The clinical spectrum of IgM monoclonal gammopathy: A single center retrospective study of 377 patients

Cao, Xinxin; Meng, Qi; Mao, Yueying; Su, Wei; Zhen, Jun-feng; Shen, Kaini; Zhang, Chunlan; Xf, Huang; Duan, Minghui; Zhang, Wei; Zhu, Tienan; Cai, Huacong; Chen, Miao; Zhou, Daobin; Li, Jian

doi:10.1016/j.leukres.2016.05.002

Cited by 22 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Our preliminary study found that IgM, LDH, IgA, К, and IgG markers were more effective in diagnosing WM. However, the level of serum β 2 ‐MG, a risk factor for WM, was not significantly different among IgM monoclonal gammopathies, which is the same as that found in other studies . Further analysis showed that the best single serum marker for diagnosing WM was IgM, serum IgM levels ≥ 14.20 g/L were used as the cutoff values for diagnosis WM as opposed to other IgM monoclonal gammopathies, and the diagnostic sensitivity and specificity were 91.2% and 76.7%, respectively.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 81%

“…However, the level of serum β 2 -MG, a risk factor for WM, was not significantly different among IgM monoclonal gammopathies, which is the same as that found in other studies. 12 Further analysis showed that the best single serum marker for diagnosing WM was IgM,…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…[6][7][8][9][10][11] A single-center retrospective study of the clinical features of 377 IgM monoclonal gammopathies by the Li Jian team showed that the sensitivity and specificity of serum IgM levels > 15.5g/L, as a marker to differentially diagnose WM, were 80.6% and 89.2%, respectively. 12 In our study, we retrospectively analyzed the basic clinical features and laboratory serum markers of 182 patients with IgM monoclonal gammopathy who were initially diagnosed by serum immunofixation electrophoresis (sIFE) in our hospital in order to explore the diagnostic value of laboratory serum markers in the differential diagnosis of WM and other IgM monoclonal gammopathies.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Serum markers in the differential diagnosis of Waldenstrom macroglobulinemia and other IgM monoclonal gammopathies

Zou

Yang

Liao

et al. 2018

Clinical Laboratory Analysis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background IgM monoclonal gammopathy can be present in a broad spectrum of diseases. We evaluated the value of serum markers in the differential diagnosis of Waldenstrom macroglobulinemia (WM) and other types of IgM monoclonal gammopathies. Methods We included patients who were first admitted to hospital and identified as having IgM monoclonal gammopathy by serum immunofixation electrophoresis (sIFE). We evaluated basic clinical features, sIFE, diagnosis, and serum markers. Furthermore, we applied the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve to analyze the differential diagnosis value of serum markers for WM. Finally, we used logistic regression and ROC curve to analyze the differential diagnosis value of multimarker combinations to identify WM. Results IgM monoclonal gammopathy was most frequently found in patients with Waldenstrom macroglobulinemia, followed by monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance (MGUS), B‐cell non‐Hodgkin Lymphoma (B‐NHL), and multiple myeloma (MM). Serum markers showed significant differences among the four diseases. The diagnostic markers LDH, IgM, IgG, IgA, and serum light chain К had higher diagnostic efficiency. Among these markers, serum IgM provided the highest diagnostic efficiency. Additionally, the combined use of all five serum markers provided the most effective diagnosis. Conclusions The five serum markers, LDH, IgM, IgG, IgA, and К, each yielded a specific efficacy in differential diagnosis of WM. The single marker with the highest diagnostic efficiency was the serum IgM level. However, a combination of multiple serum markers was better than the use of a single marker in diagnosing WM. The combined use of all five serum markers provided the most effective diagnosis, with an AUC of .952 and sensitivity and specificity of 87.8% and 86.9%, respectively.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 81%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Serum markers in the differential diagnosis of Waldenstrom macroglobulinemia and other IgM monoclonal gammopathies

Zou

Yang

Liao

et al. 2018

Clinical Laboratory Analysis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The possible prognostic impact of IgM monoclonal component in DLBCL has been recently highlighted by Cao et al in 151 patients …”

Section: Other Lymphoproliferative Disorders Which May Be Associated mentioning

confidence: 95%

Diagnostic framing of IgM monoclonal gammopathy: Focus on Waldenström macroglobulinemia

Tedeschi

Conticello

Rizzi

et al. 2018

Hematological Oncology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The finding of an IgM monoclonal gammopathy often represents a diagnostic challenge. In fact, there are many pathological disorders associated with this condition, each of which has distinctive characteristics and requires specific clinical, instrumental, and laboratory assessments to set the appropriate treatment. This review has two aims. Firstly, to provide a framework of the broad spectrum of IgM-associated disorders: (1) monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance (MGUS); (2) Waldenström macroglobulinemia (WM); (3) IgM-related disorders (among which hyperviscosity syndrome, light chain amyloidosis, cold agglutinin disease, cryoglobulinaemia, IgM neuropathy, Polyneuropathy, organomegaly, endocrinopathy, monoclonal gammopathy, skin changes (POEMS) syndrome, Castleman disease); (4) IgM-secreting multiple myeloma (IgM-MM); and (5) other lymphoproliferative disorders which may be associated with IgM (such as chronic lymphocytic leukemia, small lymphocytic lymphoma, and B-cell non Hodgkin lymphoma). Secondly, to give a detailed insight regarding diagnosis and treatment of WM.

show abstract

“…4,10,11,16,17,20,[26][27][28][29][30][31][32][33][34][35][36][37][38][39][40] To our knowledge, our study is the first to describe individual disease courses over time, 11,16,28 transfusion-dependent. Our study is also the first to characterize HRU in CAD, which is substantial in this population.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cold agglutinin disease burden: a longitudinal analysis of anemia, medications, transfusions, and health care utilization

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

The clinical spectrum of IgM monoclonal gammopathy: A single center retrospective study of 377 patients

Cited by 22 publications

References 20 publications

Serum markers in the differential diagnosis of Waldenstrom macroglobulinemia and other IgM monoclonal gammopathies

Serum markers in the differential diagnosis of Waldenstrom macroglobulinemia and other IgM monoclonal gammopathies

Diagnostic framing of IgM monoclonal gammopathy: Focus on Waldenström macroglobulinemia

Cold agglutinin disease burden: a longitudinal analysis of anemia, medications, transfusions, and health care utilization

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About