Movatterモバイル変換


[0]ホーム

URL:


Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

Advertisement

Leukemia
  • Spotlight Review
  • Published:

Criteria for diagnosis, staging, risk stratification and response assessment of multiple myeloma

Leukemiavolume 23pages3–9 (2009)Cite this article

ACorrigendum to this article was published on 09 April 2014

Abstract

New systems have emerged for diagnosis, staging and response assessment in multiple myeloma (MM). The diagnostic and response criteria recommended are primarily derived from the International Myeloma Working Group, with certain updates and clarifications. The International Staging System is the current standard for staging of myeloma. A new risk stratification model is provided to specifically define high-risk patients who may benefit from novel therapeutic strategies. This paper provides the current criteria for diagnosis, staging, risk stratification and response assessment of MM.

This is a preview of subscription content,access via your institution

Access options

Access through your institution

Subscribe to this journal

Receive 12 print issues and online access

¥40,000 per year

only ¥3,333 per issue

Buy this article

  • Purchase on SpringerLink
  • Instant access to the full article PDF.

¥ 4,980

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Similar content being viewed by others

References

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Snozek CLH, Katzmann JA, Kyle RA, Dispenzieri A, Larson D, Therneau TMet al. Prognostic value of the serum free light chain ratio in newly diagnosed myeloma: proposed incorporation into the International Staging System.Leukemia 2008;22: 1933–1937.

    Article CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Rajkumar SV, Kyle RA, Therneau TM, Melton III LJ, Bradwell AR, Clark RJet al. Serum free light chain ratio is an independent risk factor for progression in monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance (MGUS).Blood 2005;106: 812–817.

    Article CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Dispenzieri A, Kyle RA, Katzmann JA, Therneau TM, Larson D, Benson Jet al. Immunoglobulin free light chain ratio is an independent risk factor for progression of smoldering (asymptomatic) multiple myeloma.Blood 2008;111: 785–789.

    Article CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Dingli D, Kyle RA, Rajkumar SV, Nowakowski GS, Larson DR, Bida JPet al. Immunoglobulin free light chains and solitary plasmacytoma of bone.Blood 2006;108: 1979–1983.

    Article CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. The 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: 749–757.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Rajkumar SV, Kyle RA . Multiple myeloma: diagnosis and treatment.[see comment].Mayo Clinic Proc 2005;80: 1371–1382.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Kyle RA, Therneau TM, Rajkumar SV, Remstein ED, Offord JR, Larson DRet al. Long-term follow-up of IgM monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance.Blood 2003;102: 3759–3764.

    Article CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Gobbi PG, Baldini L, Broglia C, Goldaniga M, Comelli M, Morel Pet al. Prognostic validation of the international classification of immunoglobulin M gammopathies: a survival advantage for patients with immunoglobulin M monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance?Clin Cancer Res 2005;11: 1786–1790.

    Article CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Kyle RA, Therneau TM, Rajkumar SV, Offord JR, Larson DR, Plevak MFet al. Long-term follow-up of IgM monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance.Semin Oncol 2003;30: 169–171.

    Article CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Baldini L, Goldaniga M, Guffanti A, Broglia C, Cortelazzo S, Rossi Aet al. Immunoglobulin M monoclonal gammopathies of undetermined significance and indolent Waldenstrom's macroglobulinemia recognize the same determinants of evolution into symptomatic lymphoid disorders: proposal for a common prognostic scoring system.J Clin Oncol 2005;23: 4662–4668.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Owen RG, Treon SP, Al-Katib A, Fonseca R, Greipp PR, McMaster MLet al. Clinicopathological definition of Waldenstrom's macroglobulinemia: consensus panel recommendations from the Second International Workshop on Waldenstrom's Macroglobulinemia.Semin Oncol 2003;30: 110–115.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Dimopoulos MA, Moulopoulos LA, Maniatis A, Alexanian R . Solitary plasmacytoma of bone and asymptomatic multiple myeloma.Blood 2000;96: 2037–2044.

    CAS PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Dimopoulos MA, Kiamouris C, Moulopoulos LA . Solitary plasmacytoma of bone and extramedullary plasmacytoma.Hematol Oncol Clin North Am 1999;13: 1249–1257.

