FACTORS AFFECTING OUTCOME OF PATIENTS WITH MULTIPLE MYELOMA

Authors

  • Abdul Basit
  • Neelam Siddiqui
  • Abdul Hameed
  • Narjis Muzaffar
  • Sohail Athar

Abstract

Background: Multiple myeloma is a heterogeneous disease, with wide survival range and multiple risk factors and staging systems linked to survival. The objective of this study was to assess the overall survival of patients with multiple myeloma (MM) diagnosed and treated at Shaukat Khanum Memorial Cancer Hospital (SKMCH), Lahore with respect to various prognostic factors. Methods: This was a survival analysis with data collected retrospectively on 82 patients fulfilling the diagnostic criteria of multiple myeloma. Overall survival was studied in relation to International Staging System (ISS), renal failure (Serum creatinine >2 mg/dl), anaemia (Hemoglobin <10 mg/dl), bone involvement (presence of lytic lesion on skeletal survey) and hypercalcemia (serum calcium >11mg/dl) due to multiple myeloma at the time of diagnosis. Results: Mean age of patients was 61 years, including 67% males and 33% females. Median overall survival for ISS stage-I (24%), stage-II (44%) and stage-III (32%) was 58, 41 and 12 months respectively (p=0.01). Patients with renal impairment (16% of total) had median overall survival of 13 months compared to 41 months in patients without renal involvement (p=0.02). Hypercalcemia was noted in 27% patients with median overall survival of 32 months versus 38 months in patients without hypercalcemia, but its impact on survival was statistically insignificant (p=0.79). Similarly no significant impact on survival was noted in patients with bone involvement or anaemia found in 74 % and 38% of patient’s respectively. Conclusions: ISS stage and renal failure due to multiple myeloma at presentation have a significant impact on survival. However, other prognostic factors like bone involvement, anaemia and hypercalcemia were not shown to influence survival significantly.Keywords: Multiplemyeloma, survival, anaemia, hypercalcemia

References

Campo E, Swerdlow SH, Harris NL, Pileri S, Stein H, Jaffe ES. The 2008 WHO classification of lymphoid neoplasms and beyond: evolving concepts and practical applications. Blood 2011;117(19):5019–32.

Matsui W, Wang Q, Barber JP,Brennan S,Smith BD, Borrello I,et al. Clonogenic multiple myeloma progenitors, stem cell properties, and drug resistance. Cancer Res 2008;68(1):190–7.

Landgren O, Kyle RA, Pfeiffer RM, Katzmann JA, Caporaso NE, Hayes RB,et al. Monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance (MGUS) consistently precedes multiple myeloma: a prospective study. Blood 2009;113(22):5412–7.

Kyle RA, Therneau TM, Rajkumar SV, Offord JR, Larson DR, Plevak MF,et al. A long-term study of prognosis in monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance. N Engl J Med 2002;346(8):564–9.

Jemal A, Siegal R, Ward E, Murray T, Xu J, Thun MJ. Cancer statistics. CA Cancer J Clin 2007;57(1):43–66.

Kyle RA, Gertz MA, Witzig TE, Lust JA, Lacy MQ, Dispenzieri A, et al. Review of 1027 patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. Mayo ClinProc 2003;78(1):21–33.

Russell SJ, Rajkumar SV. Multiple myeloma and the road to personalised medicine. Lancet Oncol 2011;12(7):617–9.

Durie BG, Salmon SE. A clinical staging system for multiple myeloma. Correlation of measured myeloma cell mass with presenting clinical features, response to treatment and survival. Cancer1975;36(3):842–54.

Greipp PR, San Miguel J, Durie BG, Crowley JJ, Barlogie B, Bladé J, et al. International staging system for multiple myeloma. J ClinOncol2005;23(15):3412–20.

Kumar L, Raju GM, Ganessan K, Shawgi S, Menon H, Wadhwa J, et al. High dose chemotherapy followed by autologous haemopoietic stem cell transplant in multiple myeloma. Natl Med J India 2003;16(1):16–21.

Sanders PW. Pathogenesis and treatment of myeloma kidney. J Lab Clin Med 1994;124(4):484–8.

Winearls CG. Acute myeloma kidney. Kidney Int 1995; 48:1347.

International Myeloma Working Group. Criteria for the classification of monoclonal gammopathies, multiple myeloma and related disorders: a report of the International Myeloma Working Group. Br J Haematol 2003;121(5):749–57.

Smith A, Wisloff F, Samson D,UK Myeloma Forum; Nordic Myeloma Study Group; British Committee for Standards in Haematology. Guidelines on the diagnosis and management of multiple myeloma 2005. Br J Haematol 2006;132(4):410–51.

Ludwig H, Durie BG, Bolejack V, Turesson I, Kyle RA, Blade J, et al. Myeloma in patients younger than age 50 years presents with more favorable features and shows better survival: an analysis of 10 549 patients from the International Myeloma Working Group. Blood 2008;111(8):4039–47.

Bataille R, Boccadoro M, Klein B, Durie B, Pileri A. C-reactive protein and beta-2 microglobulin produce a simple and powerful myeloma staging system. Blood 1992; 80(3):733–7.

Larsen JT, Chee CE, Lust JA, Greipp PR, Rajkumar SV. Reduction in plasma cell proliferation after initial therapy in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma measures treatment response and predicts improved survival. Blood 2011;118(10):2702–7.

Yang SH, Teng HW, Hong YC, Liu CY, Yu YB, Yang CF, et al.International Staging System predicts prognosis of Chinese patients with multiple myeloma across different calendar periods with application of novel agents. Ann 2012;91(1):93–102.

Nair MK, Varghese C, Krishan E, SankaranarayananR,NairB.Survival in multiple myeloma in Kerala.Natl Med J India 1993;6(1):7–10.

Kumar L, Malik PS, Prakash G, Prabu R, Radhakrishnan V, Katyal S, et al. Autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation-what determines the outcome: an experience from North India.AnnHematol 2011;90(11):1317–28.

Xu L, Wang Y, Wu W, Yan H, Gao XD, Yu Q, et al. [Clinical study of multiple myeloma: a report of 182 cases]. Zhonghua Yi XueZaZhi. 2010; 90(14):972–7.

Downloads

Published

2014-09-01

Most read articles by the same author(s)

1 2 > >>