| Literature DB >> 28860954 |
Khishigjargal Batsukh1, Sung-Eun Lee2, Gi June Min2, Sung Soo Park2, Young-Woo Jeon2, Jae-Ho Yoon2, Byung-Sik Cho2,3, Ki-Seong Eom2,3, Yoo-Jin Kim2,3, Hee-Je Kim2,3, Seok Lee2,3, Seok-Goo Cho2, Dong-Wook Kim2,3, Jong Wook Lee2, Woo-Sung Min2, Chang-Ki Min2,3.
Abstract
This retrospective study aimed to compare the clinical features of paramedullary lesions (PLs) and extramedullary lesions (ELs) of plasmacytomas at diagnosis, using positron emission tomography integrated with computed tomography, using glucose labeled with the positron-emitting radionuclide 18F (18F-FDG-PET/CT) in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM), and to address their prognostic impact. Sixty-four patients with NDMM presenting ELs (n=22) and/or PLs (n=42) were included. Patients with ELs at initial presentation had unfavorable laboratory parameters of calcium and lactate dehydrogenase, a higher percentage of bone marrow plasma cells, and showed a trend toward advanced international staging system (ISS), compared to patients with PLs. Using X-ray imaging, high bone disease (HBD) was observed in 50% and 71% of patients with ELs and PLs, respectively. After a median follow-up of 29.2 months (range, 3.4-76.5 months) in survivors, patients with ELs had a significantly lower overall survival (OS) (p=0.033) than patients with PLs did, whereas the progression-free survival (PFS) did not differ significantly (p=0.818). However, the PFS after 1st progression was significantly worse in patients with ELs than in those with PLs (p=0.017). In the multivariate analyses, the negative impact of initial ELs on OS (p=0.033) was sustained. Our results demonstrated the different clinical features and outcomes of ELs and PLs in NDMM. Patients with initial ELs showed a shorter PFS after 1st progression, which translated into poor OS, providing insight into the different biological effect of ELs.Entities:
Keywords: 18F-FDG-PET/CT; Multiple myeloma; Plasmacytomas
Year: 2017 PMID: 28860954 PMCID: PMC5577302 DOI: 10.4110/in.2017.17.4.250
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Immune Netw ISSN: 1598-2629 Impact factor: 6.303
Baseline characteristics of patients
| Characteristics | Total (n=64) | ELs (n=22) | PLs (n=42) | p-value | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age | 59.4±11.1 | 60.1±10.3 | 59.0±11.6 | 0.705 | |
| Sex (M/F) | 42 (65.0)/22 (34.4) | 13 (59.1)/9 (40.9) | 29 (69.0)/13 (31.0) | 0.603 | |
| Serum M-protein | 0.699 | ||||
| IgG, kappa | 12 (18.8) | 4 (18.2) | 8 (19.0) | ||
| IgG, lambda | 16 (25.0) | 6 (27.3) | 10 (23.8) | ||
| IgA, kappa | 10 (15.6) | 3 (13.6) | 7 (16.7) | ||
| IgA, lambda | 4 (6.2) | 2 (9.1) | 2 (4.8) | ||
| Light chain, kappa | 9 (14.1) | 1 (4.5) | 8 (19.0) | ||
| Light chain, lambda | 10 (15.6) | 5 (22.7) | 5 (11.9) | ||
| Others | 3 (4.7) | 1 (4.5) | 2 (4.8) | ||
| Durie-Salmon stage | 1.000 | ||||
| I–II | 9 (14.0) | 3 (13.6) | 6 (14.3) | ||
| III | 55 (85.9) | 19 (86.4) | 36 (85.7) | ||
| ISS stage | 0.065 | ||||
| I–II | 42 (72.4) | 11 (55.0) | 31 (81.6) | ||
| III | 16 (27.6) | 9 (45.0) | 7 (18.4) | ||
| Previous ASCT | 0.551 | ||||
| No | 36 (56.2) | 14 (63.6) | 22 (52.4) | ||
| Yes | 28 (43.8) | 8 (36.4) | 20 (47.6) | ||
| Hb at diagnosis (g/dL) | 10.9±2.9 | 10.6±3.1 | 11.1±2.8 | 0.490 | |
| Albumin at diagnosis (g/dL) | 3.6±0.8 | 3.7±0.7 | 3.5±0.8 | 0.459 | |
| Protein at diagnosis (g/dL) | 8.2±1.9 | 8.0±2.2 | 8.3±1.7 | 0.518 | |
| Ca at diagnosis (g/dL) | 9.3±1.2 | 9.6±1.2 | 9.1±1.1 | 0.069 | |
| Cr at diagnosis (mg/dL) | 1.3±1.2 | 1.5±1.7 | 1.2±0.8 | 0.352 | |
| β2-micro at diagnosis (mg/dL) | 4.7±4.4 | 5.8±4.9 | 4.2±4.0 | 0.201 | |
| LDH at diagnosis (U/L) | 471.9±409.3 | 643.6±645.6 | 382.0±140.7 | 0.074 | |
| BMPCs at diagnosis (%) | 39.1±25.0 | 48.5±31.0 | 34.2±19.9 | 0.058 | |
| Cytogenetics* | 0.369 | ||||
| High | 19 (47.5) | 9 (60.0) | 10 (40.0) | ||
| Standard (NA=24) | 21 (52.5) | 6 (40.0) | 15 (60.0) | ||
F, female; M, male; Hb, hemoglobin; Ca, calcium; Cr, creatinine; NA, not available.
*High-risk cytogenetics is defined as hypodiploidy or deletion 13 on conventional cytogenetics or presence of t(4;14), t(14;16), and 17p- on fluorescent in situ hybridization and/or conventional cytogenetics. All other cytogenetic abnormalities were considered standard risk.
