JournalTOCs

About Help News

Clinical Nephrology
Journal Prestige (SJR): 0.535

Citation Impact (citeScore): 1
Number of Followers: 8

Full-text available via subscription

Subscription journal
ISSN (Print) 0301-0430
Published by Dustri-Verlag

[3 journals]

Diffuse "background" monoclonal light chain staining on kidney biopsies in
the absence of electron-dense deposits - putting it into perspective: A
retrospective cohort study.
- Authors: Satoskar AA; Alsanani A, Brodsky SV, Cassol C, Prosek J, Kandukurti K, Ayoub I, Khan A, Devarakonda S, Nadasdy T
  Abstract: Diffuse "background" monoclonal light chain staining on kidney biopsies in the absence of electron-dense deposits - putting it into perspective: A retrospective cohort study. Clin Nephrol. 2020 Oct 23;:
  Authors : Satoskar AA, Alsanani A, Brodsky SV, Cassol C, Prosek J, Kandukurti K, Ayoub I, Khan A, Devarakonda S, Nadasdy T
  BACKGROUND: Pathologic diagnosis of monoclonal gammopathy (MIg)-associated kidney disease requires specific morphologic and immunofluorescence (IF) findings with deposits on electron microscopy. We have encountered kidney biopsies showing only diffuse "background" monoclonal light chain staining, without characteristic morphologic or ultrastructural findings. Such staining is often overlooked if weak, or over-diagnosed as MIg-associated kidney disease if strong, causing dilemma over the need for immediate clone-directed therapy. We performed a clinicopathologic study to better understand its significance.
  MATERIALS AND METHODS: Database search revealed 32 such cases over 12 years. Demographic, laboratory, and pathology data were retrieved along with a mean follow-up of 13 months.
  RESULTS: 15/32 (47%) patients did have active myeloma on hematologic testing (without myeloma casts) warranting immediate clone-directed therapy; but 11/32 (34%) did not develop active myeloma; 3/32 (9%) did not even have detectable paraprotein; 3/32 (9%) were lost to follow-up. Importantly, strong background light chain staining was seen even in some non-myeloma biopsies and conversely, weak staining was seen in some myeloma biopsies, complicating diagnosis.
  CONCLUSION: It is important to recognize and document this finding in the biopsy report, but by itself, it should not be classified as MIg-associated kidney disease even in the face of strong staining intensity. A thorough hematologic work-up is critically important to unmask underlying active myeloma, which many patients may have. But equally important is to avoid inadvertent clone-directed therapy in patients who do not have active myeloma despite the background monoclonal staining. A protocol for periodic monitoring with hematologic and renal parameters to watch for possible malignant transformation is recommend for timely implementation of therapy to minimize renal damage.
  PMID: 33094731 [PubMed - as supplied by publisher]

JournalTOCs
School of Mathematical and Computer Sciences
Heriot-Watt University
Edinburgh, EH14 4AS, UK
Email: journaltocs@hw.ac.uk
Tel: +00 44 (0)131 4513762

Your IP address: 18.207.102.38

Home (Search)
API
About JournalTOCs
News (blog, publications)