Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Risk Stratification in Multiple Myeloma

  • Multiple Myeloma (P Kapoor, Section Editor)
  • Published:
Current Hematologic Malignancy Reports Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

There are many prognostic variables in multiple myeloma and the difficulty is in deciding which is truly significant. The widely used International Staging System (ISS) does not incorporate genetics, age, and other important variables in its risk stratification. Although it has its own limitations, the recently published Revised International Staging System (R-ISS) that was built upon the framework of ISS, is a more comprehensive and predictive tool for multiple myeloma patients and should be henceforth utilised. We will review the current prognostic variables and their significance in this paper.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

Paper of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: •• Of major importance

  1. Avet-Loiseau H, Li C, Magrangeas F, Gouraud W, Charbonnel C, Harousseau J-L, et al. Prognostic significance of copy-number alterations in multiple myeloma. J Clin Oncol Off J Am Soc Clin Oncol. 2009;27(27):4585–90. doi:10.1200/jco.2008.20.6136.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Debes-Marun CS, Dewald GW, Bryant S, Picken E, Santana-Dávila R, González-Paz N, et al. Chromosome abnormalities clustering and its implications for pathogenesis and prognosis in myeloma. Leukemia. 2003;17(2):427–36. doi:10.1038/sj.leu.2402797.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Fonseca R, Debes-Marun CS, Picken EB, Dewald GW, Bryant SC, Winkler JM, et al. The recurrent IgH translocations are highly associated with nonhyperdiploid variant multiple myeloma. Blood. 2003;102(7):2562–7. doi:10.1182/blood-2003-02-0493.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Smadja NV, Leroux D, Soulier J, Dumont S, Arnould C, Taviaux S, et al. Further cytogenetic characterization of multiple myeloma confirms that 14q32 translocations are a very rare event in hyperdiploid cases. Genes Chromosomes Cancer. 2003;38(3):234–9. doi:10.1002/gcc.10275.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Brousseau M, Leleu X, Gerard J, Gastinne T, Godon A, Genevieve F, et al. Hyperdiploidy is a common finding in monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance and monosomy 13 is restricted to these hyperdiploid patients. Clin Cancer Res. 2007;13(20):6026–31. doi:10.1158/1078-0432.ccr-07-0031.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Chng WJ, Van Wier SA, Ahmann GJ, Winkler JM, Jalal SM, Bergsagel PL, et al. A validated FISH trisomy index demonstrates the hyperdiploid and nonhyperdiploid dichotomy in MGUS. Blood. 2005;106(6):2156–61. doi:10.1182/blood-2005-02-0761.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Chng WJ, Santana-Davila R, Van Wier SA, Ahmann GJ, Jalal SM, Bergsagel PL, et al. Prognostic factors for hyperdiploid-myeloma: effects of chromosome 13 deletions and IgH translocations. Leukemia. 2006;20(5):807–13. doi:10.1038/sj.leu.2404172.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Pawlyn C, Melchor L, Murison A, Wardell CP, Brioli A, Boyle EM, et al. Coexistent hyperdiploidy does not abrogate poor prognosis in myeloma with adverse cytogenetics and may precede IGH translocations. Blood. 2015;125(5):831–40. doi:10.1182/blood-2014-07-584268.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Kumar S, Fonseca R, Ketterling RP, Dispenzieri A, Lacy MQ, Gertz MA, et al. Trisomies in multiple myeloma: impact on survival in patients with high-risk cytogenetics. Blood. 2012;119(9):2100–5. doi:10.1182/blood-2011-11-390658.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. Avet-Loiseau H, Attal M, Moreau P, Charbonnel C, Garban F, Hulin C, et al. Genetic abnormalities and survival in multiple myeloma: the experience of the Intergroupe Francophone du Myélome. Blood. 2007;109(8):3489–95. doi:10.1182/blood-2006-08-040410.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Avet-Loiseau H, Durie BGM, Cavo M, Attal M, Gutierrez N, Haessler J, et al. Combining fluorescent in situ hybridization data with ISS staging improves risk assessment in myeloma: an International Myeloma Working Group collaborative project. Leukemia. 2013;27(3):711–7. doi:10.1038/leu.2012.282.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. Avet-Loiseau H, Facon T, Grosbois B, Magrangeas F, Rapp M-J, Harousseau J-L, et al. Oncogenesis of multiple myeloma: 14q32 and 13q chromosomal abnormalities are not randomly distributed, but correlate with natural history, immunological features, and clinical presentation. Blood. 