Evaluation of the UK Myeloma Research Alliance Risk Profile in Chinese Patients with Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma without Autologous Stem Cell Transplantation

Abstract

Purpose Recently, the British Myeloma Research Alliance put forward a Myeloma Risk Profile (MRP) for the first time to stratify the prognosis risk of non-transplanted patients with multiple myeloma. However, only limited studies have evaluated the applicability of this model in the Chinese population. This study aimed to estimate the prognostic value of MRP in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma patients without autologous stem cell transplantation in China. Patients and Methods Patients with multiple myeloma in Wuxi People’s Hospital from January 1, 2007, to June 30, 2018 were evaluated based on the MRP score, and the relationship between the clinical outcome of patients with MM and the score was analyzed retrospectively. Results First, significant differences were observed in the overall survival (OS) (P<0.05) and progression-free survival (PFS) (P<0.05) between the low-, middle-, and high-risk groups. Second, in the bortezomib treatment subgroup and complex chromosome karyotype subgroup, OS and PFS were significantly shorter in the high-risk group than in the low-risk group (P<0.05). Third, the depth of remission still showed prognostic significance in the high-risk MRP group. Conclusion MRP is also applicable in Chinese patients with newly diagnosed MM who did not undergo transplantation, as it is simple and cost effective; hence, it is worth popularizing.

Prognostic impact of the UK Myeloma Research Alliance Risk Profile in transplant‐ineligible patients with multiple myeloma who received a melphalan, prednisolone, and bortezomib regimen: A supplementary analysis of JCOG1105

“…8 Several retrospective studies, including those with patients treated with bortezomibbased regimens, have reported the usefulness of the MRP. 9,10 However, caution must be taken in interpreting these results as patient backgrounds in the studies were more heterogeneous than those of JCOG1105 due to the retrospective nature of the studies.…”