Search

Copyright of Transfusiology & Haematology Today / Transfuze a Hematologie Dnes is the property of Czech Medical Association of JE Purkyne and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

In the pathogenesis of multiple myeloma (MM), both primary and secondary genetic changes play an important role. The latter includes deletion of TP53 gene, which belongs among a group of high-risk changes associated with significantly shorter progression-free survival as well as overall survival. Our objective was to determine the frequency and type of deletion of TP53 gene (17p13) in a group of 84 patients with MM or monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance (MGUS), comprising 41 males and 43 females with a median age of 61 years. In 45 patients, two distinct bone marrow samples were available, therefore we compared the results from these two collections, too. Bone marrow samples obtained from all patients were analysed using both conventional and molecular cytogenetic methods. To detect deletion of the TP53 gene, the FICTION technique with the LSI TP53/CEP 17 probe (Abbott Molecular) was used. The cut-off was set at 20%. The analysis of 84 patients with MM revealed deletion of TP53 gene in 12 (14%) patients; one patient had chromosome 17 monosomy. Deletion of TP53 gene was not observed in any of the six individuals with MGUS. Most frequently, the deletion was observed in more advanced stages of multiple myeloma. In 10 out 12 patients, the deletion of TP53 gene was a part of a complex karyotype changes. All deletions in our cohort were monoallelic. The study also confirmed a correlation between the deletion of TP53 gene and the deletion of RB1 gene. Our results support the recommendations of the European Myeloma Network supporting the role of routine examination of MM patients for TP53 gene deletion. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The authors present the case study of a multiple myeloma patient with a good primary response to induction chemotherapy and high-dose treatment supported by autologous peripheral stem cells. The following early and abrupt progression of the disease was characterised by a clone of the morphologically dedifferentiated population of tumorous cells including the loss of the ability to synthesize complete molecules of the monoclonal immunoglobulin and the overproduction of kappa free light chains. A cytogenetic examination revealed the development of a karyotype and the presence of secondary cytogenetic modifications with an unfavourable prognosis--translocation t(8;14) (q24;q32) and increased number of copies of the 1q21 area. The myeloma progression was associated with the subsequent resistance to a state-of-the-art combined therapy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Assessment of serum levels of free light chains (FLC-κ and FLC-λ) and recently heavy/light chain pairs of immunoglobulin (HLC-κ and HLC-λ) and their ratio (FLC-r and HLC-r) has significantly enriched traditional algorithm of multiple myeloma (MM) evaluation. The aim of the presented study was to assess the relationship of classical prognostic parameters of MM, standard FLC-κ/λ and HLC-κ/λ ratio ((s)FLC-r and (s)HLC-r), modified ratio of "involved/uninvolved" FLC and HLC ((m)FLC-r and (m)HLC-r ), the difference between "involved - uninvolved" FLC and HLC (FLC-dif. and HLC-dif.) to current stratification models of MM based on the result of cytogenetic analysis., Patients and Methods: In a group of 97 patients with MM we assessed serum levels of FLC by FreeliteTM method, and we calculated (s)FLC-r, (m)FLC-r and FLC-dif. indices by HevyliteTM method. For cytogenetic analysis we used FICTION (fluorescence immunophenotyping and interphase cytogenetics as a tool for the investigation of neoplasms). For MM stratification we used standard staging systems according to Durie-Salmon (D-S) and International Staging System (ISS) as well as novel stratification systems based on the results of cytogenetic analysis, ie. "Mayo Stratification of Myeloma and Risk-Adapted Therapy" (mSMART) and "Revised International Staging System" (R-ISS)., Results: Stratification mSMART and R-ISS has significantly different representation of "standard" or "low-risk" (71, 15.5, 11.3 a 29.9 %), "intermediate risk" (15.5, 53.6, 34 a 33 %) and "high risk" patients (13.4, 30.9, 54.7 a 37.1 %) compared to standard staging systems. mSMART stratification was compared to prognostic factors of MM (Hb, albumin, β(2)-M, creatinine and LDH), and the only significant relationship was found in the case of β(2)-M, R-ISS had relationship only to Hb and creatinine. In the case of D-S staging we found significant relationship of stages 1-3 and substages A and B to the levels of (m)FLC-r, FLC-dif. and (m)HLC-r, ISS had moreover relationship to k HLC-dif. and MIg concentration. Analysis of mSMART stratification showed primarily significant relationship of risk categories 1-3 to (m)FLC-r and (s)HLC-r indices, and R-ISS to (m)HLC-r index and MIg concentration. In both cytogenetics-based stratifications there was a lack of relationship to (s)FLC-r, FLC-dif. and HLC-dif. indices., Conclusion: Comparison of the results of standard staging systems according to D-S and ISS with cytogenetics based models mSMART and R-ISS showed different representation of risk groups, and significantly different relationship to classical prognostic factors together with original relationship of sMART stratification to (m)FLC-r and (s)HLC-r, and R-ISS to (m)HLC-r and MIg concentration.

Abnormalities of chromosome 1 are among the most frequent chromosomal aberrations in patients with multiple myeloma (MM) and are considered a poor-risk genetic feature. To define the frequency and minimal region of 1q gain, we performed immunophenotyping and fluorescence in situ hybridization, comparative genomic hybridization (CGH), and array-CGH in 30 patients in relapse and progression of MM. Gain of 1q21 was found in 15 patients (50%), and in 14 of them whole-arm gain was found. One of these 14 patients had trisomy of chromosome 1 together with whole arm 1q gain, and two others had segmental duplication together with whole arm 1q gain. Segmental duplication of 1q21.1 approximately q23.1 alone was found in one patient. These results confirmed a high frequency of 1q aberrations and revealed that the vast majority of patients with 1q aberration in relapse and progression of MM display whole arm 1q gain. Finally, we observed that 1q gain is highly associated with number of additional changes.

Reported here are 72 previously treated Philadelphia chromosome-positive (Ph+) CML patients on imatinib (IM) therapy, with a focus on patients with additional chromosomal aberrations (CAs). At the start of IM treatment, 49 patients exhibited only the Ph chromosome (68%) and 23 patients (32%) had one or more additional CAs. The most frequent additional changes were deletions on the der(9q) (8 of 23), trisomy 8 (3 of 23), and an extra copy of the Ph chromosome (2 of 23). Five patients had a complex karyotype. At the latest follow-up, 49 of the 72 patients (68%) were alive, including 15 of the 23 patients with additional CAs (65%). Median follow-up was 6.6 years; median duration of IM treatment was 4.4 years. In all, 35 of the 49 patients with Ph only (71%) and 10 of the 23 patients with additional CAs (43%) achieved complete cytogenetic response. All patients with deletion on der(9q) achieved complete cytogenetic response. There was no statistically significant difference in the overall survival of patients with additional CAs and patients with Ph as the sole abnormality. Patients in accelerated phase had significantly worse overall survival on IM, regardless of additional CAs. The present results confirm that the majority of previously treated Ph+ CML patients benefit from starting IM therapy, including patients with defined additional changes. In contrast, patients with complex karyotypes have poor prognosis, even with IM.