2002;99(6):2185–91.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Chang H, Sloan S, Li D, Keith Stewart A. Multiple myeloma involving central nervous system: high frequency of chromosome 17p13.1 (p53) deletions. Br J Haematol. 2004;127(3):280–4. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2141.2004.05199.x.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Fonseca R, Blood E, Rue M, Harrington D, Oken MM, Kyle RA, et al. Clinical and biologic implications of recurrent genomic aberrations in myeloma. Blood. 2003;101(11):4569–75. doi:10.1182/blood-2002-10-3017.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Keats JJ, Reiman T, Maxwell CA, Taylor BJ, Larratt LM, Mant MJ, et al. In multiple myeloma, t(4;14)(p16;q32) is an adverse prognostic factor irrespective of FGFR3 expression. Blood. 2003;101(4):1520–9. doi:10.1182/blood-2002-06-1675.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Pineda-Roman M, Zangari M, van Rhee F, Anaissie E, Szymonifka J, Hoering A, et al. VTD combination therapy with bortezomib-thalidomide-dexamethasone is highly effective in advanced and refractory multiple myeloma. Leukemia. 2008;22(7):1419–27. doi:10.1038/leu.2008.99.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Shaughnessy Jr JD, Zhan F, Burington BE, Huang Y, Colla S, Hanamura I, et al. A validated gene expression model of high-risk multiple myeloma is defined by deregulated expression of genes mapping to chromosome 1. Blood. 2007;109(6):2276–84. doi:10.1182/blood-2006-07-038430.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Nemec P, Zemanova Z, Kuglik P, Michalova K, Tajtlova J, Kaisarova P, et al. Complex karyotype and translocation t(4;14) define patients with high-risk newly diagnosed multiple myeloma: results of CMG2002 trial. Leuk Lymphoma. 2012;53(5):920–7. doi:10.3109/10428194.2011.634042.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Chesi M, Nardini E, Brents LA, Schröck E, Ried T, Kuehl WM, et al. Frequent translocation t(4;14)(p16.3;q32.3) in multiple myeloma is associated with increased expression and activating mutations of fibroblast growth factor receptor 3. Nat Genet. 1997;16(3):260–4. doi:10.1038/ng0797-260.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Chesi M, Bergsagel PL, Shonukan OO, Martelli ML, Brents LA, Chen T, et al. Frequent dysregulation of the c-maf proto-oncogene at 16q23 by translocation to an Ig locus in multiple myeloma. Blood. 1998;91(12):4457–63.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Boersma-Vreugdenhil GR, Kuipers J, Van Stralen E, Peeters T, Michaux L, Hagemeijer A, et al. The recurrent translocation t(14;20)(q32;q12) in multiple myeloma results in aberrant expression of MAFB: a molecular and genetic analysis of the chromosomal breakpoint. Br J Haematol. 2004;126(3):355–63. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2141.2004.05050.x.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Ross FM, Chiecchio L, Dagrada G, Protheroe RK, Stockley DM, Harrison CJ, et al. The t(14;20) is a poor prognostic factor in myeloma but is associated with long-term stable disease in monoclonal gammopathies of undetermined significance. Haematologica. 2010;95(7):1221–5. doi:10.3324/haematol.2009.016329.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. Vekemans MC, Lemmens H, Delforge M, Doyen C, Pierre P, Demuynck H, et al. The t(14;20)(q32;q12): a rare cytogenetic change in multiple myeloma associated with poor outcome. Br J Haematol. 2010;149(6):901–4. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2141.2010.08113.x.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Chang H, Qi C, Yi Q-L, Reece D, Stewart AK. p53 gene deletion detected by fluorescence in situ hybridization is an adverse prognostic factor for patients with multiple myeloma following autologous stem cell transplantation. Blood. 2005;105(1):358–60. doi:10.1182/blood-2004-04-1363.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Calasanz MJ, Cigudosa JC, Odero MD, García-Foncillas J, Marín J, Ardanaz MT, et al. Hypodiploidy and 22q11 rearrangements at diagnosis are associated with poor prognosis in patients with multiple myeloma. Br J Haematol. 1997;98(2):418–25.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Fassas AB-T, Spencer T, Sawyer J, Zangari M, Lee C-K, Anaissie E, et al. Both hypodiploidy and deletion of chromosome 13 independently confer poor prognosis in multiple myeloma. Br J Haematol. 2002;118(4):1041–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Smadja NV, Bastard C, Brigaudeau C, Leroux D, Fruchart C, Hématologique GFdC. Hypodiploidy is a major prognostic factor in multiple myeloma. Blood. 