Serum-free light chains combined with the Revised International Staging System could further distinguish the superior and inferior clinical outcome of multiple myeloma patients

Abstract

The Revised International Staging System (R-ISS) was introduced as a powerful prognostic system to stratify patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM). The serum-free light chain (sFLC) has been developed as a valuable marker to monitor multiple myeloma (MM) progression and response. Therefore, it is imperative to combine R-ISS and sFLC prognostic factors as modified R-ISS (MR-ISS) to better stratify patients into homogeneous survival subgroups, especially to further distinguish the high-risk MM patients who are likely to experience rapid progression or relapse. A total of 595 patients with NDMM were studied retrospectively. We performed the K-adaptive partitioning in 595 NDMM patients to define the MR-ISS classification: stage I includes R-ISS stage I and sFLC ratio < 80 (n = 66); stage III includes R-ISS stage III with sFLC ratio ≥ 80 (n = 87); stage II includes all the remaining conditions (n = 442). The median OS was not reached for MR-ISS stage I, 48.67 months for stage II, and 21.13 months for stage III. A significant OS difference of MR-ISS stage I and III patients has a particularly superior and inferior outcome compared with R-ISS stage I and III, respectively, which showed the similar results in PFS analysis. Validation of results was performed in an independent cohort. Our data indicate that the MR-ISS provides an improved prognostic power compared with R-ISS.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

References

  1. 1.

    Bustoros M, Mouhieddine TH, Detappe A, Ghobrial IM (2017) Established and novel prognostic biomarkers in multiple myeloma. Am Soc Clin Oncol Educ Book Am Soc Clin Oncol Meeting 37:548–560

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. 2.

    Walker I, Coady A, Neat M, Ladon D, Benjamin R, El-Najjar I, Kazmi M, Schey S, Streetly M (2018) Is the Revised International Staging System for myeloma valid in a real world population? Br J Haematol 180(3):451–454. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjh.14341

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. 3.

    Durie BG, Salmon SE (1975) A clinical staging system for multiple myeloma. Correlation of measured myeloma cell mass with presenting clinical features, response to treatment, and survival. Cancer 36(3):842–854

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  4. 4.

    Greipp PR, San Miguel J, Durie BG, Crowley JJ, Barlogie B, Blad¨¦ J, Boccadoro M, Child JA, Avet-Loiseau H, Harousseau JL, Kyle RA, Lahuerta JJ, Ludwig H, Morgan G, Powles R, Shimizu K, Shustik C, Sonneveld P, Tosi P, Turesson I, Westin J (2005) International staging system for multiple myeloma. J Clin Oncology 23 (15):3412-3420

  5. 5.

    Ross FM, Avet-Loiseau H, Ameye G, Guti¨¦rrez NC, Liebisch P, O'Connor S, Dalva K, Fabris S, Testi AM, Jarosova M, Hodkinson C, Collin A, Kerndrup G, Kuglik P, Ladon D, Bernasconi P, Maes B, Zemanova Z, Michalova K, Michau L, Neben K, Hermansen NE, Rack K, Rocci A, Protheroe R, Chiecchio L, Poirel HA, Sonneveld P, Nyegaard M, Johnsen HE (2012) Report from the European Myeloma Network on interphase FISH in multiple myeloma and related disorders. Haematologica 97 (8):1272-1277

  6. 6.

    Munshi NC, Anderson KC, Bergsagel PL, Shaughnessy J, Palumbo A, Durie B, Fonseca R, Stewart AK, Harousseau JL, Dimopoulos M, Jagannath S, Hajek R, Sezer O, Kyle R, Sonneveld P, Cavo M, Rajkumar SV, San Miguel J, Crowley J, Avet-Loiseau H (2011) Consensus recommendations for risk stratification in multiple myeloma: report of the International Myeloma Workshop Consensus Panel 2. Blood 117(18):4696–4700

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  7. 7.

