IgM Multiple Myeloma: Disease Definition, Prognosis, and Differentiation From Waldenstrom's Macroglobulinemia.
Authors: Schuster Steven , Dispenzieri Angela , Rajkumar S. Vincent , Aspitia Alvaro Moreno , Kyle Robert , Mikhael Joseph R. 
Published: November 2019

Abstract
Abstract 1828
Poster Board I-854

Background
IgM Multiple Myeloma (MM) and Waldenstrom's Macroglobulinemia (WM) are two hematologic diagnoses with the common variable of an IgM monoclonal gammopathy. Distinguishing these two diagnoses is critical as the approach to therapy is different. A study by Avet-Loiseau et al demonstrated the presence of t(11;14) translocations in 7 of 8 patients with IgM MM that was absent in all of a series of 17 cases of WM (Semin Oncol 2003 30:2;153). However, 6 of the 8 IgM MM cases lacked classic lytic lesions.

Method
A priori, based on the literature and the natural history of MM, we defined IgM MM as a symptomatic clonal plasma cell proliferative disorder characterized by a serum IgM monoclonal protein (regardless of size) plus presence of t(11;14) on fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH) and/or lytic bone lesions felt to be related to the underlying plasma cell disorder. The cases for the study were screened by a computerized database search for ‘IgM’ and ‘Myeloma’ of all patients seen at Mayo Clinic in the last 30 years at all three sites (Rochester, Arizona and Florida). Patients identified on the computerized screen were then audited by chart review to identify the study cohort.

Results
38 cases were identified on initial screen of the computerized database as potential patients with IgM MM. Of these, a total of 22 cases met our specific definition of IgM myeloma (t(11;14 and/or lytic lesions). Of the remaining 16 cases, 8 were IgM MGUS, 5 were WM based on clinical presentation (hyperviscosity, lymphadenopathy and organomegaly) and biopsy findings of lymphoplasmacytic lymphoma, 1 was excluded due to lack of information, and the remaining 2 patients were indeed considered to have clinical IgM MM. Interestingly, these two patients did not have either the t(11;14) or lytic lesions, but rather had immunophenotypic features suggestive of MM and not WM (CD138+, CD20-). Table 1 summarizes the clinical characteristics of the 22 patients who met our criteria for IgM MM. All 22 patients had lytic bone lesions. Of the 17 evaluated with FISH, 6 (35%) demonstrated the t(11;14) abnormality. Median overall survival by Kaplan-Meier analysis was 37 months represented in Figure 1.

Conclusion
IgM MM is a discrete clinical entity that can and should be distinguished from WM. Our definition of IgM MM is designed to be specific and requires the presence of a symptomatic IgM secreting plasma cell proliferative disorder plus presence of t(11;14) and/or lytic bone lesions felt related to the underlying plasma cell disorder. In this, the largest series of patients with IgM MM, the t(11;14) abnormality is very specific for IgM MM, but may not be sensitive, being present in approximately 1/3 of patients. The median overall survival is similar to non-IgM myeloma patients treated during this period, and much shorter than what would be expected for WM. The minority of symptomatic patients with IgM monoclonal gammopathy who do not meet this criteria, but have immunophenotypic features more suggestive of MM rather than WM need further study.

Disclosures
No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.