Cargando…
Assessing the prognostic utility of smoldering multiple myeloma risk stratification scores applied serially post diagnosis
The Mayo-2018 smoldering multiple myeloma (SMM) risk score is used routinely in the clinical setting but has only been validated at diagnosis. In SMM patients, the progression risk decreases over time. However, the utility of applying risk stratification models after diagnosis is unknown. We retrosp...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Nature Publishing Group UK
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8626440/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34836942 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41408-021-00569-2 |
_version_ | 1784606657130528768 |
---|---|
author | Visram, Alissa Rajkumar, S. Vincent Kapoor, Prashant Dispenzieri, Angela Lacy, Martha Q. Gertz, Morie A. Buadi, Francis K. Hayman, Suzanne R. Dingli, David Kourelis, Taxiarchis Gonsalves, Wilson Warsame, Rahma Muchtar, Eli Leung, Nelson Baughn, Linda B. Kyle, Robert A. Kumar, Shaji |
author_facet | Visram, Alissa Rajkumar, S. Vincent Kapoor, Prashant Dispenzieri, Angela Lacy, Martha Q. Gertz, Morie A. Buadi, Francis K. Hayman, Suzanne R. Dingli, David Kourelis, Taxiarchis Gonsalves, Wilson Warsame, Rahma Muchtar, Eli Leung, Nelson Baughn, Linda B. Kyle, Robert A. Kumar, Shaji |
author_sort | Visram, Alissa |
collection | PubMed |
description | The Mayo-2018 smoldering multiple myeloma (SMM) risk score is used routinely in the clinical setting but has only been validated at diagnosis. In SMM patients, the progression risk decreases over time. However, the utility of applying risk stratification models after diagnosis is unknown. We retrospectively studied 704 SMM patients and applied the Mayo 2018 and IMWG-2020 risk stratification models at annual landmark timepoints up to 5 years post diagnosis. The Mayo-2018 and IMWG-2020 models reliably stratified patients based on progression risk when applied post diagnosis. The respective 2-year progression risk in Mayo-2018 high risk patients versus IMWG-2020 intermediate-high risk patients was 51% versus 62% at the 1-year landmark and 47% versus 45% at the 4-year landmark. We showed that patients categorized at Mayo-2018 high-risk at follow-up had a similar risk of progression if the baseline risk assessment was low-intermediate versus high-risk (HR 1.04, 95% CI 0.46–2.36, p = 0.931 at 5-year landmark). Patients migrating to a higher risk category during follow up had a higher progression risk compared to patients with stable/decreased risk categorization. Our findings support the use of these risk scores post-diagnosis and suggest that patients evolving to a high-risk category may benefit from early intervention therapeutic approaches. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8626440 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | Nature Publishing Group UK |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-86264402021-12-10 Assessing the prognostic utility of smoldering multiple myeloma risk stratification scores applied serially post diagnosis Visram, Alissa Rajkumar, S. Vincent Kapoor, Prashant Dispenzieri, Angela Lacy, Martha Q. Gertz, Morie A. Buadi, Francis K. Hayman, Suzanne R. Dingli, David Kourelis, Taxiarchis Gonsalves, Wilson Warsame, Rahma Muchtar, Eli Leung, Nelson Baughn, Linda B. Kyle, Robert A. Kumar, Shaji Blood Cancer J Article The Mayo-2018 smoldering multiple myeloma (SMM) risk score is used routinely in the clinical setting but has only been validated at diagnosis. In SMM patients, the progression risk decreases over time. However, the utility of applying risk stratification models after diagnosis is unknown. We retrospectively studied 704 SMM patients and applied the Mayo 2018 and IMWG-2020 risk stratification models at annual landmark timepoints up to 5 years post diagnosis. The Mayo-2018 and IMWG-2020 models reliably stratified patients based on progression risk when applied post diagnosis. The respective 2-year progression risk in Mayo-2018 high risk patients versus IMWG-2020 intermediate-high risk patients was 51% versus 62% at the 1-year landmark and 47% versus 45% at the 4-year landmark. We showed that patients categorized at Mayo-2018 high-risk at follow-up had a similar risk of progression