0
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Utility of repeating bone marrow biopsy for confirmation of complete response in multiple myeloma

      editorial

      Read this article at

      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

          Introduction Achievement of complete response (CR) in multiple myeloma (MM) has been defined by the International Myeloma Working Group (IMWG) as concurrent demonstration of disappearance of monoclonal protein in the serum and urine with negative immunofixation (IFE), in addition to a bone marrow biopsy demonstrating < 5% bone marrow plasma cells (BMPC) 1,2 . With advancements in myeloma-directed therapies and increasing CR rates, it is imperative that accurate and uniform application of CR criteria be utilized, especially with increased incorporation of minimal residual disease assessment 3,4 . While obtaining serum and urine samples for monoclonal protein analyses are simple, bone marrow biopsies are associated with pain, are inconvenient, and are burdensome to patients. We are occasionally confronted with the scenario of the bone marrow fulfilling the criterion for CR (<5% PCs) with simultaneous positive serum or urine immunofixation. In these circumstances, a repeat bone marrow biopsy would be required at the time of serum and urine monoclonal protein disappearance, subjecting patients to another painful and uncomfortable procedure that is unlikely to yield different results or influence clinical decision making. We, therefore, investigated the utility of repeating a BM biopsy at the time of serum and urine IFE negativity in myeloma patients undergoing autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) with prior marrow demonstrating <5% PCs. Patients and methods A retrospective cohort study was conducted on all myeloma patients seen at Mayo Clinic who underwent an autologous stem cell transplant between 1998 and 2016. Patients included in the analysis had to have a pre-transplant BM biopsy demonstrating <5% PCs with concomitant serum and urine IFE studies and post-transplant bone marrow biopsy, serum, and urine IFE studies available for analysis. Frequency and degree of BMPC clonality were recorded in the pre-transplant BM biopsy. Serum and urine immunofixation status, collected within 30 days of the pre-transplant bone marrow biopsy was recorded as positive or negative. Among patients who had a positive pre-transplant serum or urine IFE, post-transplant data (day 100 after SCT) including BMPC percentage, serum IFE, and urine IFE were recorded, with all IFE collections occurring within 30 days from the bone marrow biopsy. We then examined the proportion of patients in whom the serum and urine IFE became negative and its association with BMPC percentages. All statistical analyses, storage of data, and image generation were performed using the JMP 14.1.0 statistical package (SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC). Approval for this study was obtained from the Mayo Clinic IRB and informed consent was obtained from all patients for review of their medical records. Results The median time from the pre-transplant bone marrow biopsy to date of transplant was 0.53 months (0.2–5 months). We identified 277 patients in our database with pre-transplant IFE positivity and pre-transplant BMPC <5%with post-transplant data available for analysis. Among these patients, 179 (64.6%) patients had detectable clonal plasma cells in the pre-transplant BM biopsy, with a median clonal PC percentage of 0.55% (0.1%-29%). Following the transplant, 116/277 (42%) patients were found to meet IFE criteria for CR (i.e. IFE negative in both serum and urine) while 161 (58%) patients remained IFE positive post-transplant in either the serum or urine (VGPR). A repeat marrow examination was done at a median of 3.3 months (1.7–4.9 months) from transplant. Among the patients with negative post-transplant serum and urine IFE (n = 116), 98% had unchanged BMPC percentage post-transplant (BMPC < 5%) and the remaining 2 patients demonstrated BMPC compositions of 15% and 7%, both of which had 6% clonal plasma cells. In contrast, among the cohort of patients who were IFE positive post-transplant, 14 (8.7%) demonstrated an increase in PC composition in their post-transplant bone marrow biopsies, with a median BMPC cellularity of 7.5% (5–80%) among which 12 had detectable clonal plasma cells with a median of 5.6% (0.2–41.2%), (Fig. 1). The remaining 94% of patients had unchanged BMPC composition (Fig. 1). Fig. 1 Post-transplant bone marrow biopsy plasma cell percentage with corresponding post-transplant immunofixation status among patients proceeding to ASCT with bone marrow plasma cells <5%, but IFE positivity. All patients represented in scatter plot met inclusion parameters including pre-transplant BMPC < 5% and pre-transplant serum or urine IFE positivity (n = 277). Among patients with post-transplant IFE positivity, 14 had BMPC > 5%. Among those with post-transplant IFE negativity, 2 had BMPC > 5%. Discussion Based on current IMWG criteria for confirming CR in myeloma, a patient must demonstrate serum and urine IFE negativity with concomitant bone marrow findings of <5% plasma cells 1 . While the timing in concordance of these parameters allows for only one bone marrow biopsy, we are occasionally confronted with conflicting results, specifically with a bone marrow biopsy fulfilling criteria for CR with contradictory peripheral studies. In these cases, IMWG guidelines would suggest repeating a bone marrow biopsy at the time when both serum and urine IFE become negative, thus subjecting the patient to another distressing and painful procedure 1 . The results of our study demonstrate that in 98% of patients whose bone marrow biopsy met criteria for CR before immunofixation studies (negative urine and serum IFE), there was no difference in the BMPC percentage with a repeat biopsy after ASCT. One explanation for this phenomenon is the difference in the monoclonal protein clearance kinetics and BMPC composition, with a delay in disappearance of M protein relative to marrow disease clearance 5 . Among the remaining patients with available post-transplant serum and urine IFE not otherwise meeting criteria for CR, 14 (8.7%) demonstrated an increase in the composition of BMPC from <5% pre-transplant. This finding could be explained by myeloma’s patchy marrow involvement which is reflected in the initial, falsely reassuring bone marrow biopsy with true disease activity captured upon subsequent marrow sampling 6 . This rationale is supported by the presence of clonal plasma cells in the post-transplant BM biopsy in this cohort, detected in 12 of 14 patients. Similarly, the observed inconsistency could also be due to an aggressive disease phenotype with progression occurring near day 100, however in these settings serum and/or urine IFE were in accordance with BM findings. The limitation in relying solely on the bone marrow biopsy is further supported with the finding of positive immunofixation either in the serum, urine, or both in these clinical settings. This reinforces the need and utility of all three parameters to accurately confirm a state of CR, however not necessarily simultaneously. One limitation of our study is this analysis only evaluated IMWG criteria for CR and not stringent complete response (sCR), which requires serum free light chain assessment and the absence of clonal plasma cells via immunohistochemistry. Secondly, we do not provide details regarding the status of soft tissue plasmacytomas via imaging to correlate with our findings. Finally, while 64% of patients had detectable clonal plasma cells in the pre-transplant biopsy, in general the proportion of clonal PCs in these samples were found at low prevalence (median 0.55%), the relevance of which has been shown to correlate with improvement in clinical outcomes, especially if present at <5% 7 . Our findings suggest that in the setting where pre-myeloma directed therapy serum or urine IFE lag in fulfilling CR criteria with BMPC <5%, repeating a bone marrow biopsy after treatment is unnecessary and unlikely to provide any additional information and influence approach to care outside of the clinical trial setting. This would save many myeloma patients from unneeded biopsies if added to the current IMWG complete response criteria.

