-
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... May 2024Multiple myeloma (MM) is a haematological malignancy that is characterised by proliferation of malignant plasma cells in the bone marrow. For adults ineligible to... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Multiple myeloma (MM) is a haematological malignancy that is characterised by proliferation of malignant plasma cells in the bone marrow. For adults ineligible to receive high-dose chemotherapy and autologous stem cell transplant, the recommended treatment combinations in first-line therapy generally consist of combinations of alkylating agents, immunomodulatory drugs, and proteasome inhibitors. Daratumumab is a CD38-targeting, human IgG1k monoclonal antibody recently developed and approved for the treatment of people diagnosed with MM. Multiple myeloma cells uniformly over-express CD-38, a 46-kDa type II transmembrane glycoprotein, making myeloma cells a specific target for daratumumab.
OBJECTIVES
To determine the benefits and harms of daratumumab in addition to antineoplastic therapy compared to antineoplastic therapy only for adults with newly diagnosed MM who are ineligible for transplant.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, EU Clinical Trials Register, ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO ICTRP, and conference proceedings from 2010 to September 2023.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials that compared treatment with daratumumab added to antineoplastic therapy versus the same antineoplastic therapy alone in adult participants with a confirmed diagnosis of MM. We excluded quasi-randomised trials and trials with less than 80% adult participants, unless there were subgroup analyses of adults with MM.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently screened the results of the search strategies for eligibility. We documented the process of study selection in a flowchart as recommended by the PRISMA statement. We evaluated the risk of bias in included studies with RoB 1 and assessed the certainty of the evidence using GRADE. We followed standard Cochrane methodological procedures.
MAIN RESULTS
We included four open-label, two-armed randomised controlled trials (34 publications) involving a total of 1783 participants. The ALCYONE, MAIA, and OCTANS trials were multicentre trials conducted worldwide in middle- and high-income countries. The AMaRC 03-16 trial was conducted in one high-income country, Australia. The mean age of participants was 69 to 74 years, and the proportion of female participants was between 40% and 54%. All trials evaluated antineoplastic therapies with or without daratumumab. In the ALCYONE and OCTANS trials, daratumumab was combined with bortezomib and melphalan-prednisone. In the AMaRC 03-16 study, it was combined with bortezomib, cyclophosphamide, and dexamethasone, and in the MAIA study, it was combined with lenalidomide and dexamethasone. None of the included studies was blinded (high risk of performance and detection bias). One study was published as abstract only, therefore the risk of bias for most criteria was unclear. The other three studies were published as full texts. Apart from blinding, the risk of bias was low for these studies. Overall survival Treatment with daratumumab probably increases overall survival when compared to the same treatment without daratumumab (hazard ratio (HR) 0.64, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.53 to 0.76, 2 studies, 1443 participants, moderate-certainty evidence). After a follow-up period of 36 months, 695 per 1000 participants survived in the control group, whereas 792 per 1000 participants survived in the daratumumab group (95% CI 758 to 825). Progression-free survival Treatment with daratumumab probably increases progression-free survival when compared to treatment without daratumumab (HR 0.48, 95% CI 0.39 to 0.58, 3 studies, 1663 participants, moderate-certainty evidence). After a follow-up period of 24 months, progression-free survival was reached in 494 per 1000 participants in the control group versus 713 per 1000 participants in the daratumumab group (95% CI 664 to 760). Quality of life Treatment with daratumumab may result in a very small increase in quality of life after 12 months, evaluated on the EORTC QLQ-C30 global health status scale (GHS), when compared to treatment without daratumumab (mean difference 2.19, 95% CI -0.13 to 4.51, 3 studies, 1096 participants, low-certainty evidence). The scale is from 0 to 100, with a higher value indicating a better quality of life. On-study mortality Treatment with daratumumab probably decreases on-study mortality when compared to treatment without daratumumab (risk ratio (RR) 0.72, 95% CI 0.62 to 0.83, 3 studies, 1644 participants, moderate-certainty evidence). After the longest follow-up available (12 to 72 months), 366 per 1000 participants in the control group and 264 per 1000 participants in the daratumumab group died (95% CI 227 to 