[Clinical characteristics and outcomes of patients newly diagnosed with multiple myeloma with extramedullary disease]

Comparison of clinical characteristics, treatment efficacy and survival in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma with single- versus multi-site extramedullary invasion

PURPOSE

We aimed to compare the clinical characteristics, treatment efficacy and survival in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma with single- versus multi-site extramedullary invasion.

METHODS

A total of 90 extramedullary multiple myeloma (EMM) patients were included. We compared the characteristics, overall remission rates (ORRs) and survival among patients with single-site and multi-site invasions. Comparison was also done regarding extramedullary-bone-related (EM-B) and extramedullary-extraosseous (EM-E) multiple myeloma patients.

RESULTS

Patients with multi-site invasion had higher LDH (179.0 U/L) than single-site invasion (P = 0.016). Significantly higher LDH was also showed in patients with EM-E (189.4 U/L) than EM-B (P = 0.025). The ORR of patients with single-site invasion (72.1%) was not significantly higher than multi-site invasion (68.2%) (P = 0.690). But the ORR of patients with EM-B was significantly higher than EM-E (78.2 vs. 56.3%, P = 0.031). Among patients with single-site invasion, the multivariate survival analysis showed that PI plus IMiD regimen significantly improved the PFS (P < 0.05). Among patients with multi-site invasion or with EM-B, the multivariate survival analysis confirmed the associations of rISS III with poor PFS and OS (P < 0.05). Among patients with EM-E, plasma cell percentage ≥ 20% was associated with significantly poor PFS and OS (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

rISS stage III was possibly associated with poor survival of EMM patients with multi-site invasion or with EM-B. Plasma cell percentage ≥ 20% was associated with poor survival of EMM patients with EM-E. Comparison should not only be done between single- and multi-site invasions, but also between EM-B and EM-E.

[Effects of extramedullary disease on patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma]

Objective: To summarize the characteristics of patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) admitted at Ruijin Hospital affiliated to Shanghai Jiaotong University School of Medicine. We compared the clinical characteristics and prognoses among patients with non-extramedullary disease (EMD), bone-related extramedullary (EM-B) disease, and extraosseous extramedullary (EM-E) disease and further explored the effects of autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (ASCT) for EMD. Methods: From January 2015 to January 2022, data of 114 patients (22%) with EMD out of 515 patients with NDMM were retrospectively analyzed; 91 (18%) and 23 (4%) patients comprised the EM-B and EM-E groups, respectively. The clinical characteristics of patients in all groups were compared with the Chi-square test. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) of patients were analyzed by the Kaplan-Meier method. Independent prognostic factors were determined using multivariate Cox proportional hazard model. Results: There were no significant differences in age, gender, ISS stage, light chain, creatinine clearance, cytogenetic risk, 17p deletion, ASCT, and induction regimens among the three groups. Overall, 13% of EM-E patients had IgD-type M protein, which was significantly higher than that in EM-B patients (P=0.021). The median PFS of patients in the non-EMD, EM-B, and EM-E groups was 27.4, 23.1, and 14.0 months; the median OS was not reached, 76.8 months, and 25.6 months, respectively. The PFS (vs non-EMD, P=0.004; vs EM-B, P=0.036) and OS (vs non-EMD, P<0.001; vs EM-B, P=0.002) were significantly worse in patients with EM-E, while those were not significantly different between patients with EM-B and those with non-EMD. In the multivariate analysis, EM-E was an independent prognostic factor for OS in patients with NDMM (HR=8.779, P<0.001) and negatively impacted PFS (HR=1.874, P=0.050). In those who did not undergo ASCT, patients with EM-B had significantly worse OS than those with non-EMD (median 76.8 months vs. not reached, P=0.029). However, no significant difference was observed in the PFS and OS of patients with EM-B and those with non-EMD who underwent ASCT. Conclusions: Compared to patients with either non-EMD or EM-B, those with EM-E had the worst prognosis. EM-E was an independent risk factor for OS in patients with NDMM. ASCT can overcome the poor prognosis of EM-B.