J 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

Štítky

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.