: 4.507

8.  Evaluation of bone mineral density and fat-lean distribution in patients with multiple myeloma in sustained remission.

Authors:  S Roux; C Bergot; J P Fermand; J Frija; J C Brouet; X Mariette
Journal:  J Bone Miner Res       Date:  2003-02       Impact factor: 6.741

9.  Review of 1027 patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma.

Authors:  Robert A Kyle; Morie A Gertz; Thomas E Witzig; John A Lust; Martha Q Lacy; Angela Dispenzieri; Rafael Fonseca; S Vincent Rajkumar; Janice R Offord; Dirk R Larson; Matthew E Plevak; Terry M Therneau; Philip R Greipp
Journal:  Mayo Clin Proc       Date:  2003-01       Impact factor: 7.616

10.  Prevalence of osteoporosis in women referred for bone density testing: utility of multiple skeletal sites.

Authors:  D A Nelson; R Molloy; M Kleerekoper
Journal:  J Clin Densitom       Date:  1998       Impact factor: 2.963

View more
  10 in total

Review 1.  The clinical relevance and management of monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance and related disorders: recommendations from the European Myeloma Network.

Authors:  Niels W C J van de Donk; Antonio Palumbo; Hans Erik Johnsen; Monika Engelhardt; Francesca Gay; Henrik Gregersen; Roman Hajek; Martina Kleber; Heinz Ludwig; Gareth Morgan; Pellegrino Musto; Torben Plesner; Orhan Sezer; Evangelos Terpos; Anders Waage; Sonja Zweegman; Hermann Einsele; Pieter Sonneveld; Henk M Lokhorst
Journal:  Haematologica       Date:  2014-03-21       Impact factor: 9.941

Review 2.  unveiling skeletal fragility in patients diagnosed with MGUS: no longer a condition of undetermined significance?

Authors:  Matthew T Drake
Journal:  J Bone Miner Res       Date:  2014-12       Impact factor: 6.741

3.  Bone disease in monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance: results from a screened population-based study.

Authors:  Sigrun Thorsteinsdottir; Sigrun H Lund; Ebba K Lindqvist; Marianna Thordardottir; Gunnar Sigurdsson; Rene Costello; Debra Burton; Hlif Steingrimsdottir; Vilmundur Gudnason; Gudny Eiriksdottir; Kristin Siggeirsdottir; Tamara B Harris; Ola Landgren; Sigurdur Y Kristinsson
Journal:  Blood Adv       Date:  2017-12-21

Review 4.  Monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance and bone health outcomes: a systematic review and exploratory meta-analysis.

Authors:  Nicola Veronese; Claudio Luchini; Marco Solmi; Giuseppe Sergi; Enzo Manzato; Brendon Stubbs
Journal:  J Bone Miner Metab       Date:  2017-02-27       Impact factor: 2.626

5.  Monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance and risk of skeletal fractures: a population-based study.

Authors:  Sigurdur Y Kristinsson; Min Tang; Ruth M Pfeiffer; Magnus Björkholm; Cecilie Blimark; Ulf-Henrik Mellqvist; Anders Wahlin; Ingemar Turesson; Ola Landgren
Journal:  Blood       Date:  2010-07-07       Impact factor: 22.113

6.  Osteoporosis, inflammation and ageing.

Authors:  Lia Ginaldi; Maria Cristina Di Benedetto; Massimo De Martinis
Journal:  Immun Ageing       Date:  2005-11-04       Impact factor: 6.400

7.  Malignant myeloma in a patient after treatment for osteoporosis with teriparatide; a rare coincidence.

Authors:  Terje Forslund; Anna-Mari Koski; Arvo Koistinen; Anu Sikiö
Journal:  Clin Med Case Rep       Date:  2008-08-29

Review 8.  Diagnosis and treatment of bone disease in multiple myeloma: spotlight on spinal involvement.

Authors:  Patrizia Tosi
Journal:  Scientifica (Cairo)       Date:  2013-12-08

Review 9.  Bone Disease in Multiple Myeloma: Biologic and Clinical Implications.

Authors:  Zachary S Bernstein; E Bridget Kim; Noopur Raje
Journal:  Cells       Date:  2022-07-27       Impact factor: 7.666

Review 10.  Monoclonal Gammopathy of Undetermined Significance (MGUS)-Not So Asymptomatic after All.

Authors:  Oliver C Lomas; Tarek H Mouhieddine; Sabrin Tahri; Irene M Ghobrial
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2020-06-12       Impact factor: 6.639

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.