4.6 Article

Ten-year survivors in AL amyloidosis: characteristics and treatment pattern

Journal

BRITISH JOURNAL OF HAEMATOLOGY
Volume 187, Issue 5, Pages 588-594

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/bjh.16096

Keywords

prognosis; treatment; response; trend; outcome; mortality

Categories

Funding

  1. Jabbs Foundation (Birmingham, United Kingdom)
  2. Henry J. Predolin Foundation (USA)
  3. National Institutes of Health National Cancer Institute [P50 CA186781]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Improvement in survival in Light chain (AL) amyloidosis has been seen over recent decades, enabling more patients to achieve long-term survival. Patients with AL amyloidosis who survived >= 10 years from time of diagnosis (n = 186) were the subject of this study. Ten-year survivors represented 22% of the total population. These patients were characterized by favourable patient, organ and plasma cell features. Of note, trisomies were less common among 10-year survivors compared to those who did not survive to 10 years. All-time best haematological response was complete response in 67%, very good partial response in 30%, partial response in 2% and no response in 1%, with 11% having received a consolidative strategy for inadequate response to first line therapy. The overall organ response rate to first-line therapy was 76%, which increased to 86% when considering subsequent line(s) of therapy. Forty-seven percent of the 10-year survivors did not require a second-line therapy. The median treatment-free survival (TFS) among the 10-year survivors was 10 center dot 5 years (interquartile range 7 center dot 4-12 center dot 2). On multivariate analysis independent predictors for TFS were the achievement of complete haematological response and lack of cardiac involvement. Long-term survivors are increasingly seen in AL amyloidosis and present distinct patient, organ and clonal disease features.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available