Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 974

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

New Criteria for Response to Treatment in Immunoglobulin Light Chain Amyloidosis Based on Free Light Chain Measurement and Cardiac Biomarkers: Impact on Survival Outcomes

Palladini, Giovanni, Dispenzieri, Angela, Gertz, Morie A., Kumar, Shaji, Wechalekar, Ashutosh, Hawkins, Philip N., Schönland, Stefan, Hegenbart, Ute, Comenzo, Raymond, Kastritis, Efstathios, Dimopoulos, Meletios A., Jaccard, Arnaud, Klersy, Catherine, Merlini, Giampaolo·2012·Journal of Clinical Oncology

Abstract

Purpose: To identify the criteria for hematologic and cardiac response to treatment in immunoglobulin light chain (AL) amyloidosis based on survival analysis of a large patient population. Patients and Methods: We gathered for analysis 816 patients with AL amyloidosis from seven referral centers in the European Union and the United States. A different cohort of 374 patients prospectively evaluated at the Pavia Amyloidosis Research and Treatment Center was used for validation. Data was available for all patients before and 3 and/or 6 months after initiation of first-line therapy. The prognostic relevance of different criteria for hematologic and cardiac response was assessed. Results: There was a strong correlation between the extent of reduction of amyloidogenic free light chains (FLCs) and improvement in survival. This allowed the identification of four levels of response: amyloid complete response (normal FLC ratio and negative serum and urine immunofixation), very good partial response (difference between involved and uninvolved FLCs [dFLC] < 40 mg/L), partial response (dFLC decrease > 50%), and no response. Cardiac involvement is the major determinant of survival, and changes in cardiac function after therapy can be reliably assessed using the cardiac biomarker N-terminal natriuretic peptide type B (NT-proBNP). Changes in FLC and NT-proBNP predicted survival as early as 3 months after treatment initiation. Conclusion: This study identifies and validates new criteria for response to first-line treatment in AL amyloidosis, based on their association with survival in large patient populations, and offers surrogate end points for clinical trials.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1200/jco.2011.37.7614

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 974

Metadata

Authors
Palladini, G., Dispenzieri, A., Gertz, M. A., Kumar, S., Wechalekar, A., Hawkins, P. N., Schönland, S., Hegenbart, U., Comenzo, R., Kastritis, E., Dimopoulos, M. A., Jaccard, A., Klersy, C., & Merlini, G.
Venue
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Published
2012-12-20
Volume
30
Issue
36
Pages
4541-4549
ISSN
  • 0732-183X (ISSN-L)
  • 1527-7755
OpenAlex
W2111080788
Cited by
974
References
0
FWCI
14.64
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: New Criteria for Response to Treatment in Immunoglobulin Light Chain Amyloidosis Based on Free Light Chain Measurement and Cardiac Biomarkers: Impact on Survival Outcomes. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1200/jco.2011.37.7614
The paper
Palladini, G., Dispenzieri, A., Gertz, M. A., Kumar, S., Wechalekar, A., Hawkins, P. N., Schönland, S., Hegenbart, U., Comenzo, R., Kastritis, E., Dimopoulos, M. A., Jaccard, A., Klersy, C., & Merlini, G. (2012). New Criteria for Response to Treatment in Immunoglobulin Light Chain Amyloidosis Based on Free Light Chain Measurement and Cardiac Biomarkers: Impact on Survival Outcomes. Journal of Clinical Oncology. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2011.37.7614

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.