International prognostic index (IPI) - A critical comparison with five multiple myeloma staging systems in the group of 270 patients treated by conventional chemotherapy

Neoplasma

Volumn 53, Issue 4, 2006, Pages 277-284

  Scudla, V ^a   Zemanova, M ^a   Minarik, J ^a   Bacovsky, J ^a   Ordeltova, M ^a   Indrak, K ^a   Budikova, M ^a   Dusek, L ^b   Farbiakova, V ^c  

^a PALACKÝ UNIVERSITY   (Czech Republic)

^b MASARYK UNIVERSITY   (Czech Republic)

^c Hospital T inec   (Czech Republic)

Author keywords

Clinical staging systems; International Prognostic Index; Multiple myeloma; New independent prognostic factors

Indexed keywords

ALBUMIN; BETA 2 MICROGLOBULIN; PROPIDIUM IODIDE; THYMIDINE KINASE;

ARTICLE; CANCER DIAGNOSIS; CANCER RISK; CANCER STAGING; CANCER SURVIVAL; CANCER THERAPY; COHORT ANALYSIS; CONTROLLED STUDY; HUMAN; HUMAN CELL; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; KAPLAN MEIER METHOD; LOG RANK TEST; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MEDICAL ASSESSMENT; MULTIPLE MYELOMA; PATIENT SELECTION; PLASMA CELL; PROGNOSIS; SCORING SYSTEM;

EID: 33746277311     PISSN: 00282685     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (46)

