Therapeutic advances in hematology · 2026
Clinical practice of the endothelial activation and stress index and its modified versions in multiple myeloma and the effects on prognosis.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Gursoy Vildan, Gul Ozgur Omer, Kose Elif, Sadri Sevil
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: Here, we aimed to evaluate the prognostic values of the endothelial activation and stress index (EASIX) and its derivatives, modified EASIX (mEASIX) and simplified EASIX (sEASIX), in patients with multiple myeloma (MM).
METHODS: The data of 134 newly diagnosed MM patients between January 2020 and December 2024 were retrospectively analyzed. Patients were divided into groups based on EASIX and its derivatives, and the outcomes of survival rates in groups were compared. Optimal cut-off points were determined using the receiver-operating characteristic analysis, and mortality predictive values of the scores were investigated. The independent prognostic factors were evaluated through univariate and multivariate Cox regression analyses.
RESULTS: The optimal cut-off point for EASIX was detected as >1.03, and survival times were significantly shorter in patients with higher EASIX scores (p < 0.001). Even so, the optimal cut-off point for mEASIX was >26.5, showing higher specificity (area under curve (AUC) = 0.663; p = 0.003). The sEASIX score predicted lower mortality (AUC = 0.586; p = 0.123). In multivariate analysis, high EASIX scores, not performing autologous stem cell transplantation, and not receiving immunomodulatory therapy were identified as independent negative prognostic factors for survival.
CONCLUSION: EASIX, especially mEASIX, is a valuable prognostic tool for predicting survival in MM patients. EASIX can be easily integrated into clinical practice due to its simple computability and reliance on commonly used laboratory parameters. However, larger prospective studies are needed to determine how these scores can be integrated with traditional prognostic systems such as the International Staging System (ISS) and Revised-ISS.
METHODS: The data of 134 newly diagnosed MM patients between January 2020 and December 2024 were retrospectively analyzed. Patients were divided into groups based on EASIX and its derivatives, and the outcomes of survival rates in groups were compared. Optimal cut-off points were determined using the receiver-operating characteristic analysis, and mortality predictive values of the scores were investigated. The independent prognostic factors were evaluated through univariate and multivariate Cox regression analyses.
RESULTS: The optimal cut-off point for EASIX was detected as >1.03, and survival times were significantly shorter in patients with higher EASIX scores (p < 0.001). Even so, the optimal cut-off point for mEASIX was >26.5, showing higher specificity (area under curve (AUC) = 0.663; p = 0.003). The sEASIX score predicted lower mortality (AUC = 0.586; p = 0.123). In multivariate analysis, high EASIX scores, not performing autologous stem cell transplantation, and not receiving immunomodulatory therapy were identified as independent negative prognostic factors for survival.
CONCLUSION: EASIX, especially mEASIX, is a valuable prognostic tool for predicting survival in MM patients. EASIX can be easily integrated into clinical practice due to its simple computability and reliance on commonly used laboratory parameters. However, larger prospective studies are needed to determine how these scores can be integrated with traditional prognostic systems such as the International Staging System (ISS) and Revised-ISS.