The evolving pattern of the monoclonal protein improves the IMWG 2/20/20 classification for patients with smoldering multiple myeloma.

The 2/20/20 International Myeloma Working Group (IMWG) score is the most employed risk score in clinical practice to evaluate the risk of progression from smoldering multiple myeloma (SMM) to symptomatic multiple myeloma. However, it faces a serious limitation: The risk score is applied at diagnosis and cannot be reapplied. Since a dynamic accurate patient risk assessment for progression is necessary, we aimed to investigate whether the detection of an evolving pattern in serum M-protein (SMP) improves the identification of high-risk patients. Eighty-three patients diagnosed with SMM between 2011 and 2020 were included. Patients were initially classified applying the 2/20/20 IMWG score at baseline and later reclassified depending on the presence of an SMP evolving pattern into six groups. We regrouped the patients into three final risk groups: low-risk, intermediate-risk, and high-risk. The risk of progression at two years for the high-risk group was 88% and all patients had progressed at 4 years. The performance measurements were superior for the new 2/20/20-Evolving score independently for the detection of high-risk patients. We show that the sequential measurement of the SMP is a noninvasive and widely available test that improves the 2/20/20 IMWG risk score.

Outcomes of Patients with Newly Diagnosed Transplant-Ineligible Multiple Myeloma According to Clinical Trials Enrollment: Experience of a Single Institution.

The proportion of non-transplant-eligible (NTE) newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) patients excluded from clinical trials (CTs) and their prognosis is unknown. CT results may not be generalizable to real-world practice due to strict recruitment criteria. We analyzed causes of NTE-NDMM patient exclusion form CTs and their outcomes. A total of 211 NTE-NDMM patients were included. They were divided into three periods: 2003-2007, 2008-2012, and 2013-2017. Overall, 50% received non-trial treatment (NCT), while 50% participated in a CT (20% control group (CG) and 30% experimental group (EG)). Main causes for exclusion from CTs were comorbidities, ECOG > 2, and renal insufficiency. In the first two periods, the CR rate was similar regardless of treatment type, but in the last period, the EG group showed improved CR. Median PFS was similar in the first two periods, with a benefit seen only in the EG in the last period. The median OS was significantly longer in CT-included patients compared to NCT group in the last two periods. Conclusions: The presence of comorbidities and worsened ECOG were the main reasons for CT exclusion. Patients included in CTs had a longer OS than NCT. This OS benefit may be influenced by a selection bias, making it challenging to generalize CT results to real clinical practice.