consultant hematology oncology SEHA al ain, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates
Introduction: Plasma cell disorders are a heterogeneous group of disease ranging from Monocloncal gammopathy of unknown significance to Multiple myeloma (MM) and the highly lethal plasma cell leukemia. The standard of care for induction has been become a triplet regimen lately. Here we describe our experience with the management of MM patients
Methods: This is a retrospective analysis of Thirty-five patients who were seen with diagnosis with plasma cell disorders from January 1, 2016 till June 30th 2018 at our center in the UAE. Patients with solitary plasmacytoma and plasma cell leukemia were excluded from further analysis (N=3). Thirty-two patients were included in the analysis.
Results: The median age was 58 years (range 26 to 94 years). Male to female ratio was 3:1. Biochemical classification showed ten patients with light chain disease only. Twelve patients had IgG kappa disease, eight had IgG lambda while there was one with IgA lambda disease and one was non-secretory with diffuse plasmacytomas.
ISS staging (based on albumin and Beta 2 microglobulin) showed ISS stage 1=7, ISS stage 2= 13, ISS stage 3=8 and data was not available for four patients (diagnosed elsewhere). Cytogenetic risk stratification was not possible due to lack of access to interphase FISH.
Seven patients did not receive any therapy either due to refusal for further investigation and therapy or poor performance status and comorbidities. Four of these seven have expired while the other three have been lost to follow-up.
Twenty-four patients were given induction therapy with a Bortezomib (V)-based regimen while one received IMIDs-based treatment. Regimens and patient numbers are as follows: RVd (Lenalidomide/V/dexamethasone) (N=16), PVd (pomalidomide instead of R due to renal insufficiency) (N=1), V/thalidomide (T) (N=1), VCd (N=2; one for secondary amyloidosis) and Vd (N=4) (poor performance status and/or comorbidities). All patients were given zoledronic acid as well as herpes zoster prophylaxis. Venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis was prescribed based on published guidelines.
Response evaluation was performed in patients receiving at least four cycles of therapy: CR(N=7); Very Good Partial Remission (VGPR) (N=6); Partial Response (PR) (N=5) and not evaluable for response due to lack of data (N=7). Five patients were documented to have received autologous stem cell transplant (autoSCT). Seven patients, lost to follow up after induction presumably received an autoSCT.
Conclusions: This is the first report on the management of MM patients in UAE. With a median follow-up of 216 days (range 3 to 839 days) the response rate to induction therapy was 72% (CR+ VGPR). We are unable to report progression free survival due to short follow-up. This response rate of 72% (VGPR or better) is less than the reported in the literature. This may partly be due to lack of patient data regarding induction therapy elsewhere, the use of double over triplet regimens and the absence of autoSCT facilities.
