Proliferation is a central independent prognostic factor and target for personalized and risk-adapted treatment in multiple myeloma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Proliferation of malignant plasma cells is a strong adverse prognostic factor in multiple myeloma and simultaneously targetable by available (e.g. tubulin polymerase inhibitors) and upcoming (e.g. aurora kinase inhibitors) compounds. DESIGN AND METHODS: We assessed proliferation using gene expression-based indices in 757 samples including independent cohorts of 298 and 345 samples of CD138-purified myeloma cells from previously untreated patients undergoing high-dose chemotherapy, together with clinical prognostic factors, chromosomal aberrations, and gene expression-based high-risk scores. RESULTS: In the two cohorts, 43.3% and 39.4% of the myeloma cell samples showed a proliferation index above the median plus three standard deviations of normal bone marrow plasma cells. Malignant plasma cells of patients in advanced stages or those harboring disease progression-associated gain of 1q21 or deletion of 13q14.3 showed significantly higher proliferation indices; patients with gain of chromosome 9, 15 or 19 (hyperdiploid samples) had significantly lower proliferation indices. Proliferation correlated with the presence of chromosomal aberrations in metaphase cytogenetics. It was significantly predictive for event-free and overall survival in both cohorts, allowed highly predictive risk stratification (e.g. event-free survival 12.7 versus 26.2 versus 40.6 months, P < 0.001) of patients, and was largely independent of clinical prognostic factors, e.g. serum β₂-microglobulin, International Staging System stage, associated high-risk chromosomal aberrations, e.g. translocation t(4;14), and gene expression-based high-risk scores. CONCLUSIONS: Proliferation assessed by gene expression profiling, being independent of serum-β₂-microglobulin, International Staging System stage, t(4;14), and gene expression-based risk scores, is a central prognostic factor in multiple myeloma. Surrogating a biological targetable variable, gene expression-based assessment of proliferation allows selection of patients for risk-adapted anti-proliferative treatment on the background of conventional and gene expression-based risk factors.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".