In multiple myeloma, bone‐marrow lymphocytes harboring the same chromosomal abnormalities as autologous plasma cells predict poor survival
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Chromosomal abnormalities in plasma cells (PCs) from multiple myeloma (MM) provide a clonal signature to identify malignant cells. BM-lymphocytes from MM aspirates, defined by stringent criteria, were screened for the same chromosomal abnormalities as autologous PCs, including translocations, deletions, and amplifications. For 200 MM patients, we evaluated BM mononuclear cells to identify lymphocytes and autologous PCs on the same slide, followed by interphase fluorescence in situ hybridization to characterize their chromosomal abnormalities. Of all patients having a given chromosomal abnormality(s) in PCs, 45% showed that same abnormality(s) in 2-37% (median = 5%) of BM-lymphocytes. Most translocations, amplifications, and deletions found in MM PCs were also detected in lymphocytes, above the healthy-donor "cut-off." In patients having chromosomally abnormal CD20(-) PCs, chromosomally abnormal lymphocytes were found among CD20+ cells confirming them as B cells. Exceptions were amplification of 1q21 or p53 deletion, which characterize PCs but were undetectable in BM-lymphocytes, suggesting that processes leading to these abnormalities may be exclusive to PCs. For a set of 75 patients whose BM-lymphocytes and PCs were analyzed by all six probe sets, 58% of those with abnormal PC also had abnormal BM-lymphocytes harboring from one to five different abnormalities. Confirming the clinical significance of chromosomally abnormal BM-lymphocytes, MM patients having abnormalities in both lymphocytes and PC had significantly worse survival than those with abnormalities only in PC (HR = 2.68). The presence of at least one chromosomal abnormality in BM-lymphocytes appears to have greater clinical significance than particular abnormalities. Chromosomally abnormal BM-lymphocytes correlate with poor outcome and by extrapolation with more aggressive disease.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".