Background & objectives:Survival of patients with multiple myeloma (MM) has improved in the past two decades following use of novel agents and autologous stem cell transplantation. To determine predictors of long-term outcome, data of MM patients who underwent autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) at a tertiary care centre in north India were retrospectively analyzed.Methods:Between 1995 and 2016, 349 MM patients underwent ASCT. Patients' median age was 52 yr, ranging from 29 to 68 yr, 68.2 per cent were males. Thirty three per cent patients had international staging system (ISS) Stage III and 68.5 per cent had received novel agents-based induction. High-dose melphalan (200 mg/m2) was used for conditioning; patients with renal insufficiency (estimated glomerular filtration rate <40 ml/min) received melphalan 140-150 mg/m2.Results:Post-transplant, 317 of 349 (90.8%) patients responded; complete [complete response (CR)] −213 (61%)], very good partial response (VGPR) −62 (17.8%) and PR in 42 (12%)]. Induction with novel agents, pre-transplant chemosensitive disease, transplant in first remission and serum albumin (≥3.5 g/dl) were predictors of significant response. At a median follow up of 73 months, median overall survival (OS) was 90 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 70.8-109.2], and progression-free survival (PFS) was 41 months (95% CI 33.0-49.0). On multivariate analysis, achievement of CR post-transplant, transplant in first remission, ISS Stages I and II (vs. III), absence of extramedullary disease and serum albumin ≥3.5 g/dl were predictors of prolonged OS. For PFS, achievement of post-transplant CR and transplant in first remission were predictors of superior outcome.Interpretation & conclusions:Treatment with novel agents, achievement of complete remission post-transplant, ISS Stages I and II, absence of extramedullary disease and transplant in first remission were predictors of long-term survival for patients with MM.

No abstract

The development of acute myeloid leukemia has been attributed to various factors, including hereditary, radiation, drugs, and certain occupational exposures. The association between malignancy and venous thromboembolism events is well established. Here, we present a case of a 70-year-old Indian man who had presented with arterial and venous thrombosis, and the patient was later diagnosed with acute promyelocytic leukemia (APL). In our case, the patient presented with right lower limb deep venous thrombosis and pulmonary thromboembolism four months prior to the diagnosis of APL. Although thromboembolic event subsequent to the diagnosis of malignancy, and especially during the chemotherapy has been widely reported, this prior presentation with simultaneous occurrence of both venous and arterial thromboembolism has rarely been reported. We take this opportunity to state the significance of a complete medical evaluation in cases of recurrent or unusual thrombotic events.

11064 Background: Reaching to the correct histo-pathological diagnosis of soft tissue sarcomas (STS) is a great challenge and is cornerstone for treatment planning. Need of expertise for diagnosis is limited by lack of expert pathologists and dedicated sarcoma oncologists in India. Through this study we highlight the pattern of pathological diagnosis and accuracy outside specialist centre. Methods: We did retrospective analysis of all patients referred to us with diagnosis of STS in the last 12 months (January 2016 to 2017). According to protocol, all patients had pathology review from our institute. If blocks were available then they were reviewed and if necessary, fresh biopsy was performed. Besides, pathological diagnosis was reviewed in joint clinic, giving clinico-radiological inputs to sarcoma pathologists. For patients diagnosed outside and had discordant report, we divided them into major discrepancy (including change of diagnosis of sarcoma to benign or other histological entity that could potentially change the treatment plan) or minor discrepancy (like mild change in grade or histopathological diagnosis not affecting the treatment plan). Results: There were 149 patients registered with median age of 36 years (14-77 years) and 93 patients (62.4%) were males. 85(57%) patients had localized disease. Most common subtypes were synovial sarcoma 16%, liposarcoma 9%, soft tissue ewings sarcoma 9%, MPNST 9%, leiomyosarcoma 8%, pleomorphic undifferentiated sarcoma 8% etc. Of 149 patients, 42 had not been worked up outside and thus comparison was not possible while 4 patients couldn’t retrieve blocks and repeat biopsy could not be performed. Of 97 patients (biopsy = 84, FNAC = 13) who had diagnosis from outside, 37% had major discrepancy and 24% had minor discrepancy compared with our biopsy review. Major discrepancy was more in non extremity than extremity STS (p = 0.003). Conclusions: Pathological diagnosis of more than half of patients referred from outside was discordant with respect to diagnosis of our centre with major implications on 37%. We believe this is due to lack of sarcoma pathology experts and virtually non-existent multidisciplinary clinics in set up outside tertiary care centres.