Forums
3 posts
• Page 1 of 1
FISH results
Hi all. I’m new to this. I was diagnosed with stage 3, IgD, multiple myeloma in Oct. 2011. FISH results indicates t(11;14), deletion of 4p16.3 (FGFR3) and deletion 16q23 (MAF). I have encountered one journal article (Blood, November 2007, Volume 110, Number 9, Gene mapping and expression analysis of 16q loss of heterozygosity identifies WWOX and CYLD as being important in determining clinical outcome in multiple myeloma) indicating deletion of 16q is associated with adverse OS. However, none of the patients with IgD had deletion of 16q in that particular study. Would anyone be aware of more recent articles or information addressing multiple myeloma and deletion of 16q?
-
ScottM - Name: Scott
- Who do you know with myeloma?: me
- When were you/they diagnosed?: October 2011
Re: FISH results
Dear ScottM,
There isn't a lot of data specifically looking at deletion 16q, and it's not considered one of the classic high-risk abnormalities in myeloma. In fact, in a subsequent study by the same group that you cite, del16q was no longer associated with a worse prognosis (Walker et al, Blood 2010; 116:e56-e65). So I think its impact on prognosis remains unclear. Our knowledge about the genetics of myeloma is expanding exponentially however, as the techniques available to study the myeloma genome continue to improve, so I suspect in the next couple of years we'll have much more information available about not only the prognosis of a specific abnormality, but hopefully about which treatments are most likely to work in certain genetically-defined subsets.
Best regards,
Adam Cohen
There isn't a lot of data specifically looking at deletion 16q, and it's not considered one of the classic high-risk abnormalities in myeloma. In fact, in a subsequent study by the same group that you cite, del16q was no longer associated with a worse prognosis (Walker et al, Blood 2010; 116:e56-e65). So I think its impact on prognosis remains unclear. Our knowledge about the genetics of myeloma is expanding exponentially however, as the techniques available to study the myeloma genome continue to improve, so I suspect in the next couple of years we'll have much more information available about not only the prognosis of a specific abnormality, but hopefully about which treatments are most likely to work in certain genetically-defined subsets.
Best regards,
Adam Cohen
-
Dr. Adam Cohen - Name: Adam D. Cohen, M.D.
Beacon Medical Advisor
Re: FISH results
"Seven disease subtypes were validated that were strongly influenced by known genetic lesions, such as c-MAF– and MAFB-, CCND1- and CCND3-, and MMSET-activating translocations and hyperdiploidy. "
http://bloodjournal.hematologylibrary.org/content/108/6/2020.abstract?ijkey=04b6025f3242883547b5926fc661e226655dae24&keytype2=tf_ipsecsha
https://myelomabeacon.org/forum/maf-gene-t803.html
http://bloodjournal.hematologylibrary.org/content/108/6/2020.abstract?ijkey=04b6025f3242883547b5926fc661e226655dae24&keytype2=tf_ipsecsha
https://myelomabeacon.org/forum/maf-gene-t803.html
-
suzierose - Name: suzierose
- When were you/they diagnosed?: 2 sept 2011
3 posts
• Page 1 of 1