Home / Health / EHR Data Predicts 5-Year Multiple Myeloma Risk | New Model

EHR Data Predicts 5-Year Multiple Myeloma Risk | New Model

EHR Data Predicts 5-Year Multiple Myeloma Risk | New Model

Predicting ​Multiple Myeloma Risk:​ A New Era in Early Detection

Multiple myeloma‍ (MM) is a cancer of ⁤plasma ⁤cells, a type of ​white blood ​cell. Early detection is crucial for improving treatment​ outcomes,⁤ but identifying individuals at high risk before symptoms appear has been‌ a significant challenge. Recent ⁣research, though, is changing that landscape, offering promising tools for proactive risk assessment.

A study⁢ published in the British Journal of Haematology explored whether readily available‌ clinical and laboratory markers could predict the progress of MM. Researchers ​at Clalit Health Services in Israel analyzed ‌electronic health records (EHRs) of patients who were later diagnosed with MM, comparing their data to a control‌ group who remained MM-free.⁤ the goal? To ‍pinpoint patterns and variables associated with increased risk.

The initial analysis ⁣involved 4256 patients diagnosed with MM between 2002 and ‌2019, carefully‍ matched with a⁢ larger ​control group (over 42,000 individuals) based on age, sex, and location. Investigators meticulously reviewed EHR data from five years prior to diagnosis,⁤ examining ‍over 200 different‌ clinical and lab parameters.

Initially, a complex machine⁢ learning‌ model was developed. While‍ accurate, it demanded considerable computational resources – a barrier to ⁢widespread implementation. Recognizing this limitation, the team developed a simplified model,​ designed for use by community ​physicians‌ with ‍standard resources.

This streamlined model focused on 20 key variables. patients who ultimately developed MM exhibited ​specific patterns: ⁢higher erythrocyte sedimentation rates (a marker⁤ of inflammation), lower hemoglobin levels,⁣ reduced absolute neutrophil counts, and decreased neutrophil/lymphocyte ratios. Elevated ​levels ⁣of globulins and ferritin were also​ observed. ⁢ ‌This simplified model achieved ⁤an area under the ​receiver operator characteristic (AUC) of 0.72, indicating a good level of predictive‍ accuracy.

Also Read:  Super Typhoon Fung-wong: Philippines Evacuations & Latest Updates

What does this ⁢mean for patients and clinicians?

The potential impact⁢ is ‌significant.This model offers a pathway to earlier detection, potentially⁢ allowing for intervention before ⁤ the disease progresses. This ‌is particularly relevant given previous research demonstrating the ⁣benefits⁢ of early treatment. A study in the New England​ Journal ‍of Medicine showed ‍that high-risk smoldering MM ‍patients treated with lenalidomide plus dexamethasone experienced a substantially longer time to disease progression compared to those under observation.

Though, implementing ⁤such a model ‌isn’t without​ considerations. A critical decision involves setting a risk threshold. A ⁤lower threshold would increase detection rates but ‍also lead to more false ⁤positives‍ and increased testing costs.A higher threshold would reduce costs but risk missing early-stage cases. Furthermore,the authors acknowledge the need for external validation – testing the model’s accuracy in diverse ⁤populations – to ensure its reliability.

Despite these caveats, the ⁤researchers are ‌optimistic. They beleive⁢ their​ findings provide a practical, actionable tool for clinicians, empowering them to proactively identify individuals at ⁤increased risk of developing ⁣multiple myeloma. This represents a ⁣potential paradigm shift, moving from reactive treatment to ⁤proactive prevention and early⁤ intervention.

References:

  1. Mittelman M, Israel ⁢A, Oster HS, et al. Can we identify individuals at risk to develop multiple myeloma? A ⁤machine learning-based predictive ⁤model. ‍ Br J Haematol. Published online June 16, ​2025. doi:10.1111/bjh.20136
  2. Mateos MV, Hernández MT,⁤ Giraldo P, et al. Lenalidomide ​plus dexamethasone for high-risk smoldering multiple myeloma. N Engl J Med. ⁢ 2013;369(5):438-447. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1300439

Leave a Reply