2019
DOI: 10.1111/bjh.16130
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Challenges and opportunities in the assessment of measurable residual disease in multiple myeloma

Abstract: Summary Treatment response assessment in multiple myeloma (MM) relies on the detection of paraprotein in serum and/or urine, bone marrow morphology and immunohistochemistry. With remarkable advances in therapy, particularly in the newly diagnosed setting, achievement of complete remission became frequent, creating the need to identify smaller amounts of residual disease and understand their prognostic and therapeutic implications. Measurable residual disease (MRD) can be assessed primarily by flow cytometry an… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
20
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 15 publications
(20 citation statements)
references
References 60 publications
0
20
0
Order By: Relevance
“…At present though, 10 −6 seems to be the most optimal threshold for MRD detection, and current criteria are likely to be reconsidered based on this new evidence. In the same context, it is rationale that an updated version of response criteria would take advantage of the quantitative nature of the sensitive MRD assays and may stratify patients not only on the context of MRD positive and MRD negative but on the level of MRD positivity as well (86). This stratification would be helpful for deeper evaluation of treatment efficacy and may prove important for defining different therapeutic MRD-driven strategies based on the level of response to a previous regimen.…”
Section: Mrd As a Prognostic Factormentioning
confidence: 99%
“…At present though, 10 −6 seems to be the most optimal threshold for MRD detection, and current criteria are likely to be reconsidered based on this new evidence. In the same context, it is rationale that an updated version of response criteria would take advantage of the quantitative nature of the sensitive MRD assays and may stratify patients not only on the context of MRD positive and MRD negative but on the level of MRD positivity as well (86). This stratification would be helpful for deeper evaluation of treatment efficacy and may prove important for defining different therapeutic MRD-driven strategies based on the level of response to a previous regimen.…”
Section: Mrd As a Prognostic Factormentioning
confidence: 99%
“… 6 , 9 Despite the advances in the treatment of MM, the disease is still considered incurable, and eventually patients relapse or become refractory to all available standard therapies. 10 One of the major failures of the available therapies is to control or eliminate MM minimal residual disease (MRD), 11 , 12 , 13 which occurs when myeloma cells that hide in niches within the BM become resistant to standard therapies and/or contamination of the autologous stem cell transplant graft with patient myeloma cells. 14 Therefore, more effective treatments are required in order to obtain sustained cancer-free outcomes, in particular by developing strategies to eliminate the MRD remaining after standard therapies have achieved their maximal disease burden reduction.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Of note, this correlation was stronger when we set MRD negativity and not CR as the clinical endpoint, thus implying that the absence of graft contamination could be a strong predictor of deep and lasting remissions. MRD negativity is a distinct and powerful independent prognostic factor in MM, which may overcome baseline prognostication by ISS and/or cytogenetics [31,32], and is currently considered as the main or secondary endpoint in several ongoing trials [33,34]. Therefore, the identification of biomarkers capable of an early prediction of MRD negativity is of utmost significance for the clinical management of MM patients and may confer significant surrogate information on modern tailored MRD-driven approaches [34,35].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%