Involvement sites and number of ELs and PLs at diagnosis by PET/CT
| In patients with PLs | In patients with ELs | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Involvement sites | n=42 | Involvement sites | n=22 | ||
| Vertebrae | 24 (57) | Pleura | 3 (14) | ||
| Ribs | 20 (48) | Lung/mediastinum | 2 (9) | ||
| Sternum | 1 (2) | Heart | 1 (5) | ||
| Clavicle | 1 (2) | Porta hepatis | 1 (5) | ||
| Skull | 5 (12) | Gallbladder | 1 (5) | ||
| Humerus | 5 (12) | Lymph node | 1 (5) | ||
| Femur | 4 (9) | Muscle | 13 (59) | ||
| Pelvis | 7 (17) | Pancreas | 1 (5) | ||
| Others | 1 (2) | ||||
| No. of involvement | No. of involvement | ||||
| Single | 14 (33) | Single | 15 (68) | ||
| Multiple (2–3) | 16 (38) | Multiple (2–3) | 2 (9) | ||
| Multiple (>3) | 12 (29) | Multiple (>3) | 5 (23) | ||
Figure 1Comparison of osteolytic lesions, visualized by X-ray imaging, between patients with ELs and PLs detected by PET/CT.
Figure 2Kaplan-Meier estimates of outcome after diagnosis and after 1st progression, according to the presence of ELs vs. PLs at diagnosis. Probabilities of OS (A), PFS (B), and PFS after 1st progression (C).
Univariate analysis of risk factors affecting survival outcome
| Variables | PFS | OS | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| RR (95% CI) | p-value | RR (95% CI) | p-value | |
| Age at diagnosis (continuous) | 1.01 (0.98–1.04) | 0.461 | 0.99 (0.96–1.03) | 0.769 |
| Sex (M vs. F) | 0.79 (0.43–1.45) | 0.455 | 1.64 (0.65–4.14) | 0.294 |
| LCD (others vs. LCD) | 1.00 (0.53–1.89) | 0.991 | 1.07 (0.44–2.58) | 0.879 |
| Durie-Samon stage (III vs. I–II) | 0.94 (0.39–2.24) | 0.886 | 0.75 (0.26–2.21) | 0.605 |
| ISS stage (III vs. I–II) | 1.30 (0.65–2.59) | 0.455 | 1.42 (0.54–3.73) | 0.481 |
| Previous ASCT (yes vs. no) | 0.34 (0.18–0.63) | 0.001 | 0.35 (0.15–0.82) | 0.016 |
| Hb at diagnosis (g/dL) (<10 vs. ≥10) | 0.64 (0.35–1.18) | 0.512 | 0.65 (0.29–1.47) | 0.298 |
| Alb at diagnosis (g/dL) (<3.5 vs. ≥3.5) | 0.57 (0.31–1.04) | 0.067 | 0.59 (0.26–1.34) | 0.209 |
| Protein at diagnosis (g/dL) (<8.3 vs. ≥8.3) | 0.84 (0.46–1.54) | 0.580 | 0.96 (0.43–2.14) | 0.918 |
| Ca at diagnosis (mg/dL) (<10 vs. ≥10) | 2.30 (1.00–5.29) | 0.051 | 2.10 (0.71–6.26) | 0.182 |
| Cr at diagnosis (mg/dL) (<2 vs. ≥2) | 0.86 (0.26–2.81) | 0.807 | 1.19 (0.28–5.10) | 0.811 |
| β2-micro at diagnosis (mg/dL) (<5.5 vs. ≥5.5) | 1.54 (0.81–2.93) | 0.185 | 2.31 (0.94–5.82) | 0.067 |
| LDH at diagnosis (U/L) (<450 vs. ≥450) | 2.76 (1.48–5.14) | 0.001 | 2.71 (1.16–6.33) | 0.021 |
| BMPC at diagnosis (%) (continuous) | 1.01 (0.99–1.02) | 0.414 | 1.01 (1.00–1.03) | 0.130 |
| PLs vs. ELs | 0.80 (0.43–1.49) | 0.484 | 0.42 (0.19–0.95) | 0.038 |
| Cytogenetics (standard risk vs. high risk) | 0.64 (0.29–1.39) | 0.256 | 0.63 (0.22–1.78) | 0.379 |
F, female; M, male; LCD, light chain disease; Hb, hemoglobin; Alb, albumin; Ca, calcium; Cr, creatinine.
Multivariate analysis of risk factors affecting survival outcome
| Variables | RR (95% CI) | p-value | |
|---|---|---|---|
| PFS | |||
| Previous ASCT (yes vs. no) | 0.41 (0.22–0.78) | 0.007 | |
| Ca at diagnosis (mg/dL) (<10 vs. ≥10) | 1.86 (0.80–4.33) | 0.151 | |
| LDH at diagnosis (U/L) (<450 vs. ≥450) | 2.17 (0.15–4.10) | 0.018 | |
| OS | |||
| Previous ASCT (yes vs. no) | 0.38 (0.14–1.03) | 0.058 | |
| β2-micro at diagnosis (mg/dL) (<5.5 vs. ≥5.5) | 2.20 (0.85–5.71) | 0.107 | |
| PLs vs. ELs | 2.79 (1.08–7.18) | 0.033 | |
Ca, calcium.
Figure 3Comparison of immune cell populations between patients with newly diagnosed MM without EMPs (control group) and with EMPs (ELs+PLs). Frequencies of M-MDSCs (A), G-MDSCs (B), CD4+ T cells (C), and CD8+ T cells (D) were compared. Data (right panel) are presented as the mean±SEM, and t-tests were used to compare the continuous variables.
SEM, standard error of the mean.