          Related collections

          Most cited references5

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

          New criteria for response assessment: role of minimal residual disease in multiple myeloma.

          Assessment of minimal residual disease (MRD) is becoming standard diagnostic care for potentially curable neoplasms such as acute lymphoblastic leukemia. In multiple myeloma (MM), the majority of patients will inevitably relapse despite achievement of progressively higher complete remission (CR) rates. Novel treatment protocols with inclusion of antibodies and small molecules might well be able to further increase remission rates and potentially also cure rates. Therefore, MRD diagnostics becomes essential to assess treatment effectiveness. This review summarizes reports from the past 2 decades, which demonstrate that persistent MRD by multiparameter flow cytometry, polymerase chain reaction, next-generation sequencing, and positron emission tomography/computed tomography, predicts significantly inferior survival among CR patients. We describe the specific features of currently available techniques for MRD monitoring and outline the arguments favoring new criteria for response assessment that incorporate MRD levels. Extensive data indicate that MRD information can potentially be used as biomarker to evaluate the efficacy of different treatment strategies, help on treatment decisions, and act as surrogate for overall survival. The time has come to address within clinical trials the exact role of baseline risk factors and MRD monitoring for tailored therapy in MM, which implies systematic usage of highly sensitive, cost-effective, readily available, and standardized MRD techniques.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Complete response correlates with long-term survival and progression-free survival in high-dose therapy in multiple myeloma.