    Palumbo A, Avet-Loiseau H, Oliva S, Lokhorst HM, Goldschmidt H, Rosinol L, Richardson P, Caltagirone S, Lahuerta JJ, Facon T, Bringhen S, Gay F, Attal M, Passera R, Spencer A, Offidani M, Kumar S, Musto P, Lonial S, Petrucci MT, Orlowski RZ, Zamagni E, Morgan G, Dimopoulos MA, Durie BG, Anderson KC, Sonneveld P, San Miguel J, Cavo M, Rajkumar SV, Moreau P (2015) Revised International Staging System for multiple myeloma: a report from International Myeloma Working Group. J Clin Oncol 33(26):2863–2869

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  8. 8.

    Kastritis E, Terpos E, Roussou M, Gavriatopoulou M, Migkou M, Eleutherakis-Papaiakovou E, Fotiou D, Ziogas D, Panagiotidis I, Kafantari E, Giannouli S, Zomas A, Konstantopoulos K, Dimopoulos MA (2017) Evaluation of the Revised International Staging System in an independent cohort of unselected patients with multiple myeloma. Haematologica 102(3):593–599

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. 9.

    Jimenez-Zepeda VH, Duggan P, Neri P, Rashid-Kolvear F, Tay J, Bahlis NJ (2016) Revised International Staging System applied to real world multiple myeloma patients. Clin Lymphoma Myeloma Leuk 16(9):511–518

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. 10.

    Radocha J, Maisnar V, Pour L, Spicka I, Minarik J, Szeligova L, Pavlicek P, Jungova A, Krejci M, Pika T, Straub J, Brozova L, Stejskal L, Heindorfer A, Jindra P, Kessler P, Mikula P, Sykora M, Wrobel M, Jarkovsky J, Hajek R (2018) Validation of multiple myeloma risk stratification indices in routine clinical practice: analysis of data from the Czech Myeloma Group Registry of Monoclonal Gammopathies. Cancer Med 7(8):4132–4145. https://doi.org/10.1002/cam4.1620

    CAS  Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. 11.

    Gonzalez-Calle V, Slack A, Keane N, Luft S, Pearce KE, Ketterling RP, Jain T, Chirackal S, Reeder C, Mikhael J, Noel P, Mayo A, Adams RH, Ahmann G, Braggio E, Stewart AK, Bergsagel PL, Van Wier SA, Fonseca R (2018) Evaluation of Revised International Staging System (R-ISS) for transplant-eligible multiple myeloma patients. Ann Hematol 97(8):1453–1462. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00277-018-3316-7

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. 12.

    Dispenzieri A, Kyle R, Merlini G, Miguel JS, Ludwig H, Hajek R, Palumbo A, Jagannath S, Blade J, Lonial S, Dimopoulos M, Comenzo R, Einsele H, Barlogie B, Anderson K, Gertz M, Harousseau JL, Attal M, Tosi P, Sonneveld P, Boccadoro M, Morgan G, Richardson P, Sezer O, Mateos MV, Cavo M, Joshua D, Turesson I, Chen W, Shimizu K, Powles R, Rajkumar SV, Durie BG (2009) International Myeloma Working Group guidelines for serum-free light chain analysis in multiple myeloma and related disorders. Leukemia 23(2):215–224

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  13. 13.

    Durie BG, Harousseau JL, Miguel JS, Blad¨¦ J, Barlogie B, Anderson K, Gertz M, Dimopoulos M, Westin J, Sonneveld P, Ludwig H, Gahrton G, Beksac M, Crowley J, Belch A, Boccadaro M, Cavo M, Turesson I, Joshua D, Vesole D, Kyle R, Alexanian R, Tricot G, Attal M, Merlini G, Powles R, Richardson P, Shimizu K, Tosi P, Morgan G, Rajkumar SV (2006) International uniform response criteria for multiple myeloma. Leukemia 20 (9):1467-1473

  14. 14.

    Drayson M, Tang LX, Drew R, Mead GP, Carr-Smith H, Bradwell AR (2001) Serum free light-chain measurements for identifying and monitoring patients with nonsecretory multiple myeloma. Blood 97(9):2900–2902

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  15. 15.

