Sidana, Surbhi

Abstract We describe a series of 102 patients diagnosed from January 1, 1990 to December 31, 2015 with Type 1 monoclonal cryoglobulinemia (MoC). Symptoms were seen in 89 (87%) patients, including: cutaneous symptoms in 64 (63%) patients, with purpura (n = 43, 42%) and ulcers/gangrene (n = 35, 34%) being most common; neurological findings in 33 (32%) patients, most frequently sensory neuropathy (n = 24, 24%); vasomotor symptoms, mainly Raynaud's phenomenon in 25 (25%); arthralgias in 24 (24%); and renal manifestations, primarily glomerulonephritis in 14 (14%) patients. An underlying lymphoproliferative disorder was identified in 94 (92%) subjects; MGUS—39, myeloma—20, lymphoplasmacytic lymphoma—21 and others—14. Treatment was initiated in 73 (72%) patients, primarily for cryoglobulinemia‐related symptoms in 57. Treatment regimens consisted of: steroids ± alkylating agents in 29 (40%), novel myeloma therapies in 16 (22%), rituximab with alkylating agents in 12 (16%) and rituximab ± steroids in 11 (15%) patients; 22 patients received plasmapheresis. Six patients underwent autologous stem cell transplant. Cryocrit at treatment initiation, change in cryocrit and time to nadir cryocrit were predictive of symptom improvement. Treatment directed toward the underlying clonal disorder resulted in improvement (n = 47) or stabilization (n = 16) of symptoms in the majority of patients and disappearance of cryoglobulin in over one‐half.

AbstractWe analyzed the outcomes following initial relapse or refractory disease in systemic light chain amyloidosis (AL) and the impact of type of therapy employed.A total of 1327 patients with AL seen at Mayo Clinic within 90 days of diagnosis, between 2006 and 2015, were reviewed. The study included 366 patients experiencing a documented hematological or organ relapse or refractory disease requiring start of second line therapy. Overall survival (OS) and time to next treatment (TTNT) were calculated from start of second line treatment.The median time to require second line treatment was 16.2 months (1‐93) from the start of first line therapy. At relapse, patients received proteasome inhibitors (PI; 45.1%), immunomodulators (IMiD; 22.7%), alkylators (9%), PI and IMiD combination (4.1%), autologous transplant (3.8%), steroids and other therapies (4.9%). Among these, 124 (33.9%) required change or reinstitution of therapy. The median time to require third line treatment was 31 months (95% CI; 24, 40.5) and the median overall survival (OS) was 38.8 months (95% CI; 29.6, 52.6) from the start of second line treatment. Retreatment with same therapy at relapse significantly reduced TTNT (22 m vs 32.3 m; P = .01) as compared to different therapy; but did not have any impact OS (30.8 m vs 51.1 m; P = .5). In conclusion, this study provides important information about outcomes of patients with AL who require second line treatment for relapsed/refractory disease . Treatment with a different therapy at relapse improves time to next therapy but does not impact OS.