304). Serious adverse events Treatment with daratumumab probably increases serious adverse events when compared to treatment without daratumumab (RR 1.18, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.37, 3 studies, 1644 participants, moderate-certainty evidence). After the longest follow-up available (12 to 72 months), 505 per 1000 participants in the control group versus 596 per 1000 participants in the daratumumab group experienced serious adverse events (95% CI 515 to 692). Adverse events (Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) grade ≥ 3) Treatment with daratumumab probably results in little to no difference in adverse events (CTCAE grade ≥ 3) when compared to treatment without daratumumab (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.99 to 1.02, 3 studies, 1644 participants, moderate-certainty evidence). After the longest follow-up available (12 to 72 months), 953 per 1000 participants in the control group versus 963 per 1000 participants in the daratumumab group experienced adverse events (CTCAE grade ≥ 3) (95% CI 943 to 972). Treatment with daratumumab probably increases the risk of infections (CTCAE grade ≥ 3) when compared to treatment without daratumumab (RR 1.52, 95% CI 1.30 to 1.78, 3 studies, 1644 participants, moderate-certainty evidence). After the longest follow-up available (12 to 72 months), 224 per 1000 participants in the control group versus 340 per 1000 participants in the daratumumab group experienced infections (CTCAE grade ≥ 3) (95% CI 291 to 399).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Overall analysis of four studies showed a potential benefit for daratumumab in terms of overall survival and progression-free survival and a slight potential benefit in quality of life. Participants treated with daratumumab probably experience increased serious adverse events. There were likely no differences between groups in adverse events (CTCAE grade ≥ 3); however, there are probably more infections (CTCAE grade ≥ 3) in participants treated with daratumumab. We identified six ongoing studies which might strengthen the certainty of evidence in a future update of this review.
Topics: Adult; Aged; Female; Humans; Middle Aged; Antibodies, Monoclonal; Antineoplastic Agents; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Bias; Bortezomib; Multiple Myeloma; Progression-Free Survival; Quality of Life; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 38695605
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD013595.pub2 -
Hematology (Amsterdam, Netherlands) Dec 2024To evaluate whether patients with multiple myeloma (MM) could benefit from tandem autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (auto-HSCT), PubMed, Embase, Web of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
To evaluate whether patients with multiple myeloma (MM) could benefit from tandem autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (auto-HSCT), PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and Cochrane Library databases were systematically searched, and 10 eligible studies were included after data extraction and quality evaluation. Meta-analysis showed that compared to single autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation, tandem auto-HSCT does not improve OS, EFS or efficacy in MM patients, and may even lead to higher treatment-related mortality (TRM). MM patients who received autologous tandem allogeneic HSCT did not achieve better response compared to tandem autologous HSCT. In summary, compared to single autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation, tandem autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation cannot provide survival advantages for MM patients, and MM patients cannot benefit from autologous tandem allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation.
Topics: Humans; Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation; Multiple Myeloma; Transplantation, Autologous
PubMed: 38651865
DOI: 10.1080/16078454.2024.2343164 -
Frontiers in Oncology 2024The low rates of durable response against relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) in recent studies prompt that chimeric antigen receptor (CAR)-T cell therapies are...
BACKGROUND
The low rates of durable response against relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) in recent studies prompt that chimeric antigen receptor (CAR)-T cell therapies are yet to be optimized. The combined anti-BCMA and anti-CD19 CAR-T cell therapy showed high clinical efficacy in several clinical trials for RRMM. We here conducted a meta-analysis to confirm its efficacy and safety.
METHODS
We collected data from Embase, Web of Science, PubMed, CNKI, Wanfang and Cochrane databases up to April 2023. We extracted and evaluated data related to the efficacy and safety of combined anti-BCMA and anti-CD19 CAR-T cell therapies in RRMM patients. The data was then analyzed using RevMan5.4 and StataSE-64 software. PROSPERO number was CRD42023455002.
