Abstract
The international staging system (ISS) for multiple myeloma (MM) is a validated alternative to the Durie–Salmon staging system (DSS) for predicting survival at diagnosis. We compared these staging systems for predicting outcomes after upfront autologous stem cell transplantation by analyzing the outcomes of 729 patients between 1995 and 2002. With a median follow-up of 56 months, the univariate probabilities (95% CI) of non-relapse mortality (NRM), relapse, progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) at 5 years were 7, 68, 25 and 52%, respectively. The median OS for stages I, II, III by DSS and ISS were 82, 68, 50 and 64, 68, 45 months, respectively. The concordance between the two staging systems was only 36%. Staging systems were formally compared using Cox models fit with DSS and ISS stages. The relative risks of PFS and OS were significantly different for stages I vs II and II vs III for DSS, but only for stages II vs III for ISS. Although both systems were predictive of PFS and OS, the DSS was superior in formal statistical comparison using Brier score. However, neither system was strongly predictive of outcomes, indicating the need for newer schemes incorporating other prognostic markers.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution
Access options
Subscribe to this journal
Receive 12 print issues and online access
$259.00 per year
only $21.58 per issue
Rent or buy this article
Prices vary by article type
from$1.95
to$39.95
Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Durie BG, Salmon SE . A clinical staging system for multiple myeloma. Correlation of measured myeloma cell mass with presenting clinical features, response to treatment, and survival. Cancer 1975; 36: 842–854.
Greipp PR, San Miguel J, Durie BG, Crowley JJ, Barlogie B, Blade J et al. International staging system for multiple myeloma. J Clin Oncol 2005; 23: 3412–3420.
Merlini G, Waldenstrom JG, Jayakar SD . A new improved clinical staging system for multiple myeloma based on analysis of 123 treated patients. Blood 1980; 55: 1011–1019.
Bataille R, Durie BG, Grenier J, Sany J . Prognostic factors and staging in multiple myeloma: a reappraisal. J Clin Oncol 1986; 4: 80–87.
Blade J, Rozman C, Cervantes F, Reverter JC, Montserrat E . A new prognostic system for multiple myeloma based on easily available parameters. Br J Haematol 1989; 72: 507–511.
Medical Research Council's Working Party on Leukemia in Adults. Prognostic features in the third MRC myelomatosis trial. Br J Cancer 1980; 42: 831–840.
Hungria VT, Maiolino A, Martinez G, Colleoni GW, Coelho EO, Rocha L et al. Confirmation of the utility of the International Staging System and identification of a unique pattern of disease in Brazilian patients with multiple myeloma. Haematologica 2008; 93: 791–792.
Gassmann W, Pralle H, Haferlach T, Pandurevic S, Graubner M, Schmitz N et al. Staging systems for multiple myeloma: a comparison. Br J Haematol 1985; 59: 703–711.
Kim H, Sohn HJ, Kim S, Kim K, Lee JH, Bang SM et al. New staging systems can predict prognosis of multiple myeloma patients undergoing autologous peripheral blood stem cell transplantation as first-line therapy. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant 2006; 12: 837–844.
Salmon SE, Durie BG . Cellular kinetics in multiple myeloma. A new approach to staging and treatment. Arch Intern Med 1975; 135: 131–138.
Blade J, Samson D, Reece D, Apperley J, Bjorkstrand B, Gahrton G et al. Criteria for evaluating disease response and progression in patients with multiple myeloma treated by high-dose therapy and haemopoietic stem cell transplantation. Myeloma Subcommittee of the EBMT. European Group for Blood and Marrow Transplant. Br J Haematol 1998; 102: 1115–1123.
Klein J, Moeschberger M . Survival Analysis: Techniques of Censored and Truncated Data, 2nd edn. Springer-Verlag: New York, NY, 2003.
Kaplan E . Nonparametric estimation from incomplete observations. J Am Stat Assoc 1958; 53: 457–481.
Cohen J . A coefficient of agreement for nominal scale. J Educat Psychol Measurement 1960; 20: 37–46.
Brennan P, Silman A . Statistical methods for assessing observer variability in clinical measures. BMJ 1992; 304: 1491–1494.
Cox DR . Regression models an d life tables. J R Stat Soc B 1972; 34: 187–200.
Graf E, Schmoor C, Sauerbrei W, Schumacher M . Assessment and comparison of prognostic classification schemes for survival data. Stat Med 1999; 18: 2529–2545.
Spiegelhalter DJ . Probabilistic prediction in patient management and clinical trials. Stat Med 1986; 5: 421–433.
Brier G . Verifications of forecasts expressed in terms of probability. Monthly Weather Review 1950; 78: 1–3.
Attal M, Harousseau JL, Stoppa AM, Sotto JJ, Fuzibet JG, Rossi JF et al. A prospective, randomized trial of autologous bone marrow transplantation and chemotherapy in multiple myeloma. Intergroupe Francais du Myelome. N Engl J Med 1996; 335: 91–97.
Child JA, Morgan GJ, Davies FE, Owen RG, Bell SE, Hawkins K et al. High-dose chemotherapy with hematopoietic stem-cell rescue for multiple myeloma. N Engl J Med 2003; 348: 1875–1883.
Krejci M, Buchler T, Hajek R, Svobodnik A, Krivanova A, Pour L et al. Prognostic factors for survival after autologous transplantation: a single centre experience in 133 multiple myeloma patients. Bone Marrow Transplant 2005; 35: 159–164.
Tao ZF, Fu WJ, Yuan ZG, Wang DX, Chen YB, Hou J . Prognostic factors and staging systems of multiple myeloma. Chin Med J (Engl) 2007; 120: 1655–1658.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Supplementary Information accompanies the paper on the Leukemia website (http://www.nature.com/leu)
Supplementary information
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Hari, P., Zhang, MJ., Roy, V. et al. Is the international staging system superior to the Durie–Salmon staging system? A comparison in multiple myeloma patients undergoing autologous transplant. Leukemia 23, 1528–1534 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1038/leu.2009.61
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/leu.2009.61
Keywords
This article is cited by
-
Management and outcome of 500 multiple myeloma patients treated for first relapse outside clinical studies
Annals of Hematology (2023)
-
Evaluation of mandibular bone changes in multiple myeloma patients on dental panoramic radiographs
Oral Radiology (2022)
-
A simple score to predict early severe infections in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma
Blood Cancer Journal (2022)
-
Prognostic value of 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma: a systematic review and meta-analysis
European Radiology (2021)
-
Risk Stratification in Multiple Myeloma in Indian Settings
Indian Journal of Hematology and Blood Transfusion (2020)