JCHOR
Journal of Current Hematology & Oncology Research

The Journal of Current Hematology & Oncology Research regularly publishes internationally qualified research in hematology and oncology within the current scholarly knowledge.

eISSN: 2980-0854
Creative Commons CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 International License.
EndNote Style

Online Manuscript System

Index
Original Article
Association of FISH cytogenetic risk and baseline PET/CT findings with early treatment response and disease progression in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma
Abstract
Aims: To evaluate the association of fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH)-defined cytogenetic risk and baseline positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) findings with early treatment response and early disease progression in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (MM).
Methods: Seventy patients with newly diagnosed MM were included in this retrospective study. Clinical characteristics, International Staging System (ISS) and Revised ISS (R-ISS) stage, lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) level, FISH-defined cytogenetic risk, and baseline PET/CT parameters, including the number of focal lesions, maximum standardized uptake value (SUV max), extramedullary disease, bone marrow involvement, and metabolic risk group, were recorded. Treatment responses after the second and fourth cycles were evaluated. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were estimated using the Kaplan–Meier method, and exploratory associations with PFS were assessed using Cox proportional hazards regression.
Results: According to baseline PET/CT, 81.4% of patients were classified as having a metabolically high-risk disease. Compared with the metabolically low-risk group, patients in the metabolically high-risk group achieved significantly higher rates of very good partial response (VGPR) after the second cycle (49.1% vs. 15.4%, p=0.032) and ≥VGPR after the fourth cycle (64.9% vs. 23.1%, p=0.011). However, progression rates did not differ significantly between the two groups (p=0.675). Although response rates and progression frequency were numerically higher in the FISH high-risk group, these differences did not reach statistical significance. Kaplan–Meier analysis demonstrated longer PFS in female patients (p=0.001); ≥VGPR after the fourth cycle was not significantly associated with PFS (p=0.116). In the multivariable Cox model (13 PFS events), female sex remained significantly associated with PFS (HR=0.067, 95% CI 0.008–0.569, p=0.013), although the estimate was unstable because of the very limited number of events. The 1-year PFS and OS rates were 86% and 92%, respectively.
Conclusion: In this exploratory cohort, the study-specific PET/CT metabolic risk classification was associated with deeper early treatment responses but not with short-term disease progression. FISH-defined cytogenetic risk was not significantly associated with early response or progression. Given the short follow-up duration, limited number of events, and lack of external validation of the metabolic risk classification, these findings should be considered preliminary and do not establish the independent prognostic value of PET/CT or FISH-defined risk.

Keywords : Multiple myeloma, PET/CT, FISH cytogenetics, progression-free survival, treatment response

Download Article
Ethical Statement

<p>This study was approved by the Non-interventional Ethics Committee of İzmir City Hospital (Date: 29.04.2026, Decision No: 2026/280).</p>

Informed Consent

<p>This retrospective study used pre-existing anonymized patient data. No additional intervention was performed, and there was no direct patient contact. The study was approved by the Ethics Committee, and the requirement for written informed consent was waived by the ethics committee.</p>

Author Contributions

<p>Concept: MKY; Design: MKY; Control: ZN&Ouml;, OB; Resources: MKY, &Ouml;A, FAY; Materials: MKY, &Ouml;A, FAY; Data Collection and/or Processing: MKY, &Ouml;A, FAY; Analysis and/or Interpretation: MKY; Literature Review: MKY; Writing the Article: MKY; Critical Review: MKY, &Ouml;A, FAY, ZN&Ouml;, OB.</p>

Conflict of Interest

<p>The authors declare no conflicts of interest related to this study.</p>

Financial Disclosure

<p>The authors received no financial support for the conduct or publication of this research.</p>


