4.6 Article

Evidence for Cytogenetic and Fluorescence In Situ Hybridization Risk Stratification of Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma in the Era of Novel Therapies

期刊

MAYO CLINIC PROCEEDINGS
卷 85, 期 6, 页码 532-537

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.4065/mcp.2009.0677

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD [CA107476, CA62242]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Overall survival (OS) has improved with increasing use of novel agents In multiple myeloma (MM). However, the disease course remains highly variable, and the heterogeneity largely reflects different genetic abnormalities. We studied the impact of the Mayo risk-stratification model of MM on patient outcome in the era of novel therapies, evaluating each individual component of the model-fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH), conventional cytogenetics (CG), and the plasma cell labeling index-that segregates patients into high- and standard-risk categories. This report consists of 290 patients with newly diagnosed MM, predominantly treated with novel agents, who were risk-stratified at diagnosis and were followed up for OS. Of these patients, 81% had received primarily thalidomide (n=50), lenalidomide (n=199), or bortezomib (n=79) as frontline or salvage therapies. Our retrospective analysis validates the currently proposed Mayo risk-stratification model (median OS, 37 months vs not reached for high- and standard-risk patients, respectively; P=.003). Although the FISH or CG test identifies a high-risk cohort with hazard ratios of 2.1 (P=.006) and 2.5 (P=.006), respectively, the plasma cell labeling index cutoff of 3% fails to independently prognosticate patient risk (hazard ratio, 1.4; P=.41). In those stratified as standard-risk by one of the 2 tests (FISH or CG), the other test appears to be of additional prognostic significance. This study validates the high-risk features defined by FISH and CG in the Mayo risk-stratification model for patients with MM predominantly treated with novel therapies based on immunomodulatory agents. Mayo Clin Proc. 2010;85(6):532-537

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据