1. KYLE RA. Why better prognostic factors for multiple myeloma are needed. Blood 1994; 83: 1713-1716.
2. CARBONE P, KEELERHOUSE LE, GEHAN E. Plasmacytic myeloma. A study of relationship of survival to various clinical manifestation and anomalous protein type in 112 patients. Amer J Med 1967; 42: 937-948.
3. SCUDLA V, BACOVSKY J, VYTRASOVA M, ORDELTOVA M, PAPAJIK T, OPICHALOVA D. Prognostic factors and clinical staging systems in multiple myeloma in the group of 237 patients from years 1991-2002 treated with conventional therapy. I. Prognostic significance of selected clinical and laboratory markers. II. Prognostic significance of some existing staging systems. Clin Oncol (Brno) 2002; 15 Suppl 1: 7-14, 15-20.
4. CAVO M, GALIENI P, GRIMALDI M. Improvement of Durie-Salmon staging for multiple myeloma by adding platelet count as a stratifying variable: Amultivariate regression analysis of 163 untreated patients. Eur J Haematol 1989; 43 Suppl 51: 99-104.
5. COHEN JH, SILBERMAN RR, LARSEN WE. Combination chemotherapy with intermittent 1,3-Bis(2-chlorethyl) 1-nitrosourea (BCNU), cyclophosphamide and prednisone for multiple myeloma. Blood 1979; 54: 824-836.
6. COSTA G, ENGLE RL, SCHILLING A. Melphalan and prednisone: An effective combination for the treatment of multiple myeloma. Amer J Med 1973; 54: 589-599.
7. DURIE BGM, SALMON SE. A clinical staging system for multiple myeloma. Cancer 1975; 36: 842-854.
8. GASSMANN W, PRALLE H, HAFERLACH T, PANDUREVIC S, GRAUBNERM et al. Staging systems for multiple myeloma: a comparison. Brit J Haematol 1985; 59: 703-711.
9. HARLEY JB, POJAK TF, MACINTYRE OR. Improved survival of increased-risk myeloma patients on combined triple-alkylating agent therapy: A study of the CALGB. Blood 1979; 54: 13-21.
10. SCUDLA V, INDRAK K. Prognostic significance of stratification systems in multiple myeloma. I. Risk categories (good and poor risk). II. Clinical staging sytems. Neoplasma 1985; 32:469-478, 481-493.
11. GREIPP PR, KYLE RA. Staging, kinetics, and prognosis in multiple myeloma. In: Wiernick PH, Goldman JM, Dutcher JP, Kyle RA, editors. Neoplastic diseases of the blood. Cambridge: Cambridge university press, Fourth edition, 2003: 488-526.
12. HAJEK R, SCUDLA V, KREJCI M, VYTRASOVA M, SCHUTZOVA M et al on behalf of Czech Myeloma Group. New International staging system applied in 588 patients: experience of the Czech Myeloma Group. Haematologica & Hematol J 2005; 90 Suppl 1: 101.
13. GREIPP PR, SAN MIGUEL J, Myeloma Prognostic Index Working Group. Progres towards an International Prognostic Index for multiple myeloma. VIII International Myeloma Workshop, Banff 2001; Abstr: 58.
14. GREIPP PR, SAN MIGUEL JF, FONSECA R, AVET-LOISEAU H, JACOBSON JL et al. Development of an International Prognostic Index (IPI) for myeloma: report of the International Myeloma Working Group. Hematol J 2003; 4 Suppl 1: 42-43.
15. 2-microglobulin in myeloma: optimal use for staging, prognosis and treatment - a prospective study of 160 patients. Blood 1984; 63: 468-476.
16. BATAILLE R, DURIE BGM, GRENIER J, SANY J. Prognostic factors and staging in multiple myeloma: a reappraisal. J Clin Oncol 1986; 4: 80-87.
17. JACOBSON JL, HUSSEIN MA, BARLOGIE B, DURIE BGM, CROWLEY JJ. A new staging system for multiple myeloma patients based on the Southwest Oncology Group (SWOG) experience. Brit J Haematol 2003; 122: 441-450.
18. SAN MIGUEL JF, GARCÍA-SANZ R, GONZÁLES M, MORO MJ, HERNANDEZ JM et al. A new staging system for multiple myeloma based on the number of S-phase plasma cells. Blood 1995; 85: 448-455.
19. SCUDLA V, VYTRASOVA M, MINARIK J, BACOVSKY J, ORDELTOVA M et al for Czech Myeloma Group. International prognostic index - a critical comparison with five other multiple myeloma staging systems in patients treated by conventional chemotherapy. Haematologica & Hematol J 2005; 90 Suppl 1: 100-101.
20. DURIE BGM, KYLE RA, BELCH A, BENSINGER W, BLADE J et al. Myeloma management guidelines: a consensus report from the Scientific Advisors of the International Myeloma Foundation. Hematol J 2003; 4: 379-398.
21. SAKALOVA A, TICHY M, BLAHA M. Generalised plasmocytoma. Bratislava: Veda, 1983: 1-231.
22. SAN MIGUEL JF, GARCÍA-SANZ R. Multiple myeloma: differential diagnosis and prognosis. In: Gahrton G, Durie BGM, Samson DM, editors. Multiple myeloma and related disorders. London: Arnold, 2004: 179-199.
23. SCUDLA V, ORDELTOVA M, BACOVSKY J, VYTRASOVA M, SUMNA E et al. A contribution to examination of propidium iodide and annexin V plasma cells indices in multiple myeloma. Neoplasma 2003; 50: 363-371.
