For Publishers
DiscoveryMetadataPeer reviewHostingPublishing
For Researchers
JoinPublishReviewCollect
Register
Blog
About
Search
Advanced search
My ScienceOpen
Search
For Publishers
For Researchers
Blog
About
16
views
74
references
 Top references
cited by
23
    
0 reviews
 Review
0
comments
 Comment
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      160
      similar
       All similar
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Pathophysiology and management of monoclonal gammopathy of renal significance

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Recent years have witnessed a rapid growth in our understanding of the pathogenic property of monoclonal proteins. It is evident that some of these small monoclonal proteins are capable of inducing end-organ damage as a result of their intrinsic physicochemical properties. Hence, an umbrella term, monoclonal gammopathy of clinical significance (MGCS), has been coined to include myriad conditions attributed to these pathogenic proteins. Because kidneys are the most commonly affected organ (but skin, peripheral nerves, and heart can also be involved), we discuss MGRS exclusively in this review. Mechanisms of renal damage may involve direct or indirect effects. Renal biopsy is mandatory and demonstration of monoclonal immunoglobulin in kidney, along with the corresponding immunoglobulin in serum or urine, is key to establish the diagnosis. Pitfalls exist at each diagnostic step, and a high degree of clinical suspicion is required to diagnose MGRS. Recognition of MGRS by hematologists and nephrologists is important, because timely clone-directed therapy improves renal outcomes. Autologous stem cell transplant may benefit selected patients.

          Related collections

          Most cited references74

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Proliferative glomerulonephritis with monoclonal IgG deposits.

          G. Markowitz, D A Valeri, Anjali Satoskar … (2009)
          Dysproteinemias that result in monoclonal glomerular deposits of IgG are relatively uncommon. Here, we report the largest series of proliferative glomerulonephritis with monoclonal IgG deposits, a form of renal involvement by monoclonal gammopathy that mimics immune-complex glomerulonephritis. We retrospectively identified 37 patients, most of whom were white (81%), female (62%), or older than 50 yr (65%). At presentation, 49% had nephrotic syndrome, 68% had renal insufficiency, and 77% had hematuria. In 30% of the patients, we identified a monoclonal serum protein with the same heavy- and light-chain isotypes as the glomerular deposits (mostly IgG1 or IgG2), but only one patient had myeloma. Histologic patterns were predominantly membranoproliferative (57%) or endocapillary proliferative (35%) with membranous features. Electron microscopy revealed granular, nonorganized deposits, and immunofluorescence demonstrated glomerular deposits that stained for a single light-chain isotype and a single heavy-chain subtype, most commonly IgG3kappa (53%). During an average of 30.3 mo of follow-up for 32 patients with available data, 38% had complete or partial recovery, 38% had persistent renal dysfunction, and 22% progressed to ESRD. Correlates of ESRD on univariate analysis were higher creatinine at biopsy, percentage of glomerulosclerosis, and degree of interstitial fibrosis but not immunomodulatory treatment or presence of a monoclonal spike. On multivariate analysis, higher percentage of glomerulosclerosis was the only independent predictor of ESRD. Only one patient lacking a monoclonal spike at presentation subsequently developed a monoclonal spike and no patient with a monoclonal spike at presentation subsequently developed a hematologic malignancy. We conclude that proliferative glomerulonephritis with monoclonal IgG deposits does not seem to be a precursor of myeloma in the vast majority of patients.
          Article 0 comments Cited 116 times – based on 0 reviews     Review now
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            How I treat monoclonal gammopathy of renal significance (MGRS).

