| Literature DB >> 33623138 |
Alissa Visram1,2, Iuliana Vaxman1,3,4, Abdullah S Al Saleh1,5, Harsh Parmar6, Angela Dispenzieri1, Prashant Kapoor1, Martha Q Lacy1, Morie A Gertz1, Francis K Buadi1, Suzanne R Hayman1, David Dingli1, Rahma Warsame1, Taxiarchis Kourelis1, Mustaqeem Siddiqui1, Wilson Gonsalves1, Eli Muchtar1, John A Lust1, Nelson Leung7, Robert A Kyle1, David Murray8, S Vincent Rajkumar1, Shaji Kumar9.
Abstract
Unlike IgG monoclonal proteins (MCPs), IgA MCP quantification is unreliable due to beta-migration of IgA MCPs on serum protein electrophoresis (SPEP). The utility of nephelometric quantitative IgA (qIgA) to monitor IgA multiple myeloma (MM) is unclear. We retrospectively studied disease response kinetics using qIgA versus MCPs by SPEP, and developed and validated novel qIgA disease assessment criteria in 491 IgA MM patients. The SPEP MCP nadir occurred a median of 41 (IQR 0-102) days before the qIgA. The median time to achieve a partial response (PR) was shorter using standard IMWG versus qIgA response criteria (32 vs 58 days, p < 0.001). Stratification by qIgA criteria, unlike IMWG criteria, led to clear separation of the progression-free survival curves of patients achieving a PR or very good PR. There was a consistent trend toward earlier detection of disease progression using qIgA versus IMWG progression criteria. In conclusion, monitoring IgA MM using MCP-based IMWG criteria may be falsely reassuring, given that MCP levels on SPEP decrease faster than qIgA levels. The qIgA response criteria more accurately stratify patients based on the progression risk and may detect disease progression earlier, which may lead to more consistent measurement of trial endpoints and improved patient outcomes.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2021 PMID: 33623138 PMCID: PMC8102180 DOI: 10.1038/s41375-021-01180-x
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Leukemia ISSN: 0887-6924 Impact factor: 11.528
Baseline characteristics of IgA MM patients included in the testing (NDMM) and validation (RRMM-CT) cohorts.
| NDMM cohort | RRMM-CT cohort | |
|---|---|---|
| ( | ( | |
| Age at diagnosis | 64 (59–70) | 65 (58–71) |
| Gender | ||
| Male— | 179 (63) | 120 (59) |
| Female— | 107 (37) | 85 (41) |
| ISS at diagnosis, | ||
| 1 | 64 (23) | 46 (24) |
| 2 | 122 (43) | 103 (53) |
| 3 | 96 (34) | 45 (23) |
| R-ISS at diagnosis, | ||
| 1 | 41 (15) | 10 (11) |
| 2 | 180 (68) | 73 (78) |
| 3 | 44 (17) | 11 (12) |
| FISH, | ||
| Standard risk | 164 (70) | 61 (63) |
| High risk | 70 (30) | 36 (37) |
| First-line treatment, | ||
| ASCT | 148 (52) | 77 (104) |
| IMID + PI + steroid | 85 (30) | – |
| IMID + steroid | 75 (26) | – |
| PI + Alkylator + steroid | 75 (26) | – |
| PI + steroid | 21 (7) | – |
| IMID + Alkylator + steroid | 13 (5) | – |
| Steroid only | 9 (3) | – |
| Alkylator + steroid | 6 (2) | – |
| PI + Anthracycline + steroid | 2 (1) | – |
| Median quantitative qIgA prior to treatment, g/dL (IQR) | 3.1 (1.9–4.3) | 2.2 (1.2–3.3) |
| Median MCP prior to treatment, g/dL (IQR) | 3.3 (2.4–4.2) | 2.3 (1.3–3.2) |
| Measurablea MCP prior to treatment, | 251 (88) | 160 (84) |
| Beta-migrating MCP, | 122 (43) | 77 (38) |
aMeasurable serum monoclonal protein at diagnosis is defined at ≥1 g/dL.
Fig. 1The association between qIgA and MCP measured by SPEP in the combined NDMM and RRMM-CT cohorts.
A The median change in serial qIgA and MCP levels post treatment and prior to IMWG progression are shown, with error bars indicating the respective interquartile ranges. B The correlation of baseline MCP and qIgA levels collected simultaneously for the combined NDMM and RRMM-CT cohorts, the line of best fit and 95% confidence interval are shown in red. The qIgA correlated poorly with MCP when MCP was <1 g/dL (Pearson’s r = 0.189, 95% CI −0.033 to −0.394) or >6 g/dL (Pearson’s r = 0.4, 95% CI −0.165 to 0.768), however, the correlation improved when MCP was 1–6 g/dL (Pearson’s r = 0.857, 95% CI 0.829–0.882).
Response criteria based on quantitative IgA.
| Assessment | Definition |
|---|---|
| Complete response (CR) | qIgA less than the ULN and sIFE negative |
| Very good partial response (VGPR) | ≥90% decrease in qIgA level and sIFE positive, OR qIgA below the ULN and sIFE positive |
| Partial response (PR) | 50–89% decrease in qIgA level |
| Minimal response (MR) | 25–49% decrease in qIgA level |
| qIgA250 progression | >0.25 g/dL increase in qIgA compared to qIgA nadir, and a ≥25% increase in qIgA level compared to the qIgA nadir, and a positive serum immunofixation |
| qIgA500 progression | >0.5 g/dL increase in qIgA compared to qIgA nadir, and a ≥25% increase in qIgA level compared to the qIgA nadir, and a positive serum immunofixation |
ULN upper limit of normal (0.356 g/dL), sIFE serum immunofixation, qIgA quantitative IgA.
Fig. 2Response kinetics of the NDMM cohort within the first 4 cycles of induction therapy.
A Line plot showing the mean percent decrease in monoclonal protein (MCP) and quantitative IgA (qIgA) compared to baseline. Patients meeting criteria for progression were excluded. Standard error is indicated by the vertical bars. Box plots comparing the median time to B partial response, or C very good partial response applying both the qIgA and IMWG response criteria.
Fig. 3Progression free survival (PFS) stratified by IMWG and qIgA response criteria.
The PFS, stratified by the qIgA criteria, is shown for the newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) testing cohort (A) and relapsed refractory clinical trial (RRMM-CT) validation cohort (C). In contrast, the PFS stratified by IMWG response criteria is shown for the testing cohort (B) and validation cohort (D). CR complete response, VGPR very good partial response, PR partial response, MR minimal response.
Fig. 4The time to progression (TTP) using the IMWG progression criteria versus the qIgA progression criteria was compared.
The TTP was assessed by IMWG progression criteria versus the qIgA250 progression criteria (A), and qIgA500 progression criteria (B) in the newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) testing cohort. Similarly, the TTP was assessed using the IMWG progression criteria compared to the qIgA250 progression criteria (C) and qIgA500 progression criteria (D) in the relapsed refractory clinical trial (RRMM-CT) validation cohort.