    Snozek CL, Katzmann JA, Kyle RA, Dispenzieri A, Larson DR, Therneau TM, Melton LJ, Kumar S, Greipp PR, Clark RJ, Rajkumar SV (2008) Prognostic value of the serum free light chain ratio in newly diagnosed myeloma: proposed incorporation into the international staging system. Leukemia 22(10):1933–1937

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  16. 16.

    Larsen JT, Kumar SK, Dispenzieri A, Kyle RA, Katzmann JA, Rajkumar SV (2013) Serum free light chain ratio as a biomarker for high-risk smoldering multiple myeloma. Leukemia 27(4):941–946

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  17. 17.

    Boyle E, Brioli A, Leleu X, Morgan G, Pawlyn C, Davies F, Campbell P, Drayson T (2013) The value of serum free light chain monitoring compared to urinary Bence-Jones measurement in light chain only myeloma [abstract]. Blood 122 (21): Abstract 1895a.

  18. 18.

    Dejoie T, Corre J, Caillon H, Hulin C, Perrot A, Caillot D, Boyle E, Chretien ML, Fontan J, Belhadj K, Brechignac S, Decaux O, Voillat L, Rodon P, Fitoussi O, Araujo C, Benboubker L, Fontan C, Tiab M, Godmer P, Luycx O, Allangba O, Pignon JM, Fuzibet JG, Legros L, Stoppa AM, Dib M, Pegourie B, Orsini-Piocelle F, Karlin L, Arnulf B, Roussel M, Garderet L, Mohty M, Meuleman N, Doyen C, Lenain P, Macro M, Leleu X, Facon T, Moreau P, Attal M, Avet-Loiseau H (2016) Serum free light chains, not urine specimens, should be used to evaluate response in light-chain multiple myeloma. Blood 128(25):2941–2948

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  19. 19.

    Kumar S, Zhang L, Dispenzieri A, Van Wier S, Katzmann JA, Snyder M, Blood E, DeGoey R, Henderson K, Kyle RA, Bradwell AR, Greipp PR, Rajkumar SV, Fonseca R (2010) Relationship between elevated immunoglobulin free light chain and the presence of IgH translocations in multiple myeloma. Leukemia 24(8):1498–1505

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  20. 20.

    Tacchetti P, Pezzi A, Zamagni E, Pantani L, Rocchi S, Zannetti BA, Mancuso K, Rizzello I, Cavo M (2017) Role of serum free light chain assay in the detection of early relapse and prediction of prognosis after relapse in multiple myeloma patients treated upfront with novel agents. Haematologica 102(3):e104–e107

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  21. 21.

    Walker BA, Mavrommatis K, Wardell CP, Ashby TC, Bauer M, Davies F, Rosenthal A, Wang H, Qu P, Hoering A, Samur M, Towfic F, Ortiz M, Flynt E, Yu Z, Yang Z, Rozelle D, Obenauer J, Trotter M, Auclair D, Keats J, Bolli N, Fulciniti M, Szalat R, Moreau P, Durie B, Stewart AK, Goldschmidt H, Raab MS, Einsele H, Sonneveld P, San Miguel J, Lonial S, Jackson GH, Anderson KC, Avet-Loiseau H, Munshi N, Thakurta A, Morgan G (2019) A high-risk, Double-Hit, group of newly diagnosed myeloma identified by genomic analysis. Leukemia 33(1):159–170. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41375-018-0196-8

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. 22.

    Katzmann JA, Clark RJ, Abraham RS, Bryant S, Lymp JF, Bradwell AR, Kyle RA (2002) Serum reference intervals and diagnostic ranges for free kappa and free lambda immunoglobulin light chains: relative sensitivity for detection of monoclonal light chains. Clin Chem 48(9):1437–1444

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  23. 23.

    Eo SH KH, Hong SM, Cho HJ (2014) K-adaptive partitioning for survival data. The kaps Add-on Package for R. Available at http://arxivorg/pdf/13064615v3pdf. Accessed 2016

  24. 24.