RESULTS
Our meta-analysis included 12 relevant clinical trials involving 347 RRMM patients who were treated with combined anti-BCMA and anti-CD19 CAR-T cell therapies. For efficacy assessment, the pooled overall response rate (ORR) was 94% (95% CI: 91%-98%), the complete response rate (CRR) was 50% (95% CI: 29%-71%), and the minimal residual disease (MRD) negativity rate within responders was 73% (95% CI: 66%-80%). In terms of safety, the pooled all-grade cytokine release syndrome (CRS) rate was 98% (95% CI: 97%-100%), grade≥3 CRS rate was 9% (95% CI: 4%-14%), and the incidence of neurotoxicity was 8% (95% CI: 4%-11%). Of hematologic toxicity, neutropenia was 82% (95% CI: 75%-89%), anemia was 71% (95% CI: 53%-90%), thrombocytopenia was 67% (95% CI: 40%-93%) and infection was 42% (95% CI: 9%-76%). The median progression-free survival (PFS) was 12.97 months (95% CI: 6.02-19.91), and the median overall survival (OS) was 26.63 months (95% CI: 8.14-45.11).
CONCLUSIONS
As a novel immunotherapy strategy with great potential, the combined anti-BCMA and anti-CD19 CAR-T cell therapy showed high efficacy in RRMM, but its safety needs further improvement. This meta-analysis suggests possible optimization of combined CAR-T therapy.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/, identifier CRD42023455002.
PubMed: 38651157
DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2024.1355643 -
CytoJournal 2024Multiple myeloma (MM) is a bone marrow cancer that profoundly affects plasma cells involved in the immune response. Myeloma cells alter the average production of cells...
OBJECTIVE
Multiple myeloma (MM) is a bone marrow cancer that profoundly affects plasma cells involved in the immune response. Myeloma cells alter the average production of cells in the bone marrow. Anti-B-cell maturation antigen (BCMA) chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy allows genetic modifications of an individual's T-cells to increase the expression of CARs used to identify and attach BCMA proteins to the malignant cells. Our main objective is to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to explore the efficacy and safety of anti-BCMA CAR T-cell therapy for MM.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
We searched five databases, PubMed, CNKI, EMBASE, Cochrane, Web of Science, and CNKI, for studies published on anti-BCMA,CAR-T-cell treatment for MM. Inclusion criteria involved prospective single-arm studies either single or multi-center, in various MM phases and studies that reported anti-BCMA,CAR-T-cell treatment for MM. We excluded non-English publications and conference papers. All statistical analyses were performed in R software and Review Manager 5.4.1.
RESULTS
Thirteen articles were included in the analysis. We found that the overall response survival complete response increase was statistically significant. Similarly, the reduction in cytokine release syndrome grades 3 and 4 and neurotoxicity after follow-up was statistically significant. However, the reduction in minimal residual disease negativity (MRDN) was not statistically significant.
CONCLUSION
Using anti-BCMA CAR T-cell therapy in MM was highly efficacious and safe in lowering the adverse outcomes and improving the survival outcomes, complete response, and overall response.
PubMed: 38628287
DOI: 10.25259/Cytojournal_64_2023 -
American Journal of Hematology Jul 2024In view of the increasing data evaluating carfilzomib-based induction for newly-diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM), we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Comparative Study
Comparative efficacy of carfilzomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone (KRd) versus bortezomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone (VRd) in newly-diagnosed multiple myeloma: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
In view of the increasing data evaluating carfilzomib-based induction for newly-diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM), we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing the efficacy of carfilzomib/lenalidomide/dexamethasone (KRd) versus bortezomib/lenalidomide/dexamethasone (VRd). Three studies totaling 1597 patients (50% KRd-treated, 50% VRd-treated) were included. Despite similar survival outcomes and overall response rate compared with the VRd arm, KRd-treated subjects showed higher odds of achieving complete responses and measurable residual disease negativity. Among patients with high-risk cytogenetics (n = 348), KRd was associated with significant improvement in progression-free survival (HR = 0.70; 95% CI = 0.50-0.97; p = .03; I = 0%), suggesting carfilzomib-based induction may be preferable in this NDMM subpopulation.
