Lachmann, Helen

Abstract The therapeutic landscape for systemic immunoglobulin light chain (AL) amyloidosis has been revolutionized by daratumumab-based regimens, achieving 76% 5-year overall survival in the landmark ANDROMEDA trial. However, the current prognostic models were developed using patient populations treated with now-suboptimal therapies, creating a critical gap between risk stratification models and contemporary outcomes. This comprehensive review analyzes prognostic factors and progression biomarkers in AL, categorizing them into disease-specific (clone-related and organ-related) and patient-specific factors. Notably, traditional baseline biomarkers including difference between involved and uninvolved free light chains and bone marrow plasma cell burden are losing prognostic significance with effective clone-directed therapies. Emerging approaches show promise, including dynamic markers such as minimal residual disease by free light chain mass spectrometry, cardiac imaging parameters such as global longitudinal strain, and functional measures. There is an urgent need for validation studies and prognostic model refinement to identify patients at high risk who may benefit from interventions beyond anti–plasma cell therapy.

Amyloidosis is caused by deposition in tissues of abnormal protein in a characteristic fibrillar form. There are many types of amyloidosis, classified according to the soluble protein precursor from which the amyloid fibrils are derived. Accurate identification of amyloid type is critical in every case since therapy for systemic amyloidosis is type specific. In ∼20–25% cases, however, immunohistochemistry (IHC) fails to prove the amyloid type and further tests are required. Laser microdissection and mass spectrometry (LDMS) is a powerful tool for identifying proteins from formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissues. We undertook a blinded comparison of IHC, performed at the UK National Amyloidosis Centre, and LDMS, performed at the Mayo Clinic, in 142 consecutive biopsy specimens from 38 different tissue types. There was 100% concordance between positive IHC and LDMS, and the latter increased diagnostic accuracy from 76% to 94%. LDMS in expert hands is a valuable tool for amyloid diagnosis.

AbstractSchnitzler's syndrome is characterized by recurrent urticarial rash and monoclonal gammopathy, associated with clinical and biological signs of inflammation and a long‐term risk of AA amyloidosis and overt lymphoproliferation. An extensive literature review was performed, and the following questions were addressed during an expert meeting: In whom should Schnitzler's syndrome be suspected? How should the diagnosis of Schnitzler's syndrome be established? How should a patient with Schnitzler's syndrome be treated? How should a patient with Schnitzler's syndrome be followed up?. A diagnosis of Schnitzler's syndrome is considered definite in any patient with two obligate criteria: a recurrent urticarial rash and a monoclonal IgM gammopathy, and two of the following minor criteria: recurrent fever, objective signs of abnormal bone remodeling, elevated CRP level or leukocytosis, and a neutrophilic infiltrate on skin biopsy. It is considered probable, if only 1 minor criterion is present. In patients with monoclonal IgG gammopathies, diagnosis is definite if three minor criteria are present and possible if two are present. First‐line treatment in patients with significant alteration of quality of life or persistent elevation of markers of inflammation should be anakinra. Follow‐up should include clinical evaluation, CBC and CRP every 3 months and MGUS as usually recommended.