    Tandon N, Rajkumar SV, LaPlant B, Pettinger A, Lacy MQ, Dispenzieri A, Buadi FK, Gertz MA, Hayman SR, Leung N, Go RS, Dingli D, Kapoor P, Lin Y, Hwa YL, Fonder AL, Hobbs MA, Zeldenrust SR, Lust JA, Gonsalves WI, Russell SJ, Kumar SK (2017) Clinical utility of the Revised International Staging System in unselected patients with newly diagnosed and relapsed multiple myeloma. Blood Cancer J 7(2):e528. https://doi.org/10.1038/bcj.2017.13

    CAS  Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  25. 25.

    Jung SH, Kim K, Kim JS, Kim SJ, Cheong JW, Kim SJ, Ahn JS, Ahn SY, Yang DH, Kim HJ, Lee JJ (2018) A prognostic scoring system for patients with multiple myeloma classified as stage II with the Revised International Staging System. Br J Haematol 181(5):707–710. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjh.14701

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. 26.

    Lu J, Lu J, Chen W, Wang J, Huo Y, Hou J, Huang X (2016) More frequent IgD and reduced CD200 expression in Chinese patients younger than 50 years old with multiple myeloma: a multicenter analysis. Drug design, development and therapy 10:3673-3679. https://doi.org/10.2147/DDDT.S100062

  27. 27.

    Lu J, Lu J, Liu A, Fu W, Du J, Huang X, Chen W, Hou J (2015) The applicability of the International Staging System in Chinese patients with multiple myeloma receiving bortezomib or thalidomide-based regimens as induction therapy: a multicenter analysis. Biomed Res Int 2015:856704–856707. https://doi.org/10.1155/2015/856704

    CAS  Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  28. 28.

    Martinez-Lopez J, Paiva B, Lopez-Anglada L, Mateos MV, Cedena T, Vidriales MB, Saez-Gomez MA, Contreras T, Oriol A, Rapado I, Teruel AI, Cordon L, Blanchard MJ, Bengoechea E, Palomera L, de Arriba F, Cueto-Felgueroso C, Orfao A, Blade J, San Miguel JF, Lahuerta JJ, Spanish Multiple Myeloma Group/Program for the Study of Malignant Blood Diseases Therapeutics Cooperative Study G (2015) Critical analysis of the stringent complete response in multiple myeloma: contribution of sFLC and bone marrow clonality. Blood 126(7):858–862. https://doi.org/10.1182/blood-2015-04-638742

    CAS  Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  29. 29.

    Xu Y, Sui W, Deng S, An G, Wang Y, Xie Z, Yao H, Zhu G, Zou D, Qi J, Hao M, Zhao Y, Wang J, Chen T, Qiu L (2013) Further stratification of patients with multiple myeloma by International Staging System in combination with ratio of serum free ¦Ê to ¦Ë light chains. Leuk Lymphoma 54(1):123–132

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  30. 30.

    Garcia de Veas Silva JL, Bermudo Guitarte C, Menendez Valladares P, Rojas Noboa JC, Kestler K, Duro Millan R (2016) Prognostic value of serum free light chains measurements in multiple myeloma patients. PLoS One 11(11):e0166841. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0166841

    CAS  Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  31. 31.

    Rajkumar SV, Dimopoulos MA, Palumbo A, Blade J, Merlini G, Mateos MV, Kumar S, Hillengass J, Kastritis E, Richardson P, Landgren O, Paiva B, Dispenzieri A, Weiss B, LeLeu X, Zweegman S, Lonial S, Rosinol L, Zamagni E, Jagannath S, Sezer O, Kristinsson SY, Caers J, Usmani SZ, Lahuerta JJ, Johnsen HE, Beksac M, Cavo M, Goldschmidt H, Terpos E, Kyle RA, Anderson KC, Durie BG, Miguel JF (2014) International Myeloma Working Group updated criteria for the diagnosis of multiple myeloma. Lancet Oncol 15(12):e538–e548. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(14)70442-5

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. 32.

