Wei Wang1, Yinghua Xie2, Xiyao Han2, Yihan Liu2, Pei Li1. 1. Department of Hematology, 159397Huashan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, China. 2. Department of Hematology, Shanghai Fifth People's Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, China.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The present study aimed to detect A-kinase interacting protein 1 expression and further explore the association of A-kinase interacting protein 1 with clinical features and prognosis in patients with multiple myeloma. METHODS: Totally, 152 de novo symptomatic patients with multiple myeloma and 30 healthy donors were enrolled. Bone marrow mononuclear cells derived plasma cells were collected from patients with multiple myeloma before initial treatment and from healthy donors on the enrollment, respectively, and then A-kinase interacting protein 1 protein/messenger RNA expressions were detected by Western blot and reverse transcription quantitative polymerase chain reaction. Treatment response (complete response and overall response rate) was assessed, and survival profiles (progression-free survival and overall survival) were calculated in patients with multiple myeloma. RESULTS: A-kinase interacting protein 1 protein/messenger RNA expressions were elevated in patients with multiple myeloma compared to healthy donors, and A-kinase interacting protein 1 (area under the curve: 0.809, 95% confidence interval: 0.726-0.891)/messenger RNA (area under the curve: 0.839, 95% confidence interval: 0.764-0.914) presented good value in differentiating patients with multiple myeloma from healthy donors. In patients with multiple myeloma, A-kinase interacting protein 1 /messenger RNA expressions negatively correlated with albumin while positively correlated with Beta-2-microglobulin, lactate dehydrogenase, International Staging System stage, and t (4;14). Meanwhile, there were 39 (25.7%) complete response patients, 113 (74.3%) noncomplete response patients, 112 (73.7%) overall response rate patients, and 40 (26.3%) nonoverall response rate patients. Complete response and overall response rates were decreased in patients with high A-kinase interacting protein 1 compared to patients with low A-kinase interacting protein 1. Additionally, progression-free survival and overall survival were reduced in patients with high A-kinase interacting protein 1 compared to patients with low A-kinase interacting protein 1. CONCLUSION: A-kinase interacting protein 1 exhibits the potency as a biomarker for multiple myeloma progression and prognosis, which implies the clinical application of A-kinase interacting protein 1 in multiple myeloma management.
OBJECTIVE: The present study aimed to detect A-kinase interacting protein 1 expression and further explore the association of A-kinase interacting protein 1 with clinical features and prognosis in patients with multiple myeloma. METHODS: Totally, 152 de novo symptomatic patients with multiple myeloma and 30 healthy donors were enrolled. Bone marrow mononuclear cells derived plasma cells were collected from patients with multiple myeloma before initial treatment and from healthy donors on the enrollment, respectively, and then A-kinase interacting protein 1 protein/messenger RNA expressions were detected by Western blot and reverse transcription quantitative polymerase chain reaction. Treatment response (complete response and overall response rate) was assessed, and survival profiles (progression-free survival and overall survival) were calculated in patients with multiple myeloma. RESULTS:A-kinase interacting protein 1 protein/messenger RNA expressions were elevated in patients with multiple myeloma compared to healthy donors, and A-kinase interacting protein 1 (area under the curve: 0.809, 95% confidence interval: 0.726-0.891)/messenger RNA (area under the curve: 0.839, 95% confidence interval: 0.764-0.914) presented good value in differentiating patients with multiple myeloma from healthy donors. In patients with multiple myeloma, A-kinase interacting protein 1 /messenger RNA expressions negatively correlated with albumin while positively correlated with Beta-2-microglobulin, lactate dehydrogenase, International Staging System stage, and t (4;14). Meanwhile, there were 39 (25.7%) complete response patients, 113 (74.3%) noncomplete response patients, 112 (73.7%) overall response rate patients, and 40 (26.3%) nonoverall response rate patients. Complete response and overall response rates were decreased in patients with high A-kinase interacting protein 1 compared to patients with low A-kinase interacting protein 1. Additionally, progression-free survival and overall survival were reduced in patients with high A-kinase interacting protein 1 compared to patients with low A-kinase interacting protein 1. CONCLUSION:A-kinase interacting protein 1 exhibits the potency as a biomarker for multiple myeloma progression and prognosis, which implies the clinical application of A-kinase interacting protein 1 in multiple myeloma management.
Authors: Christian Gerecke; Stephan Fuhrmann; Susanne Strifler; Martin Schmidt-Hieber; Hermann Einsele; Stefan Knop Journal: Dtsch Arztebl Int Date: 2016-07-11 Impact factor: 5.594
Authors: Philip R Greipp; Jesus San Miguel; Brian G M Durie; John J Crowley; Bart Barlogie; Joan Bladé; Mario Boccadoro; J Anthony Child; Herve Avet-Loiseau; Jean-Luc Harousseau; Robert A Kyle; Juan J Lahuerta; Heinz Ludwig; Gareth Morgan; Raymond Powles; Kazuyuki Shimizu; Chaim Shustik; Pieter Sonneveld; Patrizia Tosi; Ingemar Turesson; Jan Westin Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2005-04-04 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Geoffrey M Matthews; Ricardo de Matos Simoes; Eugen Dhimolea; Michal Sheffer; Sara Gandolfi; Olga Dashevsky; Jeffrey D Sorrell; Constantine S Mitsiades Journal: Semin Cancer Biol Date: 2016-08-17 Impact factor: 15.707