2019
Simplified novel prognostic score for real-life older adults with multiple myelomaregistry-based analysis
RADOCHA, J., Roman HÁJEK, Lucie BROŽOVÁ, Luděk POUR, I. ŠPIČKA et. al.Základní údaje
Originální název
Simplified novel prognostic score for real-life older adults with multiple myelomaregistry-based analysis
Autoři
RADOCHA, J. (203 Česká republika, garant), Roman HÁJEK (203 Česká republika), Lucie BROŽOVÁ (203 Česká republika, domácí), Luděk POUR (203 Česká republika, domácí), I. ŠPIČKA (203 Česká republika), J. MINAŘÍK (203 Česká republika), E. GREGORA (203 Česká republika), A. JUNGOVÁ (203 Česká republika), T. JELÍNEK (203 Česká republika), A. HEINDORFER (203 Česká republika), M. SÝKORA (203 Česká republika) a V. MAISNAR (203 Česká republika)
Vydání
Annals of hematology, New York, Springer Verlag, 2019, 0939-5555
Další údaje
Jazyk
angličtina
Typ výsledku
Článek v odborném periodiku
Obor
30205 Hematology
Stát vydavatele
Spojené státy
Utajení
není předmětem státního či obchodního tajemství
Odkazy
Impakt faktor
Impact factor: 2.904
Kód RIV
RIV/00216224:14110/19:00109477
Organizační jednotka
Lékařská fakulta
UT WoS
000461545800016
Klíčová slova anglicky
Multiple myeloma; Older adults; Prognostic factors
Příznaky
Mezinárodní význam, Recenzováno
Změněno: 17. 4. 2019 13:00, Soňa Böhmová
Anotace
V originále
The main goal was to find a simple prognostic to evaluate overall survival of patients older than 65years of age with myeloma. Retrospective registry-based analysis from the Registry of Monoclonal Gammopathies was conducted. Patients over 65years with symptomatic myeloma were included. The four major parameters with impact on survival were identified: male gender, age>75, creatinine >152mol/L, and ECOG performance status 2-4. The patients were scored as good (0 points), intermediate good (1 point), intermediate poor (2 points), poor (3-4 points). Patients (1410 MM) were included. Median OS (months) was 65.7 (95% CI 49.8-81.7) for good, 51.0 (44.1-57.8) for intermediate good, 32.2 (26.2-38.2) for intermediate poor, and 18.9 (15.1-22.7) for poor. The differences in OS were statistically significant (p<0.0001). Good score was used as reference for hazard ratios, which for each other score were 1.43 (1.09-1.84) for intermediate good, 2.58 (2.00-3.33) for intermediate poor, and 3.88 (2.94-5.10) for poor. Time to progression showed medians (months) 20.5 (17.4-62.4) for good, 19.3 (17.0-21.7) for intermediate good, 19.6 (16.2-23.0) for intermediate poor, and 13.0 (10.8-15.2) for poor. The suggested scoring system provides readily available information about the prognosis of MM patients above 65years.