    Article CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Rajkumar SV, Dispenzieri A, Kyle RA . Monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance, Waldenstrom macroglobulinemia, AL amyloidosis, and related plasma cell disorders: diagnosis and treatment.Mayo Clin Proc 2006;81: 693–703.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Dispenzieri A, Kyle RA, Lacy MQ, Rajkumar SV, Therneau TM, Larson DRet al. POEMS syndrome: definitions and long-term outcome.Blood 2003;101: 2496–2506.

    Article CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. 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: 842–854.

    Article CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Bataille R, Durie BG, Grenier J . Serum beta2 microglobulin and survival duration in multiple myeloma: a simple reliable marker for staging.Br J Haematol 1983;55: 439–447.

    Article CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Greipp PR, San Miguel JF, Durie BG, Crowley JJ, Barlogie B, Blade Jet al. International Staging System for multiple myeloma.J Clin Oncol 2005;23: 3412–3420.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Tricot G, Barlogie B, Jagannath S, Bracy D, Mattox S, Vesole DHet al. Poor prognosis in multiple myeloma is associated only with partial or complete deletions of chromosome 13 or abnormalities involving 11q and not with other karyotype abnormalities.Blood 1995;86: 4250–4256.

    CAS PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Smadja NV, Bastard C, Brigaudeau C, Leroux D, Fruchart C, Groupe Francais de Cytogenetique H . Hypodiploidy is a major prognostic factor in multiple myeloma.Blood 2001;98: 2229–2238.

    Article CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Fonseca R, Barlogie B, Bataille R, Bastard C, Bergsagel PL, Chesi Met al. Genetics and cytogenetics of multiple myeloma: a workshop report.Cancer Res 2004;64: 1546–1558.

    Article CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Fassas AB, Spencer T, Sawyer J, Zangari M, Lee CK, Anaissie Eet al. Both hypodiploidy and deletion of chromosome 13 independently confer poor prognosis in multiple myeloma.Br J Haematol 2002;118: 1041–1047.

    Article CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Rajkumar SV, Kyle RA . Multiple myeloma: diagnosis and treatment.Mayo Clin Proc 2005;80: 1371–1382.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Fonseca R, Blood E, Rue M, Harrington D, Oken MM, Kyle RAet al. Clinical and biologic implications of recurrent genomic aberrations in myeloma.Blood 2003;101: 4569–4575.

    Article CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Facon T, Avet-Loiseau H, Guillerm G, Moreau P, Genevieve F, Zandecki Met al. Chromosome 13 abnormalities identified by FISH analysis and serum beta2-microglobulin produce a powerful myeloma staging system for patients receiving high-dose therapy.Blood 2001;97: 1566–1571.

    Article CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Greipp PR, Lust JA, WM OF, Katzmann JA, Witzig TE, Kyle RA . Plasma cell labeling index and beta 2-microglobulin predict survival independent of thymidine kinase and C-reactive protein in multiple myeloma [see comments].Blood 1993;81: 3382–3387.

    CAS PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Blade J, Samson D, Reece D, Apperley J, Bjorkstrand B, Gahrton Get al. Criteria for evaluating disease response and progression in patients with multiple myeloma treated by high-dose therapy and haemopoietic stem cell transplantation. Myeloma Subcommittee of the EBMT. European Group for Blood and Marrow Transplant.Br J Haematol 1998;102: 1115–1123.

    Article CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Durie BGM, Harousseau J-L, Miguel JS, Blade J, Barlogie B, Anderson Ket al. International uniform response criteria for multiple myeloma.Leukemia 2006;20: 1467–1473.

    Article CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Anderson KC, Kyle RA, Rajkumar SV, Stewart AK, Weber D, Richardson P . Clinically relevant end points and new drug approvals for myeloma.Leukemia 2008;22: 231–239.

    Article CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This study was supported by Grants CA62242 and CA107476 from the National Cancer Institute.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Hematology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA

    R A Kyle & S V Rajkumar

Authors
  1. R A Kyle
  2. S V Rajkumar

Corresponding author

Correspondence toR A Kyle.

Rights and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Kyle, R., Rajkumar, S. Criteria for diagnosis, staging, risk stratification and response assessment of multiple myeloma.Leukemia23, 3–9 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1038/leu.2008.291

Download citation

Keywords

This article is cited by

Access through your institution
Buy or subscribe

Associated content

Focus

Myeloma

Advertisement

Search

Advanced search

Quick links


[8]ページ先頭

©2009-2026 Movatter.jp