2001;98(7):2229–38.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Van Wier S, Braggio E, Baker A, Ahmann G, Levy J, Carpten JD, et al. Hypodiploid multiple myeloma is characterized by more aggressive molecular markers than non-hyperdiploid multiple myeloma. Haematologica. 2013;98(10):1586–92. doi:10.3324/haematol.2012.081083.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Oh S, Koo DH, Kwon MJ, Kim K, Suh C, Min CK, et al. Chromosome 13 deletion and hypodiploidy on conventional cytogenetics are robust prognostic factors in Korean multiple myeloma patients: web-based multicenter registry study. Ann Hematol. 2014;93(8):1353–61. doi:10.1007/s00277-014-2057-5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Decaux O, Lode L, Magrangeas F, Charbonnel C, Gouraud W, Jezequel P, et al. Prediction of survival in multiple myeloma based on gene expression profiles reveals cell cycle and chromosomal instability signatures in high-risk patients and hyperdiploid signatures in low-risk patients: a study of the Intergroupe Francophone du Myelome. J Clin Oncol Off J Am Soc Clin Oncol. 2008;26(29):4798–805. doi:10.1200/jco.2007.13.8545.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Johnson SK, Heuck CJ, Albino AP, Qu P, Zhang Q, Barlogie B, et al. The use of molecular-based risk stratification and pharmacogenomics for outcome prediction and personalized therapeutic management of multiple myeloma. Int J Hematol. 2011;94(4):321–33. doi:10.1007/s12185-011-0948-y.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  32. Hanamura I, Stewart JP, Huang Y, Zhan F, Santra M, Sawyer JR, et al. Frequent gain of chromosome band 1q21 in plasma-cell dyscrasias detected by fluorescence in situ hybridization: incidence increases from MGUS to relapsed myeloma and is related to prognosis and disease progression following tandem stem-cell transplantation. Blood. 2006;108(5):1724–32. doi:10.1182/blood-2006-03-009910.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  33. Rosiñol L, Carrió A, Bladé J, Queralt R, Aymerich M, Cibeira MT, et al. Comparative genomic hybridisation identifies two variants of smoldering multiple myeloma. Br J Haematol. 2005;130(5):729–32. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2141.2005.05673.x.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Carew JS, Nawrocki ST, Krupnik YV, Dunner K, McConkey DJ, Keating MJ, et al. Targeting endoplasmic reticulum protein transport: a novel strategy to kill malignant B cells and overcome fludarabine resistance in CLL. Blood. 2006;107(1):222–31. doi:10.1182/blood-2005-05-1923.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  35. Fabris S, Ronchetti D, Agnelli L, Baldini L, Morabito F, Bicciato S, et al. Transcriptional features of multiple myeloma patients with chromosome 1q gain. Leukemia. 2007;21(5):1113–6. doi:10.1038/sj.leu.2404616.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Kaiser MF, Johnson DC, Wu P, Walker BA, Brioli A, Mirabella F, et al. Global methylation analysis identifies prognostically important epigenetically inactivated tumor suppressor genes in multiple myeloma. Blood. 2013;122(2):219–26. doi:10.1182/blood-2013-03-487884.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  37. Andrulis M, Lehners N, Capper D, Penzel R, Heining C, Huellein J, et al. Targeting the BRAF V600E mutation in multiple myeloma. Canc Discov. 2013;3(8):862–9. doi:10.1158/2159-8290.CD-13-0014.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Bohn OL, Hsu K, Hyman DM, Pignataro DS, Giralt S, Teruya-Feldstein J. BRAF V600E mutation and clonal evolution in a patient with relapsed refractory myeloma with plasmablastic differentiation. Clin Lymphoma Myeloma Leuk. 2014;14(2):e65–8. doi:10.1016/j.clml.2013.12.003.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Sharman JP, Chmielecki J, Morosini D, Palmer GA, Ross JS, Stephens PJ, et al. Vemurafenib response in 2 patients with posttransplant refractory BRAF V600E-mutated multiple myeloma. Clin Lymphoma Myeloma Leuk. 2014;14(5):e161–3. doi:10.1016/j.clml.2014.06.004.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Usmani SZ, Mitchell A, Waheed S, Crowley J, Hoering A, Petty N, et al. Prognostic implications of serial 18-fluoro-deoxyglucose emission tomography in multiple myeloma treated with total therapy 3. Blood. 2013;121(10):1819–23. doi:10.1182/blood-2012-08-451690.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  41. Lopez-Anglada L, Gutierrez NC, Garcia JL, Mateos MV, Flores T, San Miguel JF. P53 deletion may drive the clinical evolution and treatment response in multiple myeloma. Eur J Haematol. 