Yongfeng Zhao1, Fuling Zhou2. 1. Department of Hematology, Zhongnan Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, 430071, China. 2. Department of Hematology, Zhongnan Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, 430071, China. zhoufuling@whu.edu.cn.
Abstract
PURPOSE: We aimed to compare the clinical characteristics, treatment efficacy and survival in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma with single- versus multi-site extramedullary invasion. METHODS: A total of 90 extramedullary multiple myeloma (EMM) patients were included. We compared the characteristics, overall remission rates (ORRs) and survival among patients with single-site and multi-site invasions. Comparison was also done regarding extramedullary-bone-related (EM-B) and extramedullary-extraosseous (EM-E) multiple myeloma patients. RESULTS: Patients with multi-site invasion had higher LDH (179.0 U/L) than single-site invasion (P = 0.016). Significantly higher LDH was also showed in patients with EM-E (189.4 U/L) than EM-B (P = 0.025). The ORR of patients with single-site invasion (72.1%) was not significantly higher than multi-site invasion (68.2%) (P = 0.690). But the ORR of patients with EM-B was significantly higher than EM-E (78.2 vs. 56.3%, P = 0.031). Among patients with single-site invasion, the multivariate survival analysis showed that PI plus IMiD regimen significantly improved the PFS (P < 0.05). Among patients with multi-site invasion or with EM-B, the multivariate survival analysis confirmed the associations of rISS III with poor PFS and OS (P < 0.05). Among patients with EM-E, plasma cell percentage ≥ 20% was associated with significantly poor PFS and OS (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: rISS stage III was possibly associated with poor survival of EMM patients with multi-site invasion or with EM-B. Plasma cell percentage ≥ 20% was associated with poor survival of EMM patients with EM-E. Comparison should not only be done between single- and multi-site invasions, but also between EM-B and EM-E.
PURPOSE: We aimed to compare the clinical characteristics, treatment efficacy and survival in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma with single- versus multi-site extramedullary invasion. METHODS: A total of 90 extramedullary multiple myeloma (EMM) patients were included. We compared the characteristics, overall remission rates (ORRs) and survival among patients with single-site and multi-site invasions. Comparison was also done regarding extramedullary-bone-related (EM-B) and extramedullary-extraosseous (EM-E) multiple myeloma patients. RESULTS: Patients with multi-site invasion had higher LDH (179.0 U/L) than single-site invasion (P = 0.016). Significantly higher LDH was also showed in patients with EM-E (189.4 U/L) than EM-B (P = 0.025). The ORR of patients with single-site invasion (72.1%) was not significantly higher than multi-site invasion (68.2%) (P = 0.690). But the ORR of patients with EM-B was significantly higher than EM-E (78.2 vs. 56.3%, P = 0.031). Among patients with single-site invasion, the multivariate survival analysis showed that PI plus IMiD regimen significantly improved the PFS (P < 0.05). Among patients with multi-site invasion or with EM-B, the multivariate survival analysis confirmed the associations of rISS III with poor PFS and OS (P < 0.05). Among patients with EM-E, plasma cell percentage ≥ 20% was associated with significantly poor PFS and OS (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: rISS stage III was possibly associated with poor survival of EMM patients with multi-site invasion or with EM-B. Plasma cell percentage ≥ 20% was associated with poor survival of EMM patients with EM-E. Comparison should not only be done between single- and multi-site invasions, but also between EM-B and EM-E.
Authors: Kevin D Boyd; Fiona M Ross; Laura Chiecchio; GianPaolo Dagrada; Zoe J Konn; William J Tapper; Brian A Walker; Christopher P Wardell; Walter M Gregory; Alex J Szubert; Faith E Davies; Gareth J Morgan Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2011-06-15 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: Ronald Boellaard; Roberto Delgado-Bolton; Wim J G Oyen; Francesco Giammarile; Klaus Tatsch; Wolfgang Eschner; Fred J Verzijlbergen; Sally F Barrington; Lucy C Pike; Wolfgang A Weber; Sigrid Stroobants; Dominique Delbeke; Kevin J Donohoe; Scott Holbrook; Michael M Graham; Giorgio Testanera; Otto S Hoekstra; Josee Zijlstra; Eric Visser; Corneline J Hoekstra; Jan Pruim; Antoon Willemsen; Bertjan Arends; Jörg Kotzerke; Andreas Bockisch; Thomas Beyer; Arturo Chiti; Bernd J Krause Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2014-12-02 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Nico Gagelmann; Diderik-Jan Eikema; Simona Iacobelli; Linda Koster; Hareth Nahi; Anne-Marie Stoppa; Tamás Masszi; Denis Caillot; Stig Lenhoff; Miklos Udvardy; Charles Crawley; William Arcese; Clara Mariette; Ann Hunter; Xavier Leleu; Martin Schipperus; Michel Delforge; Pietro Pioltelli; John A Snowden; Maija Itälä-Remes; Maurizio Musso; Anja van Biezen; Laurent Garderet; Nicolaus Kröger Journal: Haematologica Date: 2018-02-01 Impact factor: 9.941