2017
DOI: 10.1111/bjh.14753
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Diagnosis and monitoring for light chain only and oligosecretory myeloma using serum free light chain tests

Abstract: This study aims to guide the integration of serum free light chain (sFLC) tests into clinical practice, including a new rapid test (Seralite ). Blood and urine analysis from 5573 newly diagnosed myeloma patients identified 576 light chain only (LCO) and 60 non-secretory (NS) cases. Serum was tested by Freelite and Seralite at diagnosis, maximum response and relapse. 20% of LCO patients had urine FLC levels below that recommended for measuring response but >97% of these had adequate sFLC levels (oligosecretory)… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1

Citation Types

3
39
0
1

Year Published

2017
2017
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

2
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 32 publications
(43 citation statements)
references
References 23 publications
3
39
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Dejoiu and colleagues compared UPEP and sFLC assays as a method of choice in the LCMM population, demonstrating superiority of FLC in response assessment and prognosis (sFLC 100% positive and measurable; UPEP 78% positive; 64% measurable). Another comparison was performed comparing involved FLC (iFLC) and rFLC, showing higher prognostic value of rFLC …”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Dejoiu and colleagues compared UPEP and sFLC assays as a method of choice in the LCMM population, demonstrating superiority of FLC in response assessment and prognosis (sFLC 100% positive and measurable; UPEP 78% positive; 64% measurable). Another comparison was performed comparing involved FLC (iFLC) and rFLC, showing higher prognostic value of rFLC …”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, evaluation has been carried out with N Latex in patients with renal impairment (without myeloma) where, unlike Seralite® and Freelite®, an adapted κ:λ ratio renal reference range was found not to be required [20]. Good clinical concordance has been shown between the different sFLC methods previously [14,15,17]. However, it is essential to remember that assays cannot be used interchangeably as they quantitate sFLC levels in different ways, particularly monoclonal FLCs [14,15,20,21].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Good clinical concordance has been shown between the different sFLC methods previously [14,15,17]. However, it is essential to remember that assays cannot be used interchangeably as they quantitate sFLC levels in different ways, particularly monoclonal FLCs [14,15,20,21]. Users need to ensure consecutive samples from individual patients are compared using the same assay, taking into account the specific healthy and renal reference limits provided by the different tests.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…From the report by Heaney et al . () it is clear that absolute values vary considerably between assays even when performed in the same laboratory. For example, measurable disease is defined as involved FLC (iFLC) ≥100 mg/l for the Freelite assay whereas difference in FLC (dFLC) ≥20 mg/l was used for the Seralite assay.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%