2010;84(4):359–61. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0609.2009.01399.x.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Tiedemann RE, Gonzalez-Paz N, Kyle RA, Santana-Davila R, Price-Troska T, Van Wier SA, et al. Genetic aberrations and survival in plasma cell leukemia. Leukemia. 2008;22(5):1044–52. doi:10.1038/leu.2008.4.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  43. Fassas AB, Ward S, Muwalla F, Van Hemert R, Schluterman K, Harik S, et al. Myeloma of the central nervous system: strong association with unfavorable chromosomal abnormalities and other high-risk disease features. Leuk Lymphoma. 2004;45(2):291–300.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Rasche L, Bernard C, Topp MS, Kapp M, Duell J, Wesemeier C, et al. Features of extramedullary myeloma relapse: high proliferation, minimal marrow involvement, adverse cytogenetics: a retrospective single-center study of 24 cases. Ann Hematol. 2012;91(7):1031–7. doi:10.1007/s00277-012-1414-5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Terpos E, Rezvani K, Basu S, Milne AE, Rose PE, Scott GL, et al. Plasmacytoma relapses in the absence of systemic progression post-high-dose therapy for multiple myeloma. Eur J Haematol. 2005;75(5):376–83. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0609.2005.00531.x.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Varettoni M, Corso A, Pica G, Mangiacavalli S, Pascutto C, Lazzarino M. Incidence, presenting features and outcome of extramedullary disease in multiple myeloma: a longitudinal study on 1003 consecutive patients. Ann Oncol. 2010;21(2):325–30. doi:10.1093/annonc/mdp329.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Chang H, Sloan S, Li D, Patterson B. Genomic aberrations in plasma cell leukemia shown by interphase fluorescence in situ hybridization. Cancer Genet Cytogenet. 2005;156(2):150–3. doi:10.1016/j.cancergencyto.2004.05.004.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Avet-Loiseau H, Roussel M, Campion L, Leleu X, Marit G, Jardel H, et al. Cytogenetic and therapeutic characterization of primary plasma cell leukemia: the IFM experience. Leukemia. 2012;26(1):158–9. doi:10.1038/leu.2011.176.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Rajkumar SV, Dimopoulos MA, Palumbo A, Blade J, Merlini G, Mateos MV, et al. International Myeloma Working Group updated criteria for the diagnosis of multiple myeloma. Lancet Oncol. 2014;15(12):e538–48. doi:10.1016/s1470-2045(14)70442-5. This article is an update of the criteria for the diagnosis of MM. The revised criteria makes the diagnosis of MM earlier.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Song IC, Kim JN, Choi YS, Ryu H, Lee MW, Lee HJ, et al. Diagnostic and prognostic implications of spine magnetic resonance imaging at diagnosis in patients with multiple myeloma. Cancer Res Treat. 2015;47(3):465–72. doi:10.4143/crt.2014.010.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  51. Walker R, Barlogie B, Haessler J, Tricot G, Anaissie E, Shaughnessy JD, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging in multiple myeloma: diagnostic and clinical implications. J Clin Oncol Off J Am Soc Clin Oncol. 2007;25(9):1121–8. doi:10.1200/jco.2006.08.5803.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Dimopoulos MA, Hillengass J, Usmani S, Zamagni E, Lentzsch S, Davies FE, et al. Role of magnetic resonance imaging in the management of patients with multiple myeloma: a consensus statement. J Clin Oncol Off J Am Soc Clin Oncol. 2015;33(6):657–64. doi:10.1200/JCO.2014.57.9961.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Hillengass J, Ayyaz S, Kilk K, Weber MA, Hielscher T, Shah R, et al. Changes in magnetic resonance imaging before and after autologous stem cell transplantation correlate with response and survival in multiple myeloma. Haematologica. 2012;97(11):1757–60. doi:10.3324/haematol.2012.065359.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  54. Bannas P, Hentschel HB, Bley TA, Treszl A, Eulenburg C, Derlin T, et al. Diagnostic performance of whole-body MRI for the detection of persistent or relapsing disease in multiple myeloma after stem cell transplantation. Eur Radiol. 2012;22(9):2007–12. doi:10.1007/s00330-012-2445-y.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Baur A, Stäbler A, Nagel D, Lamerz R, Bartl R, Hiller E, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging as a supplement for the clinical staging system of Durie and Salmon? Cancer. 2002;95(6):1334–45. doi:10.1002/cncr.10818.