Aline G Ramirez-Alvarado, Susana Gabriela Gonzalez-Prieto, Yael Solis-Aranda, Ana Paulina Rivera-Espinoza, Jaime Garcia-Chavez, Laura Arcelia Montiel-Cervantes, Jorge Vela-Ojeda
{"title":"t(4;14), and revised myeloma comorbidity index as good predictors of survival for multiple myeloma.","authors":"Aline G Ramirez-Alvarado, Susana Gabriela Gonzalez-Prieto, Yael Solis-Aranda, Ana Paulina Rivera-Espinoza, Jaime Garcia-Chavez, Laura Arcelia Montiel-Cervantes, Jorge Vela-Ojeda","doi":"10.1080/17474086.2025.2534706","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Cytogenetic tests are essential prognostic indicators for patients diagnosed with multiple myeloma (MM). The study aimed to evaluate the prevalence of cytogenetic abnormalities and their prognostic significance in patients with newly diagnosed MM.</p><p><strong>Research design and methods: </strong>A cohort study involving 88 cases. Malignant plasma cells were isolated, and interphase fluorescent in situ hybridization was performed on bone marrow samples.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The gain of 1q was observed in 17 (19%) patients, followed by t(4;14) in 10 (11.5%), and the 17p or P53 mutation was found in only 6 (7%) patients. Three patients (3.5%) exhibited t(14;16). Amplification of 1q was not detected in any of the samples. The presence of t(4;14), anemia, renal disease, a revised myeloma comorbidity index (R-MCI) of 7-9, and a lack of treatment response were associated with poor progression-free survival. Additionally, t(4;14), anemia, elevated LDH, an R-MCI of 7-9, and absence of maintenance treatment correlated with decreased overall survival. In the Cox regression analysis, the presence of t(4;14) and an R-MCI of 7-9 were the most significant factors predicting worse outcomes.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The t(4;14) and RMCI are reliable predictors of poor survival in newly diagnosed MM patients.</p>","PeriodicalId":12325,"journal":{"name":"Expert Review of Hematology","volume":" ","pages":"1-8"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Expert Review of Hematology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17474086.2025.2534706","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEMATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Cytogenetic tests are essential prognostic indicators for patients diagnosed with multiple myeloma (MM). The study aimed to evaluate the prevalence of cytogenetic abnormalities and their prognostic significance in patients with newly diagnosed MM.
Research design and methods: A cohort study involving 88 cases. Malignant plasma cells were isolated, and interphase fluorescent in situ hybridization was performed on bone marrow samples.
Results: The gain of 1q was observed in 17 (19%) patients, followed by t(4;14) in 10 (11.5%), and the 17p or P53 mutation was found in only 6 (7%) patients. Three patients (3.5%) exhibited t(14;16). Amplification of 1q was not detected in any of the samples. The presence of t(4;14), anemia, renal disease, a revised myeloma comorbidity index (R-MCI) of 7-9, and a lack of treatment response were associated with poor progression-free survival. Additionally, t(4;14), anemia, elevated LDH, an R-MCI of 7-9, and absence of maintenance treatment correlated with decreased overall survival. In the Cox regression analysis, the presence of t(4;14) and an R-MCI of 7-9 were the most significant factors predicting worse outcomes.
Conclusions: The t(4;14) and RMCI are reliable predictors of poor survival in newly diagnosed MM patients.
期刊介绍:
Advanced molecular research techniques have transformed hematology in recent years. With improved understanding of hematologic diseases, we now have the opportunity to research and evaluate new biological therapies, new drugs and drug combinations, new treatment schedules and novel approaches including stem cell transplantation. We can also expect proteomics, molecular genetics and biomarker research to facilitate new diagnostic approaches and the identification of appropriate therapies. Further advances in our knowledge regarding the formation and function of blood cells and blood-forming tissues should ensue, and it will be a major challenge for hematologists to adopt these new paradigms and develop integrated strategies to define the best possible patient care. Expert Review of Hematology (1747-4086) puts these advances in context and explores how they will translate directly into clinical practice.