Advertisement

Multiple Myeloma: Clinical Aspects

  • Paola Tacchetti
  • Michele CavoEmail author
Chapter
  • 221 Downloads

Abstract

Multiple myeloma (MM) is a clonal B-cell malignancy with a terminally differentiated plasma cell (PC) phenotype characterized by the production of either intact immunoglobulins (Ig) or free light chains (FLC). The annual incidence is 5 cases per 100,000 persons. Median age at diagnosis is approximately 70 years. An evolutionary model in which MM is the result of the transformation of a previous condition of monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance (MGUS) is virtually the basis of almost all cases. In about 15% of cases diagnosis is suspected based on routine laboratory exams. In the remaining 85% most common clinical manifestations include hypercalcemia, renal failure, anemia, or bone lesions (defined as CRAB criteria). According to the revised International Myeloma Working Group (IMWG) diagnostic criteria, MM requiring the immediate start of therapy is defined by the presence of clonal bone marrow (BM) PCs ≥10%, or biopsy-proven bony or extramedullary plasmacytoma, along with at least one CRAB criteria or at least one of the new biomarkers of malignancy, including BM PCs ≥60% and/or involved/uninvolved serum FLC (sFLC) ratio ≥100 and/or >1 focal lesions on magnetic resonance (MRI) studies. Converserly, smoldering MM does not require therapy (with the exception of controlled clinical trials) and is defined by the presence of serum monoclonal protein (M-protein) ≥30 g/L or urinary M-protein ≥500 mg per 24 h and/or clonal BM PCs in the range between 10 and 60%, and absence of both CRAB criteria and biomarkers of malignancy or amyloidosis. Treatment paradigm includes different combinations of novel agents, including proteasome inhibitors (PIs), immunomodulatory drugs (IMiDs) and monoclonal antibodies (mAb), combined or not with autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT). The main treatment end point is to achieve the deepest response early in the course of the disease and maintain it as much long as possible.

References

  1. 1.
    Hallek M, Bergsagel PL, Anderson KC, et al. Multiple myeloma: increasing evidence for a multistep transformation process. Blood. 1998;91(1):1–16.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Sonneveld P, Avet-Loiseau H, Lonial S, et al. Treatment of multiple myeloma with high-risk cytogenetics: a consensus of the international myeloma working group. Blood. 2016;127(24):2955–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Keats JJ, Chesi M, Egan JB, et al. Clonal competition with alternating dominance in multiple myeloma. Blood. 2012;120(5):1067–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Altekruse SF, Kosary CL, Krapcho M, et al. SEER cancer statistics review, 1975–2007. Bethesda, MD: National Cancer Institute. http://seer.cancer.gov/csr/1975_2007/index.html.
  5. 5.
    Becker N. Epidemiology of multiple myeloma. Recent Results Cancer Res. 2011;183:25–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Landgren O, Kyle RA, Pfeiffer RM, Katzmann JA, Caporaso NE, Hayes RB, Dispenzieri A, Kumar S, Clark RJ, Baris D, Hoover R, Rajkumar SV. Monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance (MGUS) consistently precedes multiple myeloma: a prospective study. Blood. 2009;113(22):5412–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Rajkumar SV, Dimopolous MA, Palumbo A, et al. International myeloma working group updated criteria for the diagnosis of multiple myeloma. Lancet Oncol. 2014;15:538–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Terpos E, Ntanasis-Stathopoulos I, Gavriatopoulou M, Dimopoulos MA. Pathogenesis of bone disease in multiple myeloma: from bench to bedside. Blood Cancer J. 2018;8(1):7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Dimopoulos MA, Terpos E, Chanan-Khan A, et al. Renal impairment in patients with multiple myeloma: a consensus statement on behalf of the international myeloma working group. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28(33):4976–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kyle RA, Gertz MA, Witzig TE, et al. Review of 1027 patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. Mayo Clin Proc. 2003;78(1):21–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Mead GP, Carr-Smith HD, Drayson MT, Morgan GJ, Child JA, Bradwell AR. Serum free light chains for monitoring multiple myeloma. Br J Haematol. 2004;126(3):348–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Greipp PR, San Miguel J, Durie BG, et al. International staging system for multiple myeloma. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23(15):3412–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Palumbo A, Avet-Loiseau H, Oliva S, et al. Revised international staging system for multiple myeloma: a report from international myeloma working group. J Clin Oncol. 2015;33(26):2863–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Mateos MV, Hernández MT, Giraldo P, et al. Lenalidomide plus dexamethasone for high-risk smoldering multiple myeloma. N Engl J Med. 2013;369(5):438–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Cavo M, Rajkumar SV, Palumbo A, et al. International myeloma working group consensus approach to the treatment of multiple myeloma patients who are candidates for autologous stem cell transplantation. Blood. 2011;117(23):6063–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Moreau P, San Miguel J, Sonneveld P, et al. ESMO guidelines committee. Multiple myeloma: ESMO clinical practice guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol. 2017;28:iv52–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kumar S, Paiva B, Anderson KC, et al. International myeloma working group consensus criteria for response and minimal residual disease assessment in multiple myeloma. Lancet Oncol. 2016;17(8):e328–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Seràgnoli Institute of Hematology, S.Orsola-Malpighi University Hospital of Bologna, University of BolognaBolognaItaly

Personalised recommendations