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Moulopoulos LA, Gika D, Anagnostopoulos A, Delasalle K, Weber D, Alexanian R, et al. Prognostic significance of magnetic resonance imaging of bone marrow in previously untreated patients with multiple myeloma. Ann Oncol. 2005;16(11):1824–8. doi:10.1093/annonc/mdi362.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Stäbler A, Baur A, Bartl R, Munker R, Lamerz R, Reiser MF. Contrast enhancement and quantitative signal analysis in MR imaging of multiple myeloma: assessment of focal and diffuse growth patterns in marrow correlated with biopsies and survival rates. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1996;167(4):1029–36. doi:10.2214/ajr.167.4.8819407.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Moulopoulos LA, Dimopoulos MA, Kastritis E, Christoulas D, Gkotzamanidou M, Roussou M, et al. Diffuse pattern of bone marrow involvement on magnetic resonance imaging is associated with high risk cytogenetics and poor outcome in newly diagnosed, symptomatic patients with multiple myeloma: a single center experience on 228 patients. Am J Hematol. 2012;87(9):861–4. doi:10.1002/ajh.23258.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Derlin T, Peldschus K, Munster S, Bannas P, Herrmann J, Stubig T, et al. Comparative diagnostic performance of (1)(8)F-FDG PET/CT versus whole-body MRI for determination of remission status in multiple myeloma after stem cell transplantation. Eur Radiol. 2013;23(2):570–8. doi:10.1007/s00330-012-2600-5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Nanni C, Zamagni E, Celli M, Caroli P, Ambrosini V, Tacchetti P, et al. The value of 18F-FDG PET/CT after autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) in patients affected by multiple myeloma (MM): experience with 77 patients. Clin Nucl Med. 2013;38(2):e74–9. doi:10.1097/RLU.0b013e318266cee2.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Zamagni E, Patriarca F, Nanni C, Zannetti B, Englaro E, Pezzi A, et al. Prognostic relevance of 18-F FDG PET/CT in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma patients treated with up-front autologous transplantation. Blood. 2011;118(23):5989–95. doi:10.1182/blood-2011-06-361386.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Bartel TB, Haessler J, Brown TLY, Shaughnessy JD, van Rhee F, Anaissie E, et al. F18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in the context of other imaging techniques and prognostic factors in multiple myeloma. Blood. 2009;114(10):2068–76. doi:10.1182/blood-2009-03-213280.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  63. Haznedar R, Aki SZ, Akdemir OU, Ozkurt ZN, Ceneli O, Yagci M, et al. Value of 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose uptake in positron emission tomography/computed tomography in predicting survival in multiple myeloma. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2011;38(6):1046–53. doi:10.1007/s00259-011-1738-8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. Greipp PR, San Miguel J, Durie BG, Crowley JJ, Barlogie B, Blade J, et al. International staging system for multiple myeloma. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23(15):3412–20. doi:10.1200/jco.2005.04.242.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Gkotzamanidou M, Kastritis E, Gavriatopoulou MR, Nikitas N, Gika D, Mparmparousi D, et al. Increased serum lactate dehydrongenase should be included among the variables that define very-high-risk multiple myeloma. Clin Lymphoma Myeloma Leuk. 2011;11(5):409–13. doi:10.1016/j.clml.2011.07.001.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. Terpos E, Katodritou E, Roussou M, Pouli A, Michalis E, Delimpasi S, et al. High serum lactate dehydrogenase adds prognostic value to the international myeloma staging system even in the era of novel agents. Eur J Haematol. 2010;85(2):114–9. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0609.2010.01466.x.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Ferro DP, Falconi MA, Adam RL, Ortega MM, Lima CP, de Souza CA, et al. Fractal characteristics of May-Grunwald-Giemsa stained chromatin are independent prognostic factors for survival in multiple myeloma. PLoS One. 2011;6(6), e20706. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0020706.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  68. Dispenzieri A, Zhang L, Katzmann JA, Snyder M, Blood E, Degoey R, et al. Appraisal of immunoglobulin free light chain as a marker of response. Blood. 2008;111(10):4908–15. doi:10.1182/blood-2008-02-138602.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  69. Snozek CL, Katzmann JA, Kyle RA, Dispenzieri A, Larson DR, Therneau TM, et al. Prognostic value of the serum free light chain ratio in newly diagnosed myeloma: proposed incorporation into the international staging system. Leukemia. 