Classification and prognostic evaluation in multiple myeloma. A retrospective study of relationship of survivals and responses to chemotherapy to immunological types, 20 single prognostic factors, 15 clinical staging systems, and 6 morphological classifications.
In a group of 136 completely followed up patients with multiple myeloma, the prognostic significance of the immunological myeloma types, of 20 different single prognostic factors, of 15 clinical staging systems, and of 6 morphological classifications was retrospectively investigated by means of the calculation of mean survivals, survival curves, and responses to chemotherapy. A univariate analysis was employed in order to correlate each prognostic parameter at presentation with the survival in the whole group; a multivariate analysis according to the Cox's hazards regression model was used in order to select the most powerful prognostic variables. The patients were grouped according to the myeloma immunological types, to the mean value of each single prognostic factor, and to each stage of the clinical and morphological systems. Causes of death were also related to immunological multiple myeloma types. All single variables, except age and serum calcium, presented a significant relationship with the survival, even if at different significance levels. Cox's regression model selected among them, serum levels of beta 2-microglobulin, percentage of bone marrow plasma cells, hemoglobinemia, lytic bone lesions, and Bence-Jones proteinuria as the most significant factors related to survival. Each clinical and morphological staging system divided groups of patients with significant differences in mean survivals, or in survival curves, or in response to therapy. Multiple myeloma type IgA and micromolecular, with Bence-Jones proteinuria, and type lambda were associated with a poor prognosis, with low therapeutical response, and with the development of fatal renal failure. All these parameters, together with new prognostic factors, are useful in the prognostic evaluation, and, when applied in different steps of the diagnosis and the therapy, allow of studying the clinical course of multiple myeloma under different perspectives, in order to have a more complete picture of the disease and of the single patient.
Pasqualetti
P
P
Department of Internal Medicine, School of Medicine and Surgery, University of L'Aquila, Italy.
Colantonio
D
D
Collacciani
A
A
Casale
R
R
Natali
G
G
D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D000369:Aged, 80 and over; D000970:Antineoplastic Agents / Q000627:therapeutic use; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D009101:Multiple Myeloma / Q000145:classification* / Q000276:immunology / Q000473:pathology; D009367:Neoplasm Staging; D011379:Prognosis; D012189:Retrospective Studies; D016019:Survival Analysis
D000970:Antineoplastic Agents