1. Rajkumar SV. Multiple myeloma: 2024 update on diagnosis, risk-stratification, and management. Am J Hematol. 2024;99(9):1802-1824. doi:10.1002/ajh.27422
2. Kumar SK, Rajkumar SV, Kyle RA, et al. Multiple myeloma. Nat Rev Dis Primers. 2017;3:17046. doi:10.1038/nrdp.2017.46
3. Zamagni E, Patriarca F, Nanni C, et al. Prognostic relevance of 18F-FDG PET/CT in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. Blood. 2011; 118(23):5989-5995. doi:10.1182/blood-2011-06-361386
4. Cavo M, Terpos E, Nanni C, et al. Role of 18F-FDG PET/CT in the diagnosis and management of multiple myeloma and other plasma cell disorders: a consensus statement by the International Myeloma Working Group. Lancet Oncol. 2017;18(4):e206-e217. doi:10.1016/S1470-2045(17)30189-4
5. Bladé J, Beksac M, Caers J, et al. Extramedullary disease in multiple myeloma: a systematic literature review. Blood Cancer J. 2022;12(3):45. doi:10.1038/s41408-022-00643-3
6. Jung SH, Kwon SY, Min JJ, et al. 18F-FDG PET/CT is useful for determining survival outcomes of patients with multiple myeloma classified as stage II and III with the Revised International Staging System. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2019;46(1):107-115. doi:10.1007/s00259-018-4114-0
7. Terao T, Machida Y, Tsushima T, et al. Pre-treatment metabolic tumour volume and total lesion glycolysis are superior to conventional positron-emission tomography/computed tomography variables for outcome prediction in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma in clinical practice. Br J Haematol. 2020;191(2):223-230. doi:10.1111/bjh.16633
8. Li J, Tan H, Xu T, Shi H, Liu P. Bone marrow tracer uptake pattern of PET-CT in multiple myeloma: image interpretation and prognostic value. Ann Hematol. 2021;100(12):2979-2988. doi:10.1007/s00277-021-04629-2
9. Bartel TB, Haessler J, Brown TL, et al. F18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in the context of other imaging techniques and prognostic factors in multiple myeloma. Blood. 2009;114(10):2068-2076. doi:10.1182/blood-2009-03-213280
10. Schinke C, Hoering A, Wang H, et al. The prognostic value of the depth of response in multiple myeloma depends on the time of assessment, risk status and molecular subtype. Haematologica. 2017;102(8):e313-e316. doi:10.3324/haematol.2017.165217
11. Zamagni E, Nanni C, Patriarca F, et al. A prospective comparison of 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography-computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging and whole-body planar radiographs in the assessment of bone disease in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. Haematologica. 2007;92(1):50-55. doi:10.3324/haematol.10554
12. Beksac M, Gunduz M, Ozen M, Bakanay Ozturk SM, Kucuk O, Ozkan E. Impact of PET-CT response on survival parameters following autologous stem cell transplantation among patients with multiple myeloma: comparison of two cut-off values. Blood. 2014;124(21):3983. doi:10.1182/blood.V124.21.3983.3983
13. Rasche L, Angtuaco E, McDonald JE, et al. Low expression of hexokinase-2 is associated with false-negative FDG-positron emission tomography in multiple myeloma. Blood. 2017;130(1):30-34. doi:10.1182/blood-2017-03-774422
14. Ling SC, Lau EK, Al-Shabeeb A, et al. Response of myeloma to the proteasome inhibitor bortezomib is correlated with the unfolded protein response regulator XBP-1. Haematologica. 2012;97(1):64-72. doi:10.3324/haematol.2011.043331
15. Mainou M, Madenidou AV, Liakos A, et al. Association between response rates and survival outcomes in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. A systematic review and meta-regression analysis. Eur J Haematol. 2017;98(6):563-568. doi:10.1111/ejh.12868
16. Yan Y, Mao X, Liu J, et al. The impact of response kinetics for multiple myeloma in the era of novel agents. Blood Adv. 2019;3(19):2895-2904. doi:10.1182/bloodadvances.2019000432
17. Tandon N, Sidana S, Rajkumar SV, et al. Outcomes with early response to first-line treatment in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. Blood Adv. 2019;3(5):744-750. doi:10.1182/bloodadvances.2018022806
18. Sonneveld P, Avet-Loiseau H, Lonial S, et al. Treatment of multiple myeloma with high-risk cytogenetics: a consensus of the International Myeloma Working Group. Blood. 2016;127(24):2955-2962. doi:10.1182/blood-2016-01-631200
19. Walker BA, Mavrommatis K, Wardell CP, et al. A high-risk, Double-Hit, group of newly diagnosed myeloma identified by genomic analysis. Leukemia. 2019;33(1):159-170. doi:10.1038/s41375-018-0196-8
20. Derman BA, Langerman SS, Maric M, Jakubowiak A, Zhang W, Chiu BC. Sex differences in outcomes in multiple myeloma. Br J Haematol. 2021;192(3):e66-e69. doi:10.1111/bjh.17237
21. Bird S, Cairns D, Menzies T, et al. Sex differences in multiple myeloma biology but not clinical outcomes: results from 3894 patients in the Myeloma XI Trial. Clin Lymphoma Myeloma Leuk. 2021;21(10):667-675. doi:10.1016/j.clml.2021.04.013
22. Avet-Loiseau H, Attal M, Moreau P, et al. Achievement of VGPR to induction therapy is an important prognostic factor for longer PFS in the IFM 2005-01 trial. Blood. 2011;117(11):3041-3044. doi:10.1182/blood-2010-08-300863
Article available in :
Volume 4, Issue 4, 2026
Page : 159-165
https://doi.org/10.51271/JCHOR-0101
Article Information
Received : 11 Jul 2026
Accepted : 24 Oct 2026
Published : 13 Nov 2026
Corresponding Author :

Mustafa Kemal Yeniay: Department of Hematology, İzmir City Hospital, İzmir, Turkiye

[email protected]
Citation : Yeniay MK, Anlaş Ö, Altunbaş Yalabık F, Narlı Özdemir Z, Bilgir O. Association of FISH cytogenetic risk and baseline PET/CT findings with early treatment response and disease progression in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. J Curr Hematol Oncol Res. 2026;4(4):159-165. doi:10.51271/JCHOR-0101

Read: 6
Download : 4
Cited: 0
_Footer