Myeloma Bone Disease: A Comprehensive Review

Multiple myeloma (MM) is a neoplastic clonal proliferation of plasma cells in the bone marrow microenvironment, characterized by overproduction of heavy- and light-chain monoclonal proteins (M-protein). These proteins are mainly found in the serum and/or urine. Reduction in normal gammaglobulins (immunoparesis) leads to an increased risk of infection. The primary site of origin is the bone marrow for nearly all patients affected by MM with disseminated marrow involvement in most cases. MM is known to involve bones and result in myeloma bone disease. Osteolytic lesions are seen in 80% of patients with MM which are complicated frequently by skeletal-related events (SRE) such as hypercalcemia, bone pain, pathological fractures, vertebral collapse, and spinal cord compression. These deteriorate the patient's quality of life and affect the overall survival of the patient. The underlying pathogenesis of myeloma bone disease involves uncoupling of the bone remodeling processes. Interaction of myeloma cells with the bone marrow microenvironment promotes the release of many biochemical markers including osteoclast activating factors and osteoblast inhibitory factors. Elevated levels of osteoclast activating factors such as RANK/RANKL/OPG, MIP-1-α., TNF-α, IL-3, IL-6, and IL-11 increase bone resorption by osteoclast stimulation, differentiation, and maturation, whereas osteoblast inhibitory factors such as the Wnt/DKK1 pathway, secreted frizzle related protein-2, and runt-related transcription factor 2 inhibit osteoblast differentiation and formation leading to decreased bone formation. These biochemical factors also help in development and utilization of appropriate anti-myeloma treatments in myeloma patients. This review article summarizes the pathophysiology and the recent developments of abnormal bone remodeling in MM, while reviewing various approved and potential treatments for myeloma bone disease.

Pediatric Palliative Care Program Implementation in LMICs: A Systematic Review using SWOT Analysis

CONTEXT

Of the estimated 21 million children world-wide who need access to pediatric palliative care (PPC), about 97% currently reside in low-and middle-income countries (LMIC). Access to PPC programs in LMIC are limited, and successful strategies and barriers to program implementation remain understudied.

OBJECTIVES

We conducted a systematic review to characterize the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats (SWOT) of PPC program implementation in LMIC.

METHODS

Using PRISMA guidelines, we searched key databases from inception to April 2022 and reviewed references manually. Eligible abstracts and articles included content related to composition, role, function, purpose, development, or implementation of PPC programs in LMIC.

RESULTS

From 7,846 titles and abstracts and 229 full-text articles, we identified 62 eligible abstracts and articles; 16 articles were added following manual searching of references, resulting in 78 items (28 abstracts, 50 articles). A total of 82 unique programs were described, including nine from low-income, 27 from lower-middle income, and 44 from upper-middle income countries. Common strengths included presence of multidisciplinary teams and psychosocial care. Common weaknesses included lack of PPC training and research infrastructure. Common opportunities involved collaboration between institutions, government support, and growth of PPC education. Common threats comprised limited access to PPC services, medications, and other resources.

CONCLUSION

PPC programs are being successfully implemented in resource limited settings. Hospice and palliative medicine organizations should sponsor PPC clinicians to describe and disseminate more detailed descriptions of successes and challenges with program implementation to help build and grow further PPC initiatives in LMICs.

Narrative medicine interventions for oncology clinicians: a systematic review

PURPOSE

As narrative medicine interventions are integrated increasingly into medical practice, growing evidence indicates benefits for healthcare professionals. Presently, the prevalence and impact of narrative medicine interventions in the field of oncology remain unknown. This systematic review synthesizes published data on narrative medicine interventions in oncology and reports current knowledge on feasibility, acceptability, and impact on cancer care professionals.

METHODS

Following PRISMA guidelines, we searched Ovid Medline, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases from inception through February 2024. Eligible articles were published in English and contained original data on feasibility, acceptability, and/or impact of a narrative medicine intervention for oncology professionals. Database searches identified 2614 deduplicated articles, from which 50 articles were identified for full-text assessment and 11 articles met inclusion criteria. Two additional articles were identified through manual review of references.

RESULTS

Thirteen articles described 12 unique narrative medicine interventions targeting cancer care professionals. All studies described their respective interventions as feasible, acceptable, and impactful for participants. Interventions involved writing, reading, reflection, and other narrative-based strategies. Standardized validated tools evaluated outcomes including burnout, empathy expression, secondary trauma, quality of humanistic care, and well-being. Participants reported appreciation of opportunities for reflection, perspective sharing, and bearing witness, which they perceived to strengthen wellness and community.

CONCLUSION

Narrative medicine interventions are feasible and acceptable and may bolster oncology clinicians' functioning across domains. Multi-site, prospective, randomized studies are needed to investigate the broader impact of narrative medicine interventions and advance the science of narrative medicine in oncology.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: CRD42022369432.