Characteristics of Patients Presenting with Secondary Myelodysplastic Syndrome During Treatment with Lenalidomide for Relapsed/Refractory Multiple Myeloma: 5q Deletions Can Be Observed
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Abstract 1876 Multiple myeloma (MM) is a neoplastic process involving plasma cells and the second most common hematologic malignancy after lymphoma. The relative survival rates for MM have been increasing over the last three decades, from 26% in the 1970s to 35% in recent years, due to the introduction of autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT), and more recently, the introduction of novel agents. Among patients (pts) diagnosed with MM between 1997 and 2006, those who received at least one of the novel agents thalidomide, lenalidomide and bortezomib had double the median survival compared to those who did not receive any of these treatments (Kumar SK, Blood, 2008). Given that improvements are being made in the survival of myeloma pts, they may be more prone treatment-related complications, including treatment-related myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) or acute myelogenous leukemia (AML). Herein we report seven cases of secondary MDS occurring in MM pts during treatment with lenalidomide-based (len-based) therapy for relapsed/refractory (rel/ref) MM. The pts examined were diagnosed with MM between 2000 and 2006, and consisted of 5 males and 2 females, ranging from 56–79 years of age (median age: 69 years). Five of the seven pts had undergone ASCT whereas the remaining two pts were treated with oral alkylating agents (cyclophosphamide/prednisone or melphalan/dexamethasone) as first-line treatment; one pt received another ASCT as second-line therapy. All pts received len-based regimens as second, third, or fourth-line therapy. The median time to development of MDS after diagnosis of MM was 70.5 months (range: 43.7 to 115.3 months). Of the pts that received ASCT as part of first-line therapy, the median time to development of MDS was 49.9 months (range: 35.6 to 76.1 months) post ASCT, while the median time to development of MDS after initiation of len-based treatment was 19.2 months (range: 1.1 to 33.8 months). All pts presented with decreasing blood counts at the time of MDS diagnosis; at this time the median hemoglobin level was 94 g/L (range 67–107 g/L), ANC 1.7 × 109/L (range 0.9–8.2 × 109/L) and platelet count 62 × 109/L (range 11–148 × 109/L) and only 1 pt had circulating blast cells. Pathological examination of blood films, bone marrow aspirates and biopsies confirmed the presence of MDS in all pts (4 pts with refractory cytopenia with multilineage dysplasia, 2 of whom also had ringed sideroblasts, 2 pts with refractory cytopenia with unilineage dysplasia, and 1 pt with refractory anemia with excess blasts-II); three had concomitant MM in the marrow. Of interest, 3 pts with evidence of dysmegakaryopoiesis demonstrated the presence of hypolobated megakaryocytes, similar to that seen in 5q- syndrome. Conventional cytogenetics demonstrated complex karyotypes in 6 pts, and 4 had structural abnormalities of chromosome 5, with deletion of the long arm, including 2 of the 3 pts with megakaryocyte hypolobation. Four of the 7 pts also had abnormalities involving chromosome 7, including deletion of 7q. In addition, 2 pts had deletions of chromosome 17 including deletion of TP53 (17q13). Although len may be a simple bystander in the development of MDS in rel/ref MM pts previously treated with alkylating agents, the observation of chromosome 5 abnormalities, including 5q deletion, is of note. Therefore, despite its established efficacy in the treatment of MDS, as well as of MM, len may not be able to protect against the development of MDS in pts previously treated with alkylating agents. As in other malignancies in which prolonged survival has been achieved, the increased life span of MM pts mandates monitoring for late complications of therapy. A progressive decrease in peripheral blood counts during treatment with len-based regimens warrants consideration of secondary MDS. Disclosures: Chen: Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Trudel:Celgene: Honoraria. Reece:Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».