            Jean-Paul Fermand, Frank Bridoux, Robert A Kyle … (2013)
            Recently, the term monoclonal gammopathy of renal significance (MGRS) was introduced to distinguish monoclonal gammopathies that result in the development of kidney disease from those that are benign. By definition, patients with MGRS have B-cell clones that do not meet the definition of multiple myeloma or lymphoma. Nevertheless, these clones produce monoclonal proteins that are capable of injuring the kidney resulting in permanent damage. Except for immunoglobulin light chain amyloidosis with heart involvement in which death can be rapid, treatment of MGRS is often indicated more to preserve kidney function and prevent recurrence after kidney transplantation rather than the prolongation of life. Clinical trials are rare for MGRS-related kidney diseases, except in immunoglobulin light chain amyloidosis. Treatment recommendations are therefore based on the clinical data obtained from treatment of the clonal disorder in its malignant state. The establishment of these treatment recommendations is important until data can be obtained by clinical trials of MGRS-related kidney diseases.
            Article 0 comments Cited 92 times – based on 0 reviews     Review now
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Renal monoclonal immunoglobulin deposition disease: a report of 64 patients from a single institution.

              Sanjeev Sethi, Nelson Leung, M Valeri … (2012)
              To better define the clinical-pathologic spectrum and prognosis of monoclonal immunoglobulin deposition disease (MIDD), this study reports the largest series. Characteristics of 64 MIDD patients who were seen at Mayo Clinic are provided. Of 64 patients with MIDD, 51 had light chain deposition disease, 7 had heavy chain deposition disease, and 6 had light and heavy chain deposition disease. The mean age at diagnosis was 56 years, and 23 patients (36%) were ≤50 years of age. Clinical evidence of dysproteinemia was present in 62 patients (97%), including multiple myeloma in 38 (59%). M-spike was detected on serum protein electrophoresis in 47 (73%). Serum free light chain ratio was abnormal in all 51 patients tested. Presentation included renal insufficiency, proteinuria, hematuria, and hypertension. Nodular mesangial sclerosis was seen in 39 patients (61%). During a median of 25 months of follow-up (range, 1-140) in 56 patients, 32 (57%) had stable/improved renal function, 2 (4%) had worsening renal function, and 22 (39%) progressed to ESRD. The mean renal and patient survivals were 64 and 90 months, respectively. The disease recurred in three of four patients who received a kidney transplant. Patients with MIDD generally present at a younger age than those with light chain amyloidosis or light chain cast nephropathy. Serum free light chain ratio is abnormal in all MIDD patients, whereas only three-quarters have abnormal serum protein electrophoresis. The prognosis for MIDD is improving compared with historical controls, likely reflecting earlier detection and improved therapies.
              Article 0 comments Cited 79 times – based on 0 reviews     Review now
                Bookmark
                All references

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Title: Blood Advances
                Publisher: American Society of Hematology
                ISSN (Print): 2473-9529
                ISSN (Electronic): 2473-9537
                Publication date Created: August 13 2019
                Publication date (Print): August 13 2019
                Publication date (Electronic): August 13 2019
                Volume: 3
                Issue: 15
                Pages: 2409-2423
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Internal Medicine, Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, Chandigarh, India;
                [2 ]Oxford Kidney Unit, Oxford University Hospitals, NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford, United Kingdom;
                [3 ]MRC Population Health Research Unit, Clinical Trial Service Unit and Epidemiological Studies Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, Headington, Oxford, United Kingdom;
                [4 ]Department of Haematology, Oxford University Hospitals, NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford, United Kingdom;
                [5 ]NIHR Biomedical Research Centres Blood Theme, Oxford, United Kingdom;
                [6 ]Department of Cellular Pathology, John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford University Hospitals, NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford, United Kingdom; and
                [7 ]Oxford Myeloma Centre for Translational Research, Oxford, United Kingdom
                Article
                DOI: 10.1182/bloodadvances.2019031914
                PMC ID: 6693003
                PubMed ID: 31409583
                SO-VID: 6fe384a9-8a44-4658-808c-efcae267c3b7
                Copyright © © 2019
                History

                Data availability:

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_

                Similar content160

                See all similar

                Cited by23

                See all cited by

                Most referenced authors940

                See all reference authors