    Shaughnessy JD Jr, Zhan F, Burington BE, Huang Y, Colla S, Hanamura I, Stewart JP, Kordsmeier B, Randolph C, Williams DR, Xiao Y, Xu H, Epstein J, Anaissie E, Krishna SG, Cottler-Fox M, Hollmig K, Mohiuddin A, Pineda-Roman M, Tricot G, van Rhee F, Sawyer J, Alsayed Y, Walker R, Zangari M, Crowley J, Barlogie B (2007) A validated gene expression model of high-risk multiple myeloma is defined by deregulated expression of genes mapping to chromosome 1. Blood 109(6):2276–2284. https://doi.org/10.1182/blood-2006-07-038430

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. 33.

    Avet-Loiseau H, Andree-Ashley LE, Moore D 2nd, Mellerin MP, Feusner J, Bataille R, Pallavicini MG (1997) Molecular cytogenetic abnormalities in multiple myeloma and plasma cell leukemia measured using comparative genomic hybridization. Gene Chromosome Can 19(2):124–133

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  34. 34.

    Sawyer JR, Tricot G, Lukacs JL, Binz RL, Tian E, Barlogie B, Shaughnessy J Jr (2005) Genomic instability in multiple myeloma: evidence for jumping segmental duplications of chromosome arm 1q. Gene Chromosome Canc 42(1):95–106. https://doi.org/10.1002/gcc.20109

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  35. 35.

    Decaux O, Lode L, Magrangeas F, Charbonnel C, Gouraud W, Jezequel P, Attal M, Harousseau JL, Moreau P, Bataille R, Campion L, Avet-Loiseau H, Minvielle S, Intergroupe Francophone du M (2008) Prediction of survival in multiple myeloma based on gene expression profiles reveals cell cycle and chromosomal instability signatures in high-risk patients and hyperdiploid signatures in low-risk patients: a study of the Intergroupe Francophone du Myelome. J Clin Oncol 26(29):4798–4805. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2007.13.8545

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. 36.

    Walker BA, Boyle EM, Wardell CP, Murison A, Begum DB, Dahir NM, Proszek PZ, Johnson DC, Kaiser MF, Melchor L, Aronson LI, Scales M, Pawlyn C, Mirabella F, Jones JR, Brioli A, Mikulasova A, Cairns DA, Gregory WM, Quartilho A, Drayson MT, Russell N, Cook G, Jackson GH, Leleu X, Davies FE, Morgan GJ (2015) Mutational spectrum, copy number changes, and outcome: results of a sequencing study of patients with newly diagnosed myeloma. Journal of clinical oncology: official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology 33 (33):3911-3920. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2014.59.1503

  37. 37.

    Palumbo A, Bringhen S, Mateos MV, Larocca A, Facon T, Kumar SK, Offidani M, McCarthy P, Evangelista A, Lonial S, Zweegman S, Musto P, Terpos E, Belch A, Hajek R, Ludwig H, Stewart AK, Moreau P, Anderson K, Einsele H, Durie BG, Dimopoulos MA, Landgren O, San Miguel JF, Richardson P, Sonneveld P, Rajkumar SV (2015) Geriatric assessment predicts survival and toxicities in elderly myeloma patients: an International Myeloma Working Group report. Blood 125(13):2068–2074. https://doi.org/10.1182/blood-2014-12-615187

    CAS  Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  38. 38.

    Rajkumar SV (2016) Multiple myeloma: 2016 update on diagnosis, risk-stratification, and management. Am J Hematol 91(7):719–734. https://doi.org/10.1002/ajh.24402

    CAS  Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  39. 39.

    Usmani SZ, Weiss BM, Plesner T, Bahlis NJ, Belch A, Lonial S, Lokhorst HM, Voorhees PM, Richardson PG, Chari A, Sasser AK, Axel A, Feng H, Uhlar CM, Wang J, Khan I, Ahmadi T, Nahi H (2016) Clinical efficacy of daratumumab monotherapy in patients with heavily pretreated relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma. Blood 128(1):37–44. https://doi.org/10.1182/blood-2016-03-705210

    CAS  Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  40. 40.