if the baseline risk assessment was low-intermediate versus high-risk (HR 1.04, 95% CI 0.46–2.36, p = 0.931 at 5-year landmark). Patients migrating to a higher risk category during follow up had a higher progression risk compared to patients with stable/decreased risk categorization. Our findings support the use of these risk scores post-diagnosis and suggest that patients evolving to a high-risk category may benefit from early intervention therapeutic approaches. Nature Publishing Group UK 2021-11-26 /pmc/articles/PMC8626440/ /pubmed/34836942 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41408-021-00569-2 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Article Visram, Alissa Rajkumar, S. Vincent Kapoor, Prashant Dispenzieri, Angela Lacy, Martha Q. Gertz, Morie A. Buadi, Francis K. Hayman, Suzanne R. Dingli, David Kourelis, Taxiarchis Gonsalves, Wilson Warsame, Rahma Muchtar, Eli Leung, Nelson Baughn, Linda B. Kyle, Robert A. Kumar, Shaji Assessing the prognostic utility of smoldering multiple myeloma risk stratification scores applied serially post diagnosis |
title | Assessing the prognostic utility of smoldering multiple myeloma risk stratification scores applied serially post diagnosis |
title_full | Assessing the prognostic utility of smoldering multiple myeloma risk stratification scores applied serially post diagnosis |
title_fullStr | Assessing the prognostic utility of smoldering multiple myeloma risk stratification scores applied serially post diagnosis |
title_full_unstemmed | Assessing the prognostic utility of smoldering multiple myeloma risk stratification scores applied serially post diagnosis |
title_short | Assessing the prognostic utility of smoldering multiple myeloma risk stratification scores applied serially post diagnosis |
title_sort | assessing the prognostic utility of smoldering multiple myeloma risk stratification scores applied serially post diagnosis |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8626440/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34836942 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41408-021-00569-2 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT visramalissa assessingtheprognosticutilityofsmolderingmultiplemyelomariskstratificationscoresappliedseriallypostdiagnosis AT rajkumarsvincent assessingtheprognosticutilityofsmolderingmultiplemyelomariskstratificationscoresappliedseriallypostdiagnosis AT kapoorprashant assessingtheprognosticutilityofsmolderingmultiplemyelomariskstratificationscoresappliedseriallypostdiagnosis AT dispenzieriangela assessingtheprognosticutilityofsmolderingmultiplemyelomariskstratificationscoresappliedseriallypostdiagnosis AT lacymarthaq assessingtheprognosticutilityofsmolderingmultiplemyelomariskstratificationscoresappliedseriallypostdiagnosis AT gertzmoriea assessingtheprognosticutilityofsmolderingmultiplemyelomariskstratificationscoresappliedseriallypostdiagnosis AT buadifrancisk assessingtheprognosticutilityofsmolderingmultiplemyelomariskstratificationscoresappliedseriallypostdiagnosis AT haymansuzanner assessingtheprognosticutilityofsmolderingmultiplemyelomariskstratificationscoresappliedseriallypostdiagnosis AT dinglidavid assessingtheprognosticutilityofsmolderingmultiplemyelomariskstratificationscoresappliedseriallypostdiagnosis AT kourelistaxiarchis assessingtheprognosticutilityofsmolderingmultiplemyelomariskstratificationscoresappliedseriallypostdiagnosis AT gonsalveswilson assessingtheprognosticutilityofsmolderingmultiplemyelomariskstratificationscoresappliedseriallypostdiagnosis AT warsamerahma assessingtheprognosticutilityofsmolderingmultiplemyelomariskstratificationscoresappliedseriallypostdiagnosis AT muchtareli assessingtheprognosticutilityofsmolderingmultiplemyelomariskstratificationscoresappliedseriallypostdiagnosis AT leungnelson assessingtheprognosticutilityofsmolderingmultiplemyelomariskstratificationscoresappliedseriallypostdiagnosis AT baughnlindab assessingtheprognosticutilityofsmolderingmultiplemyelomariskstratificationscoresappliedseriallypostdiagnosis AT kyleroberta assessingtheprognosticutilityofsmolderingmultiplemyelomariskstratificationscoresappliedseriallypostdiagnosis AT kumarshaji assessingtheprognosticutilityofsmolderingmultiplemyelomariskstratificationscoresappliedseriallypostdiagnosis |