Topics: Multiple Myeloma; Humans; Lenalidomide; Dexamethasone; Oligopeptides; Bortezomib; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Progression-Free Survival; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 38606993
DOI: 10.1002/ajh.27314 -
Annals of Medicine Dec 2024Circulating plasma cells (CPCs) are defined by the presence of peripheral blood clonal plasma cells, which would contribute to the progression and dissemination of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Circulating plasma cells (CPCs) are defined by the presence of peripheral blood clonal plasma cells, which would contribute to the progression and dissemination of multiple myeloma (MM). An increasing number of studies have demonstrated the predictive potential of CPCs in the past few years. Therefore, there is a growing need for an updated meta-analysis to identify the specific relationship between CPCs and the prognosis of MM based on the current research status.
METHODS
The PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases were screened to determine eligible studies from inception to November 5, 2023. Publications that reported the prognostic value of CPCs in MM patients were included. Hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were extracted to pool the results. Subgroup analyses were performed based on region, sample size, cut-off value, detection time, initial treatment, and data type. The association between CPCs level and clinicopathological characteristics, including the International Staging System (ISS), Revised-ISS (R-ISS), and cytogenetic abnormalities were also evaluated. Statistical analyses were conducted using STATA 17.0 software.
RESULTS
Twenty-two studies with a total of 5637 myeloma patients were enrolled in the current meta-analysis. The results indicated that myeloma patients with elevated CPCs were expected to have a poor OS (HR = 2.19, 95% CI: 1.81-2.66, < 0.001) and PFS (HR = 2.45, 95% CI: 1.93-3.12, < 0.001). Subgroup analyses did not alter the prognostic role of CPCs, regardless of region, sample size, cut-off value, detection time, initial treatment, or data type. Moreover, the increased CPCs were significantly related to advanced tumour stage (ISS III vs. ISS I-II: pooled OR = 2.89, 95% CI: 2.41-3.46, < 0.001; R-ISS III vs. R-ISS I-II: pooled OR = 3.65, 95% CI: 2.43-5.50, < 0.001) and high-risk cytogenetics (high-risk vs. standard-risk: OR = 2.22, 95% CI: 1.60-3.08, < 0.001).
CONCLUSION
Our meta-analysis confirmed that the increased number of CPCs had a negative impact on the PFS and OS of MM patients. Therefore, CPCs could be a promising prognostic biomarker that helps with risk stratification and disease monitoring.
Topics: Humans; Multiple Myeloma; Plasma Cells; Prognosis; Biomarkers; Proportional Hazards Models
PubMed: 38599340
DOI: 10.1080/07853890.2024.2338604 -
American Journal of Hematology Jun 2024Thrombosis represents a frequent and potentially severe complication in individuals diagnosed with multiple myeloma (MM). These events can be driven by both the disease... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Comparative Study
Thromboembolic risk of carfilzomib or bortezomib in combination with lenalidomide and dexamethasone for newly diagnosed multiple myeloma: A comparative systematic review and meta-analysis.
