| Literature DB >> 31819538 |
Yanxia Jin1,2, Yufeng Shang1, Hailing Liu3, Lu Ding1, Xiqin Tong1, Honglei Tu1, Guolin Yuan4, Fuling Zhou1,5.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Multiple myeloma (MM) patients with bone destruction are difficult to restore, so it is of great clinical significance to further explore the factors affecting MM bone destruction. METHODS ANDEntities:
Keywords: bone destruction; multiple myeloma; prediction index; prognosis
Year: 2019 PMID: 31819538 PMCID: PMC6899072 DOI: 10.2147/OTT.S229122
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Onco Targets Ther ISSN: 1178-6930 Impact factor: 4.147
Baseline Characteristics in 419 Cases of MM Patients
| Parameters | Without Bone Destruction (131) | With Bone Destruction (288) | χ2 | p Value |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age | 8.604 | 0.003 | ||
| ≤70 years | 58 (43–69) | 59 (31–70) | ||
| >70 years | 75 (71–85) | 74 (71–86) | ||
| Sex | 3.671 | 0.055 | ||
| Female | 64 (48.9%) | 112 (38.9%) | ||
| Male | 67 (51.1%) | 176 (61.1%) | ||
| ISS stage | 5.056 | 0.080 | ||
| I | 20 (15.3%) | 34 (11.8%) | ||
| II | 37 (28.2%) | 59 (20.5%) | ||
| III | 67 (51.1%) | 179 (62.2%) | ||
| IMWG risk stratification | 2.846 | 0.241 | ||
| Low | 3 (2.3%) | 1 (0.3%) | ||
| Moderate | 31 (23.7%) | 59 (20.5%) | ||
| High | 21 (16.0%) | 41 (14.2%) | ||
| M-protein isotype | 1.167 | 0.558 | ||
| IgG | 59 (45.0%) | 131 (45.5%) | 0.039 | 0.843 |
| IgA | 28 (21.4%) | 68 (23.6%) | 0.327 | 0.567 |
| Light chain only | 36 (27.5%) | 64 (22.2%) | 1.317 | 0.251 |
| LC isotype | 3.375 | 0.155 | ||
| Kappa | 40 (30.5%) | 60 (20.8%) | 4.727 | 0.030 |
| Lambda | 41 (31.3%) | 95 (33.0%) | 0.138 | 0.711 |
| Non-secretory | 5 (3.8%) | 17 (5.9%) | 0.807 | 0.369 |
| FISH abnormalities | ||||
| 13q deletion (RB1) | 21 (16.0%) | 51 (17.7%) | 2.216 | 0.137 |
| 13q34 deletion (D13S319) | 18 (13.7%) | 51 (17.7%) | 4.583 | 0.032 |
| 17p deletion (p53) | 15 (11.5%) | 25 (8.7%) | 0.102 | 0.749 |
| 1q amplification (1q21) | 24 (18.3%) | 51 (17.7%) | 0.711 | 0.399 |
| IGH translocation | 38 (29.0%) | 74 (25.7%) | 0.251 | 0.616 |
Abbreviations: ISS, International staging system; LC, light chain; IGH, immunoglobulin heavy chain gene; MM, multiple myeloma; IMWG, international myeloma working group. FISH, fluorescence in-situ hybridization.
Figure 1Survival curves of MM patients with bone destruction and without bone destruction.
Figure 2Comparison of factors between 419 MM patients without bone destruction and with bone destruction. The two independent samples parametric t-tests were applied to compare the mean of variables between patients without bone destruction and with bone destruction. (A) Plasma cell ratio and positive rate of immune-phenotype; (B) concentration of immunoglobulin and light chain; (C) blood routine; (D) concentration of biochemical factors; (E) hepatorenal function; (F) concentration of electrolyte. *p < 0 05.
