Comparison of progression risk of monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance by method of detection
- PMID: 39437710
- PMCID: PMC12060158
- DOI: 10.1182/blood.2024025415
Comparison of progression risk of monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance by method of detection
Abstract
Monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance (MGUS) is an asymptomatic premalignant disorder. The current standard of care is not to screen for MGUS, so it is often incidentally diagnosed in the clinic. It is unknown whether the outcomes of screened vs clinically detected MGUS differ. We compared the progression risk between screened vs clinical MGUS cohorts and assessed whether the MGUS detection method affected risk prediction of established clinical factors (score). We included 379 screened MGUS cases from the Olmsted County population-based study and 1384 patients with MGUS diagnosed during routine clinical evaluation at Mayo Clinic. Median follow-up time for the screened vs clinical cohort was 26.6 and 40.1 years, respectively. Accounting for death as a competing risk, the cumulative incidence of progression at 25 years was similar in the screened (11.1% [95% confidence interval [CI], 8.3-14.8]) vs clinical (10.1% [95% CI, 8.6-11.8]) MGUS cohorts, even when stratified by sex, age, or the baseline MGUS risk score. Overall, 0.9 (95% CI, 0.6-1.2) of patients with screened MGUS vs 1.0 (95% CI, 0.9-1.2) of those with clinically detected MGUS experienced disease progression for every 100 person-years of follow-up. MGUS detection method did not modify the association between MGUS risk score and progression risk (pinteraction = 0.217) and did not add to known risk factors for progression (likelihood ratio test; P = .839). Here, we show that progression risk among patients with screened vs clinically detected heavy-chain MGUS was similar. Future studies are needed to assess whether tailored follow-up of patients with screened MGUS affects clinical outcomes.
© 2025 American Society of Hematology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights are reserved, including those for text and data mining, AI training, and similar technologies.
Conflict of interest statement
Conflict-of-interest disclosure: The authors declare no competing financial interests.
References
-
- Rajkumar SV, Dimopoulos MA, Palumbo A, et al. International Myeloma Working Group updated criteria for the diagnosis of multiple myeloma. Lancet Oncol. 2014;15(12):e538–e548. - PubMed
-
- Kyle RA, Therneau TM, Rajkumar SV, et al. Prevalence of monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance. N Engl J Med. 2006;354(13):1362–1369. - PubMed
-
- Kristinsson SY, Rögnvaldsson S, Thorsteinsdottir S, et al. Screening for monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance: a population-based randomized clinical trial. First results from the Iceland screens, treats, or prevents multiple myeloma (iStopMM) study. Blood. 2021;138(suppl 1):156.
-
- Ravindran A, Lackore KA, Glasgow AE, et al. Monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance: indications for prediagnostic testing, subsequent diagnoses, and follow-up practice at Mayo Clinic. Mayo Clin Proc. 2020;95(5):944–954. - PubMed
-
- Kyle RA, Durie BG, Rajkumar SV, et al. International Myeloma Working Group Monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance (MGUS) and smoldering (asymptomatic) multiple myeloma: IMWG consensus perspectives risk factors for progression and guidelines for monitoring and management. Leukemia. 2010;24(6):1121–1127. - PMC - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