Thrombosis represents a frequent and potentially severe complication in individuals diagnosed with multiple myeloma (MM). These events can be driven by both the disease as well as the therapies themselves. Overall, available evidence is inconclusive about the differential thrombogenicity of carfilzomib/lenalidomide/dexamethasone (KRd) and bortezomib/lenalidomide/dexamethasone (VRd). This meta-analysis compares the risk for venous thromboembolism (VTE; including deep venous thrombosis and pulmonary embolism) and arterial thromboembolism (ATE; including myocardial infarction and ischemic stroke) with KRd versus VRd as primary therapy for newly diagnosed MM (NDMM). Out of 510 studies identified after deduplication, one randomized controlled trial and five retrospective cohort studies were included. We analyzed 2304 patients (VRd: 1380; KRd: 924) for VTE events and 2179 patients (VRd: 1316; KRd: 863) for ATE events. Lower rates of VTE were observed in the VRd group when compared with the KRd group (6.16% vs. 8.87%; odds ratio [OR], 0.53; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.32-0.88; p = .01). Both treatment groups exhibited minimal ATE incidence, with no significant difference between them (0.91% vs. 1.16%; OR, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.24-4.20; p = .99). In view of potential biases from retrospective studies, heterogeneity of baseline population characteristics, and limited access to patient-level data (e.g., VTE risk stratification and type of thromboprophylaxis regimen used) inherent to this meta-analysis, additional research is warranted to further validate our findings and refine strategies for thrombosis prevention in MM.
Topics: Humans; Multiple Myeloma; Dexamethasone; Oligopeptides; Bortezomib; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Lenalidomide; Thromboembolism; Venous Thromboembolism
PubMed: 38488702
DOI: 10.1002/ajh.27288 -
Frontiers in Immunology 2024Bispecific antibody (BsAbs) therapy represents a promising immunotherapeutic approach with manageable toxicity and noteworthy preliminary efficacy in treating patients... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
Bispecific antibody (BsAbs) therapy represents a promising immunotherapeutic approach with manageable toxicity and noteworthy preliminary efficacy in treating patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to compare the efficacy and safety of B-cell maturation antigen (BCMA)-targeted BsAbs and non-BCMA-targeted BsAbs in the treatment of RRMM patients.
METHODS
PubMed/MEDLINE, Web of Science, EMBASE, Cochrane Library and meeting libraries were searched from inception to August 16th, 2023. The efficacy evaluation included the complete objective response rate (ORR), complete response (CR) rate, stringent CR (sCR) rate, partial response (PR) rate, and very good PR (VGPR) rate. The efficacy evaluation included any grade adverse events (AEs) and grade ≥ 3 AEs.
RESULTS
Fourteen studies with a total of 1473 RRMM patients were included. The pooled ORR of the entire cohort was 61%. The non-BCMA-targeted BsAbs group displayed a higher ORR than the BCMA-targeted BsAbs group (74% . 54%, < 0.01). In terms of hematological AEs, BCMA-targeted BsAbs therapy exhibited higher risks of neutropenia (any grade: 48% . 18%, < 0.01; grade ≥ 3: 43% . 15%, < 0.01) and lymphopenia (any grade: 37% . 8%, < 0.01; grade ≥ 3: 31% . 8%, = 0.07). Regarding non-hematological AEs, there were no significant differences in the risks of cytokine release syndrome (CRS, any grade: 64% . 66%, = 0.84; grade ≥ 3: 1% . 1%, = 0.36) and infections (any grade: 47% . 49%, = 0.86; grade ≥ 3: 24% . 20%, = 0.06) between the two groups. However, non-BCMA-targeted BsAbs therapy was associated with a higher risk of immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome (ICANS, any grade: 11% . 2%, < 0.01) and lower risks of fatigue (any grade: 14% . 30%, < 0.01) and pyrexia (any grade: 14% . 29%, < 0.01).
CONCLUSION
This analysis suggest that non-BCMA-targeted BsAbs therapy may offer a more favorable treatment response and tolerability, while BCMA-targeted BsAbs therapy may be associated with diminished neurotoxic effects.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/, identifier CRD42018090768.
Topics: Humans; Multiple Myeloma; Antibodies, Bispecific; B-Cell Maturation Antigen; Prospective Studies; Neurotoxicity Syndromes; Neutropenia
PubMed: 38482019
DOI: 10.3389/fimmu.2024.1348955 -
Annals of Medicine Dec 2024The combination of granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) and plerixafor is one of the approaches for hematopoietic stem cell mobilization in patients with... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
AIM
The combination of granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) and plerixafor is one of the approaches for hematopoietic stem cell mobilization in patients with multiple myeloma (MM), non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL), and Hodgkin's lymphoma (HL). This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to determine the ability of G-CSF + plerixafor to mobilize peripheral blood (PB) CD34+ cells and examine its safety profile.