2008;22(10):1933–7. doi:10.1038/leu.2008.171.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  70. Kyrtsonis MC, Vassilakopoulos TP, Kafasi N, Sachanas S, Tzenou T, Papadogiannis A, et al. Prognostic value of serum free light chain ratio at diagnosis in multiple myeloma. Br J Haematol. 2007;137(3):240–3. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2141.2007.06561.x.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  71. van Rhee F, Bolejack V, Hollmig K, Pineda-Roman M, Anaissie E, Epstein J, et al. High serum-free light chain levels and their rapid reduction in response to therapy define an aggressive multiple myeloma subtype with poor prognosis. Blood. 2007;110(3):827–32. doi:10.1182/blood-2007-01-067728.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  72. Khoriaty R, Hussein MA, Faiman B, Kelly M, Kalaycio M, Baz R. Prediction of response and progression in multiple myeloma with serum free light chains assay: corroboration of the serum free light chain response definitions. Clin Lymphoma Myeloma Leuk. 2010;10(1):E10–3. doi:10.3816/CLML.2010.n.010.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  73. Sthaneshwar P, Nadarajan V, Maniam JA, Nordin N, Gin Gin G. Serum free light chains: diagnostic and prognostic value in multiple myeloma. Clin Chem Lab Med. 2009;47(9):1101–7. doi:10.1515/cclm.2009.260.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  74. Deng SH, Xu Y, Mai YJ, Wang YF, Zhao YZ, Zou DH, et al. Analysis of the international staging system of multiple myeloma and its comparison with the DS and IFM staging system in 122 Chinese patients. Zhonghua xue ye xue za zhi = Zhonghua xueyexue zazhi. 2008;29(4):217–21.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  75. Xu Y, Sui W, Deng S, An G, Wang Y, Xie Z, et al. Further stratification of patients with multiple myeloma by International Staging System in combination with ratio of serum free kappa to lambda light chains. Leuk Lymphoma. 2013;54(1):123–32. doi:10.3109/10428194.2012.704033.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  76. Bradwell AR, Harding SJ, Fourrier NJ, Wallis GLF, Drayson MT, Carr-Smith HD, et al. Assessment of monoclonal gammopathies by nephelometric measurement of individual immunoglobulin kappa/lambda ratios. Clin Chem. 2009;55(9):1646–55. doi:10.1373/clinchem.2009.123828.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  77. Bradwell A, Harding S, Fourrier N, Mathiot C, Attal M, Moreau P, et al. Prognostic utility of intact immunoglobulin Ig‘kappa/Ig’lambda ratios in multiple myeloma patients. Leukemia. 2013;27(1):202–7. doi:10.1038/leu.2012.159.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  78. Ludwig H, Milosavljevic D, Zojer N, Faint JM, Bradwell AR, Hübl W, et al. Immunoglobulin heavy/light chain ratios improve paraprotein detection and monitoring, identify residual disease and correlate with survival in multiple myeloma patients. Leukemia. 2013;27(1):213–9. doi:10.1038/leu.2012.197.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  79. Koulieris E, Panayiotidis P, Harding SJ, Kafasi N, Maltezas D, Bartzis V, et al. Ratio of involved/uninvolved immunoglobulin quantification by Hevylite™ assay: clinical and prognostic impact in multiple myeloma. Exp Hematol Oncol. 2012;1(1):9. doi:10.1186/2162-3619-1-9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  80. Batinić J, Perić Z, Šegulja D, Last J, Prijić S, Dubravčić K, et al. Immunoglobulin heavy/light chain analysis enhances the detection of residual disease and monitoring of multiple myeloma patients. Croat Med J. 2015;56(3):263–71.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  81. Beaumont-Epinette MP, Moreau C, Besnard S, Latute F, Collet N, Sebillot M, et al. Heavy/light chain specific immunoglobulin ratios provides no additional information than serum proteins electrophoresis and immunofixation for the diagnosis and the follow-up of intact immunoglobulin multiple myeloma patients. Pathol Biol. 2015;63(4-5):215–21. doi:10.1016/j.patbio.2015.06.001.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  82. Tovar N, Fernández de Larrea C, Elena M, Cibeira MT, Aróstegui JI, Rosiñol L, et al. Prognostic impact of serum immunoglobulin heavy/light chain ratio in patients with multiple myeloma in complete remission after autologous stem cell transplantation. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2012;18(7):1076–9. doi:10.1016/j.bbmt.2012.03.004.