25 research outputs found

    Duo Shared Genomic Segment analysis identifies a genome-wide significant risk locus at 18q21.33 in myeloma pedigrees

    No full text
    Aim: High-risk pedigrees (HRPs) are a powerful design to map highly penetrant risk genes. We previously described Shared Genomic Segment (SGS) analysis, a mapping method for single large extended pedigrees that also addresses genetic heterogeneity inherent in complex diseases. SGS identifies shared segregating chromosomal regions that may inherit in only a subset of cases. However, single large pedigrees that are individually powerful (at least 15 meioses between studied cases) are scarce. Here, we expand the SGS strategy to incorporate evidence from two extended HRPs by identifying the same segregating risk locus in both pedigrees and allowing for some relaxation in the size of each HRP.Methods: Duo-SGS is a procedure to combine single-pedigree SGS evidence. It implements statistically rigorous duo-pedigree thresholding to determine genome-wide significance levels that account for optimization across pedigree pairs. Single-pedigree SGS identifies optimal segments shared by case subsets at each locus across the genome, with nominal significance assessed empirically. Duo-SGS combines the statistical evidence for SGS segments at the same genomic location in two pedigrees using Fisher’s method. One pedigree is paired with all others and the best duo-SGS evidence at each locus across the genome is established. Genome-wide significance thresholds are determined through distribution-fitting and the Theory of Large Deviations. We applied the duo-SGS strategy to eleven extended, myeloma HRPs.Results: We identified one genome-wide significant region at 18q21.33 (0.85 Mb, P = 7.3 × 10-9) which contains one gene, CDH20. Thirteen regions were genome-wide suggestive: 1q42.2, 2p16.1, 3p25.2, 5q21.3, 5q31.1, 6q16.1, 6q26, 7q11.23, 12q24.31, 13q13.3, 18p11.22, 18q22.3 and 19p13.12.Conclusion: Our results provide novel risk loci with segregating evidence from multiple HRPs and offer compelling targets and specific segment carriers to focus a future search for functional variants involved in inherited risk formyeloma

    Allogeneic stem cell transplant for multiple myeloma & myelofibrosis with split-dose busulfan, fludarabine & cyclophosphamide

    No full text
    Allogeneic stem cell transplant can have high morbidity and mortality in patients with myelofibrosis (MF) and multiple myeloma (MM). This phase 2 study used a novel myeloablative regimen of split-dose busulfan, fludarabine, and then post-transplant cyclophosphamide. Four patients with MF and 2 with MM were enrolled. At 1 year, non-relapse mortality was 33.3%, and overall survival was 50%. Incidence of acute and chronic GVHD was 33.3% and 16.7%, respectively. Those surviving beyond 1 year (MF = 1, MM = 2) had durable remissions with a median follow-up of 42 months. This small study demonstrates relative safety & favorable key outcomes using this novel approach

    Global Myeloma Trial Participation and Drug Access in the Era of Novel Therapies

    No full text
    The globalization of clinical trials has accelerated recent advances in multiple myeloma (MM). However, it is unclear whether trial enrollment locations are reflective of the global burden of MM and whether access to novel therapies is timely and equitable for countries that participate in those trials. MM trials are generally conducted in countries that are high-income and located in Europe or Central Asia

    Time-to-event surrogate end-points in multiple myeloma randomised trials from 2005 to 2019: A surrogacy analysis

    No full text
    Use of surrogate end-points such as progression-free survival (PFS) and other time-to-event (TTE) end-points is common in multiple myeloma (MM) clinical trials. This systematic review characterises all published randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in MM using PFS or other TTE end-points between 2005 and 2019 and assesses strength of surrogacy of PFS for overall survival (OS). The association between OS hazard ratios (HRs) and PFS HRs was evaluated with linear regression, and the coefficient of determination with Pearson's correlation. We identified 88 RCTs of which 67 (76%) used PFS as the primary/co-primary end-point. One trial indicated whether progression was biochemical or clinical. Of the variance in OS, 39% was due to variance in PFS. Correlation between PFS and OS was weak (0.62, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.38–0.78). In newly diagnosed MM, 43% of the variance in OS was due to changes in PFS. The correlation between PFS and OS was weak (0.65, 95% CI 0.30–0.84). In relapsed/refractory MM, 58% of the variance in OS was due to changes in PFS. Correlation between PFS and OS was medium (0.76, 95% CI 0.42–0.91). We demonstrate that PFS and progression characteristics are characterised poorly in MM trials and that PFS is a poor surrogate for OS in MM
    corecore