Clinicopathological Profile of Paraprotein-Associated Kidney Disease in Monoclonal Gammopathies: An Observational Study

Overview

Journal Cureus

Specialty Biomedical Engineering

Date 2023 Jan 26

PMID 36699747

Authors

Divya Parepalli

Bheemanathi Hanuman Srinivas

Debdatta Basu

Priyamvada Ps

Biswajith Dubashi

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Background Renal involvement in monoclonal gammopathies presents with different clinico-morphological patterns and can manifest at the onset or the late phase of hematological disease, or after chemotherapy. The spectrum is ever-expanding with advancements in diagnostic methods. Renal biopsy is needed for accurate diagnosis, as each of these patterns carries therapeutic and prognostic implications. Methods A total of 41 cases of monoclonal gammopathies were included in the study. Clinical, biochemical, and hematological details were obtained, and pathological variables were observed. Patients were followed till the maximum possible period, and treatment history and follow-up creatinine details were collected. Results The spectrum of renal biopsy lesions observed included light chain cast nephropathy (LCCN) n=19, amyloidosis n=11, monoclonal immunoglobulin deposition disease (MIDD) n=6, and proliferative glomerulonephritis with monoclonal immunoglobulin deposition (PGNMID) n=5; 10 of these cases can be categorized as monoclonal gammopathy of renal significance (MGRS). Acute kidney injury (AKI) (41%) is the predominant clinical presentation in general whereas the majority of amyloidosis cases presented with nephrotic and sub-nephrotic proteinuria. LCCN cases had high serum creatinine and calcium, positivity for M-spike, as well as a high FLC ratio, compared to the other types. Around 100% of LCCN and MIDD patients had myeloma and 100% of PGNMID cases had normal marrow. Conclusion More than three-fourths of patients were diagnosed with monoclonal gammopathies with biochemical and hematological workups after an initial kidney biopsy. The clinicopathological profile of these patients had a broad spectrum but there were still some consistent findings within the different types. A subgroup of patients (MGRS) had undetectable serum paraproteins but had monoclonal immunoglobulin deposition in the kidney.

References

Ecotiere L, Thierry A, Debiais-Delpech C, Chevret S, Javaugue V, Desport E . Prognostic value of kidney biopsy in myeloma cast nephropathy: a retrospective study of 70 patients. Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2015; 31(1):64-72. DOI: 10.1093/ndt/gfv283. View

Amaador K, Peeters H, Minnema M, Nguyen T, Dendooven A, Vos J . Monoclonal gammopathy of renal significance (MGRS) histopathologic classification, diagnostic workup, and therapeutic options. Neth J Med. 2019; 77(7):243-254. View

Santostefano M, Zanchelli F, Zaccaria A, Poletti G, Fusaroli M . The ultrastructural basis of renal pathology in monoclonal gammopathies. J Nephrol. 2005; 18(6):659-75. View

Herrera G, Joseph L, Gu X, Hough A, Barlogie B . Renal pathologic spectrum in an autopsy series of patients with plasma cell dyscrasia. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2004; 128(8):875-9. DOI: 10.5858/2004-128-875-RPSIAA. View

Leung N, Bridoux F, Batuman V, Chaidos A, Cockwell P, DAgati V . The evaluation of monoclonal gammopathy of renal significance: a consensus report of the International Kidney and Monoclonal Gammopathy Research Group. Nat Rev Nephrol. 2018; 15(1):45-59. PMC: 7136169. DOI: 10.1038/s41581-018-0077-4. View

Klomjit N, Leung N, Fervenza F, Sethi S, Zand L . Rate and Predictors of Finding Monoclonal Gammopathy of Renal Significance (MGRS) Lesions on Kidney Biopsy in Patients with Monoclonal Gammopathy. J Am Soc Nephrol. 2020; 31(10):2400-2411. PMC: 7609011. DOI: 10.1681/ASN.2020010054. View

Bridoux F, Leung N, Hutchison C, Touchard G, Sethi S, Fermand J . Diagnosis of monoclonal gammopathy of renal significance. Kidney Int. 2015; 87(4):698-711. DOI: 10.1038/ki.2014.408. View

Lin J, Markowitz G, Valeri A, Kambham N, Sherman W, Appel G . Renal monoclonal immunoglobulin deposition disease: the disease spectrum. J Am Soc Nephrol. 2001; 12(7):1482-1492. DOI: 10.1681/ASN.V1271482. View

Herrera G . Renal manifestations of plasma cell dyscrasias: an appraisal from the patients' bedside to the research laboratory. Ann Diagn Pathol. 2000; 4(3):174-200. DOI: 10.1016/s1092-9134(00)90042-x. View

10.

Said S, Sethi S, Valeri A, Leung N, Cornell L, Fidler M . Renal amyloidosis: origin and clinicopathologic correlations of 474 recent cases. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2013; 8(9):1515-23. PMC: 3805078. DOI: 10.2215/CJN.10491012. View

11.

Montseny J, KLEINKNECHT D, Meyrier A, Vanhille P, Simon P, Pruna A . Long-term outcome according to renal histological lesions in 118 patients with monoclonal gammopathies. Nephrol Dial Transplant. 1998; 13(6):1438-45. DOI: 10.1093/ndt/13.6.1438. View

12.

Fielder K, Durie B . Primary amyloidosis associated with multiple myeloma. Predictors of successful therapy. Am J Med. 1986; 80(3):413-8. DOI: 10.1016/0002-9343(86)90715-1. View

13.

Nasr S, Valeri A, Sethi S, Fidler M, Cornell L, Gertz M . Clinicopathologic correlations in multiple myeloma: a case series of 190 patients with kidney biopsies. Am J Kidney Dis. 2012; 59(6):786-94. DOI: 10.1053/j.ajkd.2011.12.028. View

14.

Ronco P, Aucouturier P, Mougenot B . Plasma cell dyscrasia-related glomerulopathies and Fanconi's syndrome: a molecular approach. J Nephrol. 2000; 13 Suppl 3:S34-44. View

15.

Nasr S, Sethi S, Cornell L, Fidler M, Boelkins M, Fervenza F . Proliferative glomerulonephritis with monoclonal IgG deposits recurs in the allograft. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2010; 6(1):122-32. PMC: 3022233. DOI: 10.2215/CJN.05750710. View

16.

Nasr S, Markowitz G, Stokes M, Seshan S, Valderrama E, Appel G . Proliferative glomerulonephritis with monoclonal IgG deposits: a distinct entity mimicking immune-complex glomerulonephritis. Kidney Int. 2003; 65(1):85-96. DOI: 10.1111/j.1523-1755.2004.00365.x. View

17.

Gerth J, Sachse A, Busch M, Illner N, Muegge L, Grone H . Screening and differential diagnosis of renal light chain-associated diseases. Kidney Blood Press Res. 2011; 35(2):120-8. DOI: 10.1159/000330715. View