Abbreviations: Ig, immunoglobulin; LAM, lambda; KAP, kappa; ALB, albumin; GLB, globulin; WBC, white blood cell; PLT, platelet; HGB, hemoglobin; ESR, erythrocyte sedimentation rate. ALP, alkaline phosphatase; LDH, lactate dehydrogenase; β2-MG, β2-microglobulin; CREA, creatinine; UA, uric acid; BUN, blood urea nitrogen; TBA, total bile acid.
Factors Associated with Bone Destruction in MM by Univariate and Multivariate Analysis
| Factors | Univariate | Multivariate | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| r | p Value | B | p Value | |
| Ca2+ | 0.126 | 0.011 | ||
| ISS stage | 0.099 | 0.049 | ||
| 13q34 deletion | 0.169 | 0.032 | 0.334 | 0.019 |
| Positive rate of CD138 immuno-phenotype | 0.358 | 0.011 | 0.350 | 0.014 |
| TBA | −0.157 | 0.006 | ||
| Kappa chain isotope | −0.111 | 0.030 | ||
Notes: Univariate analysis was estimated using bivariate correlation analysis by Pearson test (r). The multivariate analysis was determined by a linear regression model with forward stepwise. The variables were categorized as age (70 years), Ca (2.75 mmol/l).
Abbreviation: B, standardized coefficient.
Predictors of Overall Survival in MM for the Current Cohort
| Variables | OR (95% CI) | p Value |
|---|---|---|
| Age | 2.453 (1.29–4.67) | 0.024 |
| Ca | 3.151 (1.32–7.54) | 0.001 |
| β2-MG | 3.96 (1.54–10.19) | 0.001 |
| HGB | 0.48 (0.23–0.97) | 0.009 |
| CREA | 4.51 (2.32–8.74) | <0.001 |
| UA | 2.80 (1.25–6.31) | 0.002 |
Notes: Kaplan–Meier and chi-square analysis with Pearson test to evaluate the odds ratios (OR) and 95% CI.
Abbreviation: β2-MG, serum β2 microglobulin.
Cox Analysis of the Hazard Ratios in MM for the Current Cohort
| Variables | B | P | HR | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| β2-MG | 1.173 | 0.020 | 3.231 | 1.204–8.672 |
| CREA | 0.947 | 0.046 | 2.578 | 1.019–6.522 |
Notes: Multivariate analysis by Cox proportional hazards regression model to estimate the hazard ratios (HR) and 95% CI.
Abbreviation: B, regression coefficient.
Figure 3Survival curves of variates in myeloma bone destruction patients. Overall survival was analyzed by Kaplan–Meier method with the two-sided log-rank test to evaluate the overall survival. The variables were categorized as (A) age (70 years), (B) Ca2+ (2.75 mmol/l), (C) CREA (177 μmol/l), (D) UA (420 μmol/l), (E) HGB (100 g/l), (F) serum β2-MG (3.5 mg/l). Months were calculated from diagnosis time to July in 2016. The time of diagnosis was defined as the day of the initial bone marrow biopsy.
Figure 4ROC curve analysis of the performance of index and survival analysis for bone destruction in MM patients. ROC analysis of the diagnostic performance (A) and prediction the survival of each index (B), (C) analysis of the overall survival by the Kaplan–Meier method. ROC, receiver operator characteristic.
Predictive Value of Index (β2-MG, GLB and WBC) in Bone Destruction of MM Patients
| Factors | AUC | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Diagnosis performance of each variate for bone destruction | |||
| β2-MG | 0.424 | ||
| GLB | 0.458 | ||
| WBC | 0.518 | ||
| β2-MG×GLB/WBC | 0.631 | ||
| Prediction of survival of each variate for bone destruction | |||
| β2-MG | 0.724 | ||
| GLB | 0.572 | ||
| WBC | 0.528 | ||
| Combination | 0.755 | ||
| Cox analysis the index for risk evaluation | |||
| Combination of β2-MG, GLB and WBC | B=3.738 | p<0.001 | HR: 42.002 with 95% CI (10.559–167.082) |
Abbreviations: AUC, area under curve; B, regression coefficient; HR, hazard ratios.