24. SAN MIGUEL JF, FONSECA R, GREIPP PR. Prognostic factors and classification for multiple myeloma (Contribution to clinical management). In: Malpas JS, Bergsagel DE, Kyle RA, editors. Myeloma biology and management. Philadelphia: Saunders, 2004: 189-199.
25. 2-microglobulin and plasma cell labeling index, benefit from high dose vs conventional chemotherapy. Haematologica 1999; 84: 905-910.
26. 2 microglobulin level and plasma cell labeling indices as prognostic factors in patients with newly diagnosed myeloma. Blood 1988; 72: 219-223.
27. 2 microglobulin predict survival independent of thymidine kinase and C-reactive protein in multiple myeloma. Blood 1993; 81: 3382-3387.
28. GREIPP PR, LEONG T, BENNETT JM, GAILLARD JP, KLEIN B et al. Plasmablastic morphology and independent prognostic factor with clinical and laboratory correlates: Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) Myeloma trial E 9486 report by the ECOG Myeloma laboratory group. Blood 1998; 91: 2501-2507.
29. MURAKAMI H, KAWADA T, SAITOH T, UCHIUMI H, MORIDAIRA K et al. A staging system for multiple myeloma based on the morphology of myeloma cells. Eur J Haematol 1999; 62: 63-67.
30. DRACH J, ACKERMANN J, KAUFMANN H. Molecular cytogenetics and clinical outcome in multiple myeloma. VIIIth International Myeloma Workshop, Banff 2001; Abstr: 15-16.
31. 2-microglobulin produce a powerful myeloma staging system for patients receiving high-dose therapy. Blood 2001; 97: 1566-1571.
32. MERLINI G, WALDENSTRÖM JG, JAYAKAR SD. A new improved clinical staging system for multiple myeloma based on analysis of 123 treated patients. Blood 1980; 55: 1011-1019.
33. PULKKI K, PELEINIEMI TT, RAJAMAKI A, TIENHAARA A, LAAKSO M, LAHTINEN R. Soluble interleukin-6 receptor as a prognostic factor in multiple myeloma. Brit J Haematol 1996; 92: 370-374.
34. SPICKA I, CIESLAR P, PROCHAZKA B, JIRSA M, CHRZ M et al. Prognostic factors and markers of activity of the multiple myeloma. Cas Lek Ces 2000; 139: 208-212.
35. BERGSAGEL PL, CHESI M, TRUDEL S, AFFTER M, ROBBIANI DF et al. Primary IGH translocations and D-type cyclin expression provide a novel molecular classification of multiple myeloma. Hematol J 2003; 4 Suppl 1: 15-16.
36. GRIGNANI G, GOBBI PG, FORMISANO R. A prognostic index for multiple myeloma. Brit J Cancer 1996; 73: 1101-1107.
37. DIMOPOULOS MA, ZERVAS K, POULI A, HAMILOS G, MITSOULI C et al for the Greek Myeloma Study Group (GMSG). Independent validation of the Southwest Oncology Group (SWOG) staging system: a clinically useful staging system for multiple myeloma. Blood 2002; 100: 2361.
38. 2-microglobulin alone. Haematologica & Hematol J 2005; 90 Suppl 1: 97-98.
39. 2-microglobulin (B2M) and albumin for multiple myeloma (MM) proposed by the International Myeloma Working Group (IMWG) with similar results using B2M alone. Blood 2003; 102 Part 1: 937a.
40. LUDWIG H, DURIE BGM, RASMUSSEN E, CROWLEY J. Poorer survival with age in myeloma is closely linked to higher International staging system at presentation but not correlated with other known independent risk factors. Haematologica & Hematol J 2005; 90 Suppl 1: 98-99.
41. HERNANDEZ J, OLIVIER C, FISAC R, QUEIZAN JA, GARCIA-SANZ R et al. Comparison of the International prognostic index and Dune-Salmon staging system to detect differences in the levels of biochemical markers of bone remodeling and serum cytokines in multiple myeloma. Haematologica & Hematol J 2005; 90 Suppl 1: 97.
42. HUNGRIA VTM, MARTINEZ G, QUERO A, RIBEIRO KCB, PERES AL et al. Validation of the International staging system for multiple myeloma: a retrospective analysis of 172 patients at two Brazilian centers. Haematologica & Hematol J 2005; 90 Suppl 1:99.
43. DUNN JA, DRAYSON MT, BEGUM G, BARTH NJ, MACLENAN CM. The search for a new and improved staging system for non-intensive chemotherapy: the UK Medical Research Council's experience. Haematologica & Hematol J 2005; 90 Suppl 1:98.
44. International Myeloma Working Group. Criteria for the classification of monoclonal gammopathies, multiple myeloma and related disorders: a report of the International Myeloma Working Group. Brit J Haematol 2003; 121: 749-757.
45. ANDERSON K. Overview of new therapies and future directions. Haematologica & Hematol J 2005; 90 Suppl 1: 27.
46. ADAM Z, Czech Myeloma Group. Myeloma diagnosis and management: guidelines of Czech Myeloma Group. Transf Hematol 2003; 9: 3-31.