Avet-Loiseau Hervé, Davies Faith E, Samur Mehmet K, Corre Jill, D'Agostino Mattia, Kaiser Martin F, Raab Marc S, Weinhold Niels, Gutierrez Norma C, Paiva Bruno, Neri Paola, Weisel Katja, Maura Francesco, Walker Brian A, Bustoros Mark, Stewart A Keith, Usmani Saad Z, Hillengass Jens, Chng Wee Joo, Keats Jonathan J, Martinez-Lopez Joaquin, Sperling Adam S, Touzeau Cyrille, Zhan Fenghuang, Raje Noopur S, Cavo Michele, Bolli Niccolò, Ghobrial Irene M, Dhodapkar Madhav V, Jagannath Sundar, Spencer Andrew, Parekh Samir, Bahlis Nizar J, Lonial Sagar, Sonneveld Pieter, Bergsagel Leif, Orlowski Robert Z, Morgan Gareth, Mateos María Victoria, Rajkumar S Vincent, San Miguel Jesus F, Anderson Kenneth C, Moreau Philippe, Kumar Shaji, Prósper Felipe, Munshi Nikhil C
Unité de Genomique du Myélome, Institut National de la Santé et de la Recherche Médicale, University Cancer Center of Toulouse, Toulouse, France.
Perlmutter Cancer Center, NYU Langone Health, New York, NY.
J Clin Oncol. 2025 Jun 9:JCO2401893. doi: 10.1200/JCO-24-01893.
Despite significant improvements in survival of patients with multiple myeloma (MM), outcomes remain heterogeneous, and a significant proportion of patients experience suboptimal outcomes. Importantly, traditional prognostic factors based on data from patients treated with older therapies no longer capture prognosis accurately in the contemporary era of novel triplet or quadruplet therapies. Therefore, risk stratification requires refinement in the context of available and investigational treatment options in routine practice and clinical trials, respectively. The current identification of high-risk MM (HRMM) in routine practice is based on the Revised International Staging System, which stratifies patients using a combination of widely available serum biomarkers and chromosomal abnormalities assessed via fluorescence in situ hybridization. In recent years, a substantial body of evidence concerning additional clinical, biological, and molecular/genomic prognostic factors has accumulated, along with new MM risk stratification tools and consensus reports. The International Myeloma Society, along with the International Myeloma Working Group, convened an Expert Panel with the primary aim of revisiting the definition of HRMM and formulating a practical and data-driven consensus definition, based on new evidence from molecular/genomic assays, updated clinical data, and contemporary risk stratification concepts. The Panel proposes the following Consensus Genomic Staging (CGS) of HRMM which relies upon the presence of at least one of these abnormalities: (1) del(17p), with a cutoff of >20% clonal fraction, and/or mutation; (2) an IgH translocation including t(4;14), t(14;16), or t(14;20) along with 1q+ and/or del(1p32); (3) monoallelic del(1p32) along with 1q+ or biallelic del(1p32); or (4) β2 microglobulin ≥5.5 mg/L with normal creatinine (<1.2 mg/dL).
尽管多发性骨髓瘤(MM)患者的生存率有了显著提高,但治疗结果仍存在异质性,相当一部分患者的治疗效果欠佳。重要的是,基于接受旧疗法治疗患者的数据得出的传统预后因素,在当代新型三联或四联疗法时代已无法准确反映预后情况。因此,风险分层需要分别在常规实践和临床试验中现有及正在研究的治疗方案背景下进行完善。目前在常规实践中识别高危MM(HRMM)是基于修订后的国际分期系统,该系统使用广泛可用的血清生物标志物和通过荧光原位杂交评估的染色体异常对患者进行分层。近年来,关于额外的临床、生物学和分子/基因组预后因素的大量证据不断积累,同时也出现了新的MM风险分层工具和共识报告。国际骨髓瘤协会与国际骨髓瘤工作组召集了一个专家小组,其主要目的是重新审视HRMM的定义,并根据分子/基因组检测的新证据、更新的临床数据和当代风险分层概念,制定一个实用且以数据为驱动的共识定义。该专家小组提出了以下HRMM的共识基因组分期(CGS),其依据是存在以下至少一种异常情况:(1)17p缺失,克隆比例阈值>20%,和/或 突变;(2)IgH易位,包括t(4;14)、t(14;16)或t(14;20),以及1q+和/或1p32缺失;(3)单等位基因1p32缺失,伴有1q+或双等位基因1p32缺失;或(4)β2微球蛋白≥5.5 mg/L,肌酐正常(<1.2 mg/dL)。