Understanding the role of hyperdiploidy in myeloma prognosis: which trisomies really matter?

Affiliation auteurs!!!! Error affiliation !!!!
TitreUnderstanding the role of hyperdiploidy in myeloma prognosis: which trisomies really matter?
Type de publicationJournal Article
Year of Publication2015
AuteursChretien M-L, Corre J, Lauwers-Cances V, Magrangeas F, Cleynen A, Yon E, Hulin C, Leleu X, Orsini-Piocelle F, Blade J-S, Sohn C, Karlin L, Delbrel X, Hebraud B, Roussel M, Marit G, Garderet L, Mohty M, Rodon P, Voillat L, Royer B, Jaccard A, Belhadj K, Fontan J, Caillot D, Stoppa A-M, Attal M, Facon T, Moreau P, Minvielle S, Avet-Loiseau H
JournalBLOOD
Volume126
Pagination2713-2719
Date PublishedDEC 17
Type of ArticleArticle
ISSN0006-4971
Résumé

The prognosis of multiple myeloma is mainly dependent upon chromosomal changes. The 2 major abnormalities driving poor outcome are del(17p) and t(4;14). However, the outcome of these high-risk patients is not absolutely uniform, with some patients presenting long survival. We hypothesized that these better outcomes might be related to concomitant ``good-risk'' chromosomal changes exploring hyperdiploidy. We analyzed a large series of 965 myeloma patients, including 168 patients with t(4;14) and 126 patients with del(17p), using high-throughput single-nucleotide polymorphism arrays after plasma cell sorting. As expected, trisomic chromosomes were highly associated. Using the LASSO model, we found that only chromosome 3, when trisomic, was associated with a longer progression-free survival and that 3 trisomies modulated overall survival (OS) in myeloma patients: trisomies 3 and 5 significantly improved OS, whereas trisomy 21 worsened OS. In patients with t(4;14), trisomies 3 and/or 5 seemed to overcome the poor prognosis. For the first time, using a specific modeling approach, we show that not all trisomies display the same prognostic impact. This finding could be important for routine assessment of prognosis in myeloma, and some high-risk patients with a traditional evaluation could in fact be standard-risk patients.

DOI10.1182/blood-2015-06-650242