METHODS
We performed a database search using the terms 'granulocyte colony stimulating factor', 'G-CSF', 'AMD3100', and 'plerixafor', published up to May 1, 2023. The methodology is described in further detail in the PROSPERO database (CRD42023425760).
RESULTS
Twenty-three studies were included in this systematic review and meta-analysis. G-CSF + plerixafor resulted in more patients achieving the predetermined apheresis yield of CD34+ cells than G-CSF alone (OR, 5.33; 95%, 4.34-6.55). It was further discovered that G-CSF + plerixafor could mobilize more CD34+ cells into PB, which was beneficial for the next transplantation in both randomized controlled (MD, 18.30; 95%, 8.74-27.85) and single-arm (MD, 20.67; 95%, 14.34-27.00) trials. Furthermore, G-CSF + plerixafor did not cause more treatment emergent adverse events than G-CSF alone (OR, 1.25; 95%, 0.87-1.80).
CONCLUSIONS
This study suggests that the combination of G-CSF and plerixafor, resulted in more patients with MM, NHL, and HL, achieving the predetermined apheresis yield of CD34+ cells, which is related to the more effective mobilization of CD34+ cells into PB.
Topics: Humans; Hematopoietic Stem Cell Mobilization; Multiple Myeloma; Granulocyte Colony-Stimulating Factor; Heterocyclic Compounds; Lymphoma; Lymphoma, Non-Hodgkin; Hematopoietic Stem Cells; Transplantation, Autologous; Benzylamines; Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation
PubMed: 38470973
DOI: 10.1080/07853890.2024.2329140 -
Otology & Neurotology : Official... Apr 2024To examine the otologic and neurotologic symptoms, physical examination findings, and imaging features secondary to hematologic malignancies. (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
To examine the otologic and neurotologic symptoms, physical examination findings, and imaging features secondary to hematologic malignancies.
METHODS
Following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, databases, including PubMed, Scopus, and CINAHL, were searched for articles including patients with otologic manifestations of leukemia, lymphoma and multiple myeloma. Data collected included patient and study demographics, specific hematologic malignancy, timing and classification of otologic symptoms, physical examination findings, imaging features and methods of diagnosis. Pooled descriptive analysis was performed.
RESULTS
Two hundred seventy-two articles, of which 255 (93.8%) were case reports and 17 (6.2%) were case series, reporting on 553 patients were identified. Otologic manifestations were reported on 307 patients with leukemia, 204 patients with lymphoma and 42 patients with multiple myeloma. Hearing loss and unilateral facial palsy were the most common presenting symptoms for 111 reported subjects with leukemia (n = 46, 41.4%; n = 43, 38.7%) and 90 with lymphoma (n = 38, 42.2%; n = 39, 43.3%). Hearing loss and otalgia were the most common presenting symptoms for 21 subjects with multiple myeloma (n = 10, 47.6%; n = 6, 28.6%). Hearing loss and unilateral facial palsy were the most common otologic symptoms indicative of relapse in subjects with leukemia (n = 14, 43.8%) and lymphoma (n = 5, 50%).
CONCLUSION
Hearing loss, facial palsy, and otalgia might be the first indication of a new diagnosis or relapse of leukemia, lymphoma, or multiple myeloma. Clinicians should have a heightened level of suspicion of malignant etiologies of otologic symptoms in patients with current or medical histories of these malignancies.
Topics: Humans; Earache; Facial Paralysis; Multiple Myeloma; Hearing Loss; Hematologic Neoplasms; Deafness; Leukemia; Bell Palsy; Lymphoma; Recurrence
PubMed: 38437804
DOI: 10.1097/MAO.0000000000004141