            There are a number of reports in literature data on the long-term outcomes of patients with multiple myeloma treated with high-dose therapy and autologous stem cell transplantation (HDT/SCT). While in general these data support the association between maximal tumor response and overall survival or progression-free survival after HDT/SCT, some trials have failed to find such correlation and there is no recent comprehensive literature analysis of this issue. We, therefore, performed a comprehensive literature review to identify prospective and retrospective studies on HDT/SCT in frontline multiple myeloma in which long-term outcomes were reported according to best tumor response observed. Following a prospectively defined search strategy we identified 21 studies (10 prospective and 11 retrospective studies) in which outcomes of 4,990 HDT/SCT patients according to their best tumor response were reported. The majority of these studies indicated a correlation between maximal response during or after HDT/SCT and long-term outcomes (overall survival and event-free/progression-free survival). The conclusions in individual studies report on the association between maximal response following induction therapy and long-term outcomes were more heterogeneous, possibly due to the low rate of complete response after standard induction therapy in each individual study. We, therefore, performed two types of meta-analyses, one based on the p-values reported for these associations in the individual studies, and one based on the primary response and outcome data provided in the individual studies. Both meta-analyses indicated highly significant associations between maximal response (complete response/near complete response/very good partial response) during or after HDT/SCT and long-term outcomes (overall survival and event-free/progression-free survival). Both meta-analyses also provided evidence of highly significant associations between maximal response following induction therapy and long-term outcomes (overall survival and event-free/progression-free survival).
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              The importance of bone marrow examination in determining complete response to therapy in patients with multiple myeloma.

              The current definition of complete response in multiple myeloma includes a requirement for a bone marrow (BM) examination showing less than 5% plasma cells in addition to negative serum and urine immunofixation. There have been suggestions to eliminate the need for BM examinations when defining complete response. We evaluated 92 patients with multiple myeloma who achieved negative immunofixation in the serum and urine after therapy and found that 14% had BM plasma cells more than or equal to 5%. Adding a requirement for normalization of the serum-free light chain ratio to negative immunofixation studies did not negate the need for BM studies; 10% with a normal serum-free light chain ratio had BM plasma cells more than or equal to 5%. We also found that, on achieving immunofixation-negative status, patients with less than 5% plasma cells in the BM had improved overall survival compared with those with 5% or more BM plasma cells (6.2 years vs 2.3 years, respectively; P = .01).
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                kumar.shaji@mayo.edu
                Journal
                Blood Cancer J
                Blood Cancer Journal
                Nature Publishing Group UK (London )
                2044-5385
                2 October 2020
                2 October 2020
                October 2020
                : 10
                : 10
                : 95
                Affiliations
                [1 ]GRID grid.66875.3a, ISNI 0000 0004 0459 167X, Division of Hematology, , Mayo Clinic, ; Rochester, MN USA
                [2 ]GRID grid.66875.3a, ISNI 0000 0004 0459 167X, Division of Hematopathology, , Mayo Clinic, ; Rochester, MN USA
                [3 ]GRID grid.66875.3a, ISNI 0000 0004 0459 167X, Division of Hematology and Molecular Medicine, , Mayo Clinic, ; Rochester, MN USA
                [4 ]GRID grid.66875.3a, ISNI 0000 0004 0459 167X, Division of Nephrology and Hypertension, Department of Internal Medicine, , Mayo Clinic, ; Rochester, MN USA
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5651-1411
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8284-3495
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5862-1833
                http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5392-9284
                Article
                363
                10.1038/s41408-020-00363-6
                7532166
                33009363
                e86ff9fb-4f7b-4371-8234-391b558a91a2
                © The Author(s) 2020

                Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

                History
                : 20 July 2020
                : 14 September 2020
                : 18 September 2020
                Categories
                Editorial
                Custom metadata
                © The Author(s) 2020

                Oncology & Radiotherapy
                myeloma
                Oncology & Radiotherapy
                myeloma

                Comments

                Comment on this article