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  83. Dimopoulos MA, Kastritis E, Delimpasi S, Katodritou E, Hatzimichael E, Kyrtsonis M-C, et al. Multiple myeloma in octogenarians: clinical features and outcome in the novel agent era. Eur J Haematol. 2012;89(1):10–5. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0609.2012.01784.x.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  84. Bringhen S, Mateos MV, Zweegman S, Larocca A, Falcone AP, Oriol A, et al. Age and organ damage correlate with poor survival in myeloma patients: meta-analysis of 1435 individual patient data from 4 randomized trials. Haematologica. 2013;98(6):980–7. doi:10.3324/haematol.2012.075051.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  85. San Miguel JF, Sànchez J, Gonzalez M. Prognostic factors and classification in multiple myeloma. Br J Cancer. 1989;59(1):113–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  86. Chretien ML, Hebraud B, Cances-Lauwers V, Hulin C, Marit G, Leleu X, et al. Age is a prognostic factor even among patients with multiple myeloma younger than 66 years treated with high-dose melphalan: the IFM experience on 2316 patients. Haematologica. 2014;99(7):1236–8. doi:10.3324/haematol.2013.098608.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  87. Hamaker ME, Jonker JM, de Rooij SE, Vos AG, Smorenburg CH, van Munster BC. Frailty screening methods for predicting outcome of a comprehensive geriatric assessment in elderly patients with cancer: a systematic review. Lancet Oncol. 2012;13(10):e437–44. doi:10.1016/s1470-2045(12)70259-0.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  88. Clegg A, Young J, Iliffe S, Rikkert MO, Rockwood K. Frailty in elderly people. Lancet. 2013;381(9868):752–62. doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(12)62167-9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  89. Fried LP, Tangen CM, Walston J, Newman AB, Hirsch C, Gottdiener J, et al. Frailty in older adults: evidence for a phenotype. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2001;56(3):M146–56.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  90. Slaets JPJ. Vulnerability in the elderly: frailty. Med Clin North Am. 2006;90(4):593–601. doi:10.1016/j.mcna.2006.05.008.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  91. Harousseau J-L, Avet-Loiseau H, Attal M, Charbonnel C, Garban F, Hulin C, et al. Achievement of at least very good partial response is a simple and robust prognostic factor in patients with multiple myeloma treated with high-dose therapy: long-term analysis of the IFM 99-02 and 99-04 Trials. J Clin Oncol Off J Am Soc Clin Oncol. 2009;27(34):5720–6. doi:10.1200/jco.2008.21.1060.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  92. Lahuerta JJ, Mateos MV, Martínez-López J, Rosiñol L, Sureda A, de la Rubia J, et al. Influence of pre- and post-transplantation responses on outcome of patients with multiple myeloma: sequential improvement of response and achievement of complete response are associated with longer survival. J Clin Oncol Off J Am Soc Clin Oncol. 2008;26(35):5775–82. doi:10.1200/jco.2008.17.9721.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  93. Moreau P, Attal M, Pégourié B, Planche L, Hulin C, Facon T, et al. Achievement of VGPR to induction therapy is an important prognostic factor for longer PFS in the IFM 2005-01 trial. Blood. 2011;117(11):3041–4. doi:10.1182/blood-2010-08-300863.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  94. Gay F, Larocca A, Wijermans P, Cavallo F, Rossi D, Schaafsma R, et al. Complete response correlates with long-term progression-free and overall survival in elderly myeloma treated with novel agents: analysis of 1175 patients. Blood. 2011;117(11):3025–31. doi:10.1182/blood-2010-09-307645.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  95. Barlogie B, Anaissie E, Haessler J, van Rhee F, Pineda-Roman M, Hollmig K, et al. Complete remission sustained 3 years from treatment initiation is a powerful surrogate for extended survival in multiple myeloma. Cancer. 2008;113(2):355–9. doi:10.1002/cncr.23546.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  96. Hoering A, Crowley J, Shaughnessy JD, Hollmig K, Alsayed Y, Szymonifka J, et al. Complete remission in multiple myeloma examined as time-dependent variable in terms of both onset and duration in Total Therapy protocols. Blood. 2009;114(7):1299–305. doi:10.1182/blood-2009-03-211953.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  97. Ong S, Widanalage S, Chen YX, Ooi MG, Surendran S, Koh LP, et al. Early relapse post autologous transplant is a stronger predictor of survival compared to pretreatment patient factors in the novel agent era - Analysis of Singapore Multiple Myeloma Working Group. 2015.