    Dhodapkar MV, Borrello I, Cohen AD, Stadtmauer EA (2017) Hematologic malignancies: plasma cell disorders. Am Soc Clin Oncol Educ Book 37:561–568. https://doi.org/10.14694/EDBK_175546

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank Dr. Brian Durie from Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, USA, and Dr. Antonio Palumbo from Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Citta` della Salute e della Scienza di Torino, Dipartimento di Oncologia ed Ematologia, Torino, Italy, for the review and editorial assistance.

Funding

This work was supported by the International Myeloma Foundation (IMF) Special Research Grant (2013) and in part by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (NFSC 81372543).

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

J. Du, W. Fu, and J. Hou were responsible for the study conception and design; J. lu, W. Gao, J. Li, H. He, L. Li, R. Li, L. Zhou, H. Jiang, and W. Chen provided care for study patients; J. Lu, J. Li, and H. He were involved in the collection and assembly of data; J. Du and W. Fu performed the study analysis; all authors participated in data analysis and interpretation, manuscript writing, and provided their final approval of the manuscript.

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Juan Du or Weijun Fu or Jian Hou.

Ethics declarations

The study was conducted in accordance with the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki principles. It was approved by the Ethics Committee at Shanghai Changzheng Hospital.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interest.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Electronic supplementary material

Supplementary Fig. 1
figure7

ROC curve demonstrating the sensitivity and specificity of the initial involved/uninvolved sFLC ratio for prognostic value of 595 NDMM patients. The optimal cut-off point for involved/uninvolved sFLC ratio with the highest sensitivity and specificity estimating survival was 80 (AUC = 0.563 (95% CI; 0.468, 0.675), p = 0.007). (PNG 334 kb)

Supplementary Fig. 2
figure8

OS and PFS in MR-ISS stages by type of treatment. (A) OS in Pis–based regimens. (B) OS in IMIDs-based regimens. (C) OS in Pis combined with IMIDs–based regimens. (D) PFS in Pis–based regimens. (E) PFS in IMIDs-based regimens. (F) PFS in Pis combined with IMIDs–based regimens. (PNG 4095 kb)

Supplementary Fig. 3
figure9

OS and PFS in MR-ISS stages by received transplantation or not. (A) OS in patients received non-transplantation. (B) OS in patients received transplantation. (C) PFS in patients received non-transplantation. (D) PFS in patients received transplantation. (PNG 2995 kb)

Supplementary Fig. 4
figure10

OS and PFS in MR-ISS stages by received maintenance therapy or not. (A) OS in patients with maintenance therapy. (B) OS in patients with non-maintenance therapy. (C) PFS in patients with maintenance therapy. (D) PFS in patients with non-maintenance therapy. (PNG 2848 kb)

Supplementary Fig. 5
figure11

OS and PFS in MR-ISS stages by renal function. (A) OS in patients with normal renal function. (B) OS in patients with abnormal renal function. (C) PFS in patients with normal renal function. (D) PFS in patients with abnormal renal function. There was no patient in MR-ISS stage III with abnormal renal function so that no plot of stage III showed in curves of Fig. 5B and Fig. 5D. (PNG 2947 kb)

High Resolution Image (TIF 3446 kb)

High Resolution Image (TIF 12904 kb)

High Resolution Image (TIF 8572 kb)

High Resolution Image (TIF 8572 kb)

High Resolution Image (TIF 8572 kb)

ESM 1

(DOCX 21 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Du, J., Lu, J., Gao, W. et al. Serum-free light chains combined with the Revised International Staging System could further distinguish the superior and inferior clinical outcome of multiple myeloma patients. Ann Hematol 99, 1779–1791 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00277-020-04162-8

Download citation

Keywords

  • Multiple myeloma
  • Serum-free light chains
  • Revised International Staging System
  • Clinical outcome