    Google Scholar 

  98. Durie B, Harousseau J, Miguel J, Blade J, Barlogie B, Anderson K, et al. International uniform response criteria for multiple myeloma. Leukemia. 2006;20(9):1467–73.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  99. Kapoor P, Kumar SK, Dispenzieri A, Lacy MQ, Buadi F, Dingli D, et al. Importance of achieving stringent complete response after autologous stem-cell transplantation in multiple myeloma. J Clin Oncol Off J Am Soc Clin Oncol. 2013;31(36):4529–35. doi:10.1200/jco.2013.49.0086.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  100. Kroger N, Asenova S, Gerritzen A, Bacher U, Zander A. Questionable role of free light chain assay ratio to determine stringent complete remission in multiple myeloma patients. Blood. 2010;115(16):3413–4. doi:10.1182/blood-2010-01-261677. author reply 3414-3415.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  101. Paiva B, Martinez-Lopez J, Vidriales MB, Mateos MV, Montalban MA, Fernandez-Redondo E, et al. Comparison of immunofixation, serum free light chain, and immunophenotyping for response evaluation and prognostication in multiple myeloma. J Clin Oncol Off J Am Soc Clin Oncol. 2011;29(12):1627–33. doi:10.1200/jco.2010.33.1967.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  102. Martinez-Lopez J, Paiva B, Lopez-Anglada L, Mateos MV, Cedena T, Vidriales MB, et al. Critical analysis of the stringent complete response in multiple myeloma: contribution of sFLC and bone marrow clonality. Blood. 2015;126(7):858–62. doi:10.1182/blood-2015-04-638742.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  103. de Larrea CF, Cibeira MT, Elena M, Arostegui JI, Rosinol L, Rovira M, et al. Abnormal serum free light chain ratio in patients with multiple myeloma in complete remission has strong association with the presence of oligoclonal bands: implications for stringent complete remission definition. Blood. 2009;114(24):4954–6. doi:10.1182/blood-2009-06-224832.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  104. Paiva B, Gutiérrez NC, Rosiñol L, Vídriales M-B, Montalbán M-Á, Martínez-López J, et al. High-risk cytogenetics and persistent minimal residual disease by multiparameter flow cytometry predict unsustained complete response after autologous stem cell transplantation in multiple myeloma. Blood. 2012;119(3):687–91. doi:10.1182/blood-2011-07-370460.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  105. Paiva B, Vidriales M-B, Cerveró J, Mateo G, Pérez JJ, Montalbán MA, et al. Multiparameter flow cytometric remission is the most relevant prognostic factor for multiple myeloma patients who undergo autologous stem cell transplantation. Blood. 2008;112(10):4017–23. doi:10.1182/blood-2008-05-159624.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  106. Kröger N, Badbaran A, Zabelina T, Ayuk F, Wolschke C, Alchalby H, et al. Impact of high-risk cytogenetics and achievement of molecular remission on long-term freedom from disease after autologous-allogeneic tandem transplantation in patients with multiple myeloma. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2013;19(3):398–404. doi:10.1016/j.bbmt.2012.10.008.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  107. Ladetto M, Pagliano G, Ferrero S, Cavallo F, Drandi D, Santo L, et al. Major tumor shrinking and persistent molecular remissions after consolidation with bortezomib, thalidomide, and dexamethasone in patients with autografted myeloma. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28(12):2077–84. doi:10.1200/jco.2009.23.7172.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  108. 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. Cancer. 1975;36(3):842–54.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  109. Kimura N, Tokunaga C, Dalal S, Richardson C, Yoshino K, Hara K, et al. A possible linkage between AMP-activated protein kinase (AMPK) and mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) signalling pathway. Genes Cells. 2003;8(1):65–79.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  110. Durie BG, Kyle RA, Belch A, Bensinger W, Blade J, Boccadoro M, et al. Myeloma management guidelines: a consensus report from the Scientific Advisors of the International Myeloma Foundation. Hematol J. 2003;4(6):379–98. doi:10.1038/sj.thj.6200312.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  111. Neben K, Lokhorst HM, Jauch A, Bertsch U, Hielscher T, van der Holt B, et al. Administration of bortezomib before and after autologous stem cell transplantation improves outcome in multiple myeloma patients with deletion 17p. Blood. 2012;119(4):940–8. doi:10.1182/blood-2011-09-379164.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  112. Kapoor P, Fonseca R, Rajkumar SV, Sinha S, Gertz MA, Stewart AK, et al. Evidence for cytogenetic and fluorescence in situ hybridization risk stratification of newly diagnosed multiple myeloma in the era of novel therapie. Mayo Clin Proc. 2010;85(6):532–7. doi:10.4065/mcp.2009.0677.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  113. Moreau P, Cavo M, Sonneveld P, Rosinol L, Attal M, Pezzi A, et al. Combination of international scoring system 3, high lactate dehydrogenase, and t(4;14) and/or del(17p) identifies patients with multiple myeloma (MM) treated with front-line autologous stem-cell transplantation at high risk of early MM progression-related death. J Clin Oncol. 2014;32(20):2173–80. doi:10.1200/jco.2013.53.0329. This article explains the new revised International Staging System.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1E Kent Ridge Road, NUHS Tower Block Level 7, Singapore, 119228, Singapore

    Melissa Gaik-Ming Ooi, Sanjay de Mel & Wee Joo Chng

Authors
  1. Melissa Gaik-Ming Ooi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Sanjay de Mel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Wee Joo Chng
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Melissa Gaik-Ming Ooi.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.

Additional information

This article is part of the Topical Collection on Multiple Myeloma

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ooi, M.GM., de Mel, S. & Chng, W.J. Risk Stratification in Multiple Myeloma. Curr Hematol Malig Rep 11, 137–147 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11899-016-0307-4

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11899-016-0307-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation