Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research, ISSN - 0973 - 709X

Users Online : 51172

AbstractMaterial and MethodsResultsDiscussionConclusionReferencesDOI and Others
Article in PDF How to Cite Citation Manager Readers' Comments (0) Audio Visual Article Statistics Link to PUBMED Print this Article Send to a Friend
Advertisers Access Statistics Resources

Dr Mohan Z Mani

"Thank you very much for having published my article in record time.I would like to compliment you and your entire staff for your promptness, courtesy, and willingness to be customer friendly, which is quite unusual.I was given your reference by a colleague in pathology,and was able to directly phone your editorial office for clarifications.I would particularly like to thank the publication managers and the Assistant Editor who were following up my article. I would also like to thank you for adjusting the money I paid initially into payment for my modified article,and refunding the balance.
I wish all success to your journal and look forward to sending you any suitable similar article in future"



Dr Mohan Z Mani,
Professor & Head,
Department of Dermatolgy,
Believers Church Medical College,
Thiruvalla, Kerala
On Sep 2018




Prof. Somashekhar Nimbalkar

"Over the last few years, we have published our research regularly in Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research. Having published in more than 20 high impact journals over the last five years including several high impact ones and reviewing articles for even more journals across my fields of interest, we value our published work in JCDR for their high standards in publishing scientific articles. The ease of submission, the rapid reviews in under a month, the high quality of their reviewers and keen attention to the final process of proofs and publication, ensure that there are no mistakes in the final article. We have been asked clarifications on several occasions and have been happy to provide them and it exemplifies the commitment to quality of the team at JCDR."



Prof. Somashekhar Nimbalkar
Head, Department of Pediatrics, Pramukhswami Medical College, Karamsad
Chairman, Research Group, Charutar Arogya Mandal, Karamsad
National Joint Coordinator - Advanced IAP NNF NRP Program
Ex-Member, Governing Body, National Neonatology Forum, New Delhi
Ex-President - National Neonatology Forum Gujarat State Chapter
Department of Pediatrics, Pramukhswami Medical College, Karamsad, Anand, Gujarat.
On Sep 2018




Dr. Kalyani R

"Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research is at present a well-known Indian originated scientific journal which started with a humble beginning. I have been associated with this journal since many years. I appreciate the Editor, Dr. Hemant Jain, for his constant effort in bringing up this journal to the present status right from the scratch. The journal is multidisciplinary. It encourages in publishing the scientific articles from postgraduates and also the beginners who start their career. At the same time the journal also caters for the high quality articles from specialty and super-specialty researchers. Hence it provides a platform for the scientist and researchers to publish. The other aspect of it is, the readers get the information regarding the most recent developments in science which can be used for teaching, research, treating patients and to some extent take preventive measures against certain diseases. The journal is contributing immensely to the society at national and international level."



Dr Kalyani R
Professor and Head
Department of Pathology
Sri Devaraj Urs Medical College
Sri Devaraj Urs Academy of Higher Education and Research , Kolar, Karnataka
On Sep 2018




Dr. Saumya Navit

"As a peer-reviewed journal, the Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research provides an opportunity to researchers, scientists and budding professionals to explore the developments in the field of medicine and dentistry and their varied specialities, thus extending our view on biological diversities of living species in relation to medicine.
‘Knowledge is treasure of a wise man.’ The free access of this journal provides an immense scope of learning for the both the old and the young in field of medicine and dentistry as well. The multidisciplinary nature of the journal makes it a better platform to absorb all that is being researched and developed. The publication process is systematic and professional. Online submission, publication and peer reviewing makes it a user-friendly journal.
As an experienced dentist and an academician, I proudly recommend this journal to the dental fraternity as a good quality open access platform for rapid communication of their cutting-edge research progress and discovery.
I wish JCDR a great success and I hope that journal will soar higher with the passing time."



Dr Saumya Navit
Professor and Head
Department of Pediatric Dentistry
Saraswati Dental College
Lucknow
On Sep 2018




Dr. Arunava Biswas

"My sincere attachment with JCDR as an author as well as reviewer is a learning experience . Their systematic approach in publication of article in various categories is really praiseworthy.
Their prompt and timely response to review's query and the manner in which they have set the reviewing process helps in extracting the best possible scientific writings for publication.
It's a honour and pride to be a part of the JCDR team. My very best wishes to JCDR and hope it will sparkle up above the sky as a high indexed journal in near future."



Dr. Arunava Biswas
MD, DM (Clinical Pharmacology)
Assistant Professor
Department of Pharmacology
Calcutta National Medical College & Hospital , Kolkata




Dr. C.S. Ramesh Babu
" Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR) is a multi-specialty medical and dental journal publishing high quality research articles in almost all branches of medicine. The quality of printing of figures and tables is excellent and comparable to any International journal. An added advantage is nominal publication charges and monthly issue of the journal and more chances of an article being accepted for publication. Moreover being a multi-specialty journal an article concerning a particular specialty has a wider reach of readers of other related specialties also. As an author and reviewer for several years I find this Journal most suitable and highly recommend this Journal."
Best regards,
C.S. Ramesh Babu,
Associate Professor of Anatomy,
Muzaffarnagar Medical College,
Muzaffarnagar.
On Aug 2018




Dr. Arundhathi. S
"Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR) is a reputed peer reviewed journal and is constantly involved in publishing high quality research articles related to medicine. Its been a great pleasure to be associated with this esteemed journal as a reviewer and as an author for a couple of years. The editorial board consists of many dedicated and reputed experts as its members and they are doing an appreciable work in guiding budding researchers. JCDR is doing a commendable job in scientific research by promoting excellent quality research & review articles and case reports & series. The reviewers provide appropriate suggestions that improve the quality of articles. I strongly recommend my fraternity to encourage JCDR by contributing their valuable research work in this widely accepted, user friendly journal. I hope my collaboration with JCDR will continue for a long time".



Dr. Arundhathi. S
MBBS, MD (Pathology),
Sanjay Gandhi institute of trauma and orthopedics,
Bengaluru.
On Aug 2018




Dr. Mamta Gupta,
"It gives me great pleasure to be associated with JCDR, since last 2-3 years. Since then I have authored, co-authored and reviewed about 25 articles in JCDR. I thank JCDR for giving me an opportunity to improve my own skills as an author and a reviewer.
It 's a multispecialty journal, publishing high quality articles. It gives a platform to the authors to publish their research work which can be available for everyone across the globe to read. The best thing about JCDR is that the full articles of all medical specialties are available as pdf/html for reading free of cost or without institutional subscription, which is not there for other journals. For those who have problem in writing manuscript or do statistical work, JCDR comes for their rescue.
The journal has a monthly publication and the articles are published quite fast. In time compared to other journals. The on-line first publication is also a great advantage and facility to review one's own articles before going to print. The response to any query and permission if required, is quite fast; this is quite commendable. I have a very good experience about seeking quick permission for quoting a photograph (Fig.) from a JCDR article for my chapter authored in an E book. I never thought it would be so easy. No hassles.
Reviewing articles is no less a pain staking process and requires in depth perception, knowledge about the topic for review. It requires time and concentration, yet I enjoy doing it. The JCDR website especially for the reviewers is quite user friendly. My suggestions for improving the journal is, more strict review process, so that only high quality articles are published. I find a a good number of articles in Obst. Gynae, hence, a new journal for this specialty titled JCDR-OG can be started. May be a bimonthly or quarterly publication to begin with. Only selected articles should find a place in it.
An yearly reward for the best article authored can also incentivize the authors. Though the process of finding the best article will be not be very easy. I do not know how reviewing process can be improved. If an article is being reviewed by two reviewers, then opinion of one can be communicated to the other or the final opinion of the editor can be communicated to the reviewer if requested for. This will help one’s reviewing skills.
My best wishes to Dr. Hemant Jain and all the editorial staff of JCDR for their untiring efforts to bring out this journal. I strongly recommend medical fraternity to publish their valuable research work in this esteemed journal, JCDR".



Dr. Mamta Gupta
Consultant
(Ex HOD Obs &Gynae, Hindu Rao Hospital and associated NDMC Medical College, Delhi)
Aug 2018




Dr. Rajendra Kumar Ghritlaharey

"I wish to thank Dr. Hemant Jain, Editor-in-Chief Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR), for asking me to write up few words.
Writing is the representation of language in a textual medium i e; into the words and sentences on paper. Quality medical manuscript writing in particular, demands not only a high-quality research, but also requires accurate and concise communication of findings and conclusions, with adherence to particular journal guidelines. In medical field whether working in teaching, private, or in corporate institution, everyone wants to excel in his / her own field and get recognised by making manuscripts publication.


Authors are the souls of any journal, and deserve much respect. To publish a journal manuscripts are needed from authors. Authors have a great responsibility for producing facts of their work in terms of number and results truthfully and an individual honesty is expected from authors in this regards. Both ways its true "No authors-No manuscripts-No journals" and "No journals–No manuscripts–No authors". Reviewing a manuscript is also a very responsible and important task of any peer-reviewed journal and to be taken seriously. It needs knowledge on the subject, sincerity, honesty and determination. Although the process of reviewing a manuscript is a time consuming task butit is expected to give one's best remarks within the time frame of the journal.
Salient features of the JCDR: It is a biomedical, multidisciplinary (including all medical and dental specialities), e-journal, with wide scope and extensive author support. At the same time, a free text of manuscript is available in HTML and PDF format. There is fast growing authorship and readership with JCDR as this can be judged by the number of articles published in it i e; in Feb 2007 of its first issue, it contained 5 articles only, and now in its recent volume published in April 2011, it contained 67 manuscripts. This e-journal is fulfilling the commitments and objectives sincerely, (as stated by Editor-in-chief in his preface to first edition) i e; to encourage physicians through the internet, especially from the developing countries who witness a spectrum of disease and acquire a wealth of knowledge to publish their experiences to benefit the medical community in patients care. I also feel that many of us have work of substance, newer ideas, adequate clinical materials but poor in medical writing and hesitation to submit the work and need help. JCDR provides authors help in this regards.
Timely publication of journal: Publication of manuscripts and bringing out the issue in time is one of the positive aspects of JCDR and is possible with strong support team in terms of peer reviewers, proof reading, language check, computer operators, etc. This is one of the great reasons for authors to submit their work with JCDR. Another best part of JCDR is "Online first Publications" facilities available for the authors. This facility not only provides the prompt publications of the manuscripts but at the same time also early availability of the manuscripts for the readers.
Indexation and online availability: Indexation transforms the journal in some sense from its local ownership to the worldwide professional community and to the public.JCDR is indexed with Embase & EMbiology, Google Scholar, Index Copernicus, Chemical Abstracts Service, Journal seek Database, Indian Science Abstracts, to name few of them. Manuscriptspublished in JCDR are available on major search engines ie; google, yahoo, msn.
In the era of fast growing newer technologies, and in computer and internet friendly environment the manuscripts preparation, submission, review, revision, etc and all can be done and checked with a click from all corer of the world, at any time. Of course there is always a scope for improvement in every field and none is perfect. To progress, one needs to identify the areas of one's weakness and to strengthen them.
It is well said that "happy beginning is half done" and it fits perfectly with JCDR. It has grown considerably and I feel it has already grown up from its infancy to adolescence, achieving the status of standard online e-journal form Indian continent since its inception in Feb 2007. This had been made possible due to the efforts and the hard work put in it. The way the JCDR is improving with every new volume, with good quality original manuscripts, makes it a quality journal for readers. I must thank and congratulate Dr Hemant Jain, Editor-in-Chief JCDR and his team for their sincere efforts, dedication, and determination for making JCDR a fast growing journal.
Every one of us: authors, reviewers, editors, and publisher are responsible for enhancing the stature of the journal. I wish for a great success for JCDR."



Thanking you
With sincere regards
Dr. Rajendra Kumar Ghritlaharey, M.S., M. Ch., FAIS
Associate Professor,
Department of Paediatric Surgery, Gandhi Medical College & Associated
Kamla Nehru & Hamidia Hospitals Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh 462 001 (India)
E-mail: drrajendrak1@rediffmail.com
On May 11,2011




Dr. Shankar P.R.

"On looking back through my Gmail archives after being requested by the journal to write a short editorial about my experiences of publishing with the Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR), I came across an e-mail from Dr. Hemant Jain, Editor, in March 2007, which introduced the new electronic journal. The main features of the journal which were outlined in the e-mail were extensive author support, cash rewards, the peer review process, and other salient features of the journal.
Over a span of over four years, we (I and my colleagues) have published around 25 articles in the journal. In this editorial, I plan to briefly discuss my experiences of publishing with JCDR and the strengths of the journal and to finally address the areas for improvement.
My experiences of publishing with JCDR: Overall, my experiences of publishing withJCDR have been positive. The best point about the journal is that it responds to queries from the author. This may seem to be simple and not too much to ask for, but unfortunately, many journals in the subcontinent and from many developing countries do not respond or they respond with a long delay to the queries from the authors 1. The reasons could be many, including lack of optimal secretarial and other support. Another problem with many journals is the slowness of the review process. Editorial processing and peer review can take anywhere between a year to two years with some journals. Also, some journals do not keep the contributors informed about the progress of the review process. Due to the long review process, the articles can lose their relevance and topicality. A major benefit with JCDR is the timeliness and promptness of its response. In Dr Jain's e-mail which was sent to me in 2007, before the introduction of the Pre-publishing system, he had stated that he had received my submission and that he would get back to me within seven days and he did!
Most of the manuscripts are published within 3 to 4 months of their submission if they are found to be suitable after the review process. JCDR is published bimonthly and the accepted articles were usually published in the next issue. Recently, due to the increased volume of the submissions, the review process has become slower and it ?? Section can take from 4 to 6 months for the articles to be reviewed. The journal has an extensive author support system and it has recently introduced a paid expedited review process. The journal also mentions the average time for processing the manuscript under different submission systems - regular submission and expedited review.
Strengths of the journal: The journal has an online first facility in which the accepted manuscripts may be published on the website before being included in a regular issue of the journal. This cuts down the time between their acceptance and the publication. The journal is indexed in many databases, though not in PubMed. The editorial board should now take steps to index the journal in PubMed. The journal has a system of notifying readers through e-mail when a new issue is released. Also, the articles are available in both the HTML and the PDF formats. I especially like the new and colorful page format of the journal. Also, the access statistics of the articles are available. The prepublication and the manuscript tracking system are also helpful for the authors.
Areas for improvement: In certain cases, I felt that the peer review process of the manuscripts was not up to international standards and that it should be strengthened. Also, the number of manuscripts in an issue is high and it may be difficult for readers to go through all of them. The journal can consider tightening of the peer review process and increasing the quality standards for the acceptance of the manuscripts. I faced occasional problems with the online manuscript submission (Pre-publishing) system, which have to be addressed.
Overall, the publishing process with JCDR has been smooth, quick and relatively hassle free and I can recommend other authors to consider the journal as an outlet for their work."



Dr. P. Ravi Shankar
KIST Medical College, P.O. Box 14142, Kathmandu, Nepal.
E-mail: ravi.dr.shankar@gmail.com
On April 2011
Anuradha

Dear team JCDR, I would like to thank you for the very professional and polite service provided by everyone at JCDR. While i have been in the field of writing and editing for sometime, this has been my first attempt in publishing a scientific paper.Thank you for hand-holding me through the process.


Dr. Anuradha
E-mail: anuradha2nittur@gmail.com
On Jan 2020

Important Notice

Original article / research
Year : 2022 | Month : May | Volume : 16 | Issue : 5 | Page : EC37 - EC41 Full Version

Spectrum of Renal Histopathological Changes in Multiple Myeloma


Published: May 1, 2022 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.7860/JCDR/2022/51274.16368
Thundi Parambil Raghavan Nisha, Chettithodi Sivasankaran Bindu, Bhaskaran K Sindhu

1. Associate Professor, Department of Pathology, Government Medical College, Kozhikode, Kerala, India. 2. Assistant Professor, Department of Pathology, Government Medical College, Kozhikode, Kerala, India. 3. Professor, Department of Pathology, Government Medical College, Kozhikode, Kerala, India.

Correspondence Address :
Dr. Chettithodi Sivasankaran Bindu,
Assistant Professor, Department of Pathology, Government Medical College,
Kozhikode, Kerala, India.
E-mail: binducs12@gmail.com

Abstract

Introduction: Renal involvement is very common in myeloma. The evaluation of renal status plays an important role in diagnosis and prognosis of patients with myeloma. The kidney biopsy will show various patterns of injury and the chronicity of the disease which help in planning the treatment options. Myeloma comprises a significant number of malignancies but no data regarding renal biopsy changes in myeloma is available from North Kerala, India.

Aim: To describe the various morphological patterns of renal involvement in all myeloma patients who required a renal biopsy for evaluation of renal dysfunction.

Materials and Methods: It was a retrospective, descriptive study conducted at Government Medical College, Kozhikode, India, a tertiary care centre from January 2016 to December 2019. A total of 63 patients of myeloma who underwent a renal biopsy for evaluation of renal dysfunction as the initial presentation or immediately after diagnosis were included in this study. Serum electrophoresis, skeletal survey, complete blood counts, bone marrow study and biochemical evaluation for serum creatinine, total protein, albumin globulin ratio were done in all patients. Data was analysed using standard analytical techniques with Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) version 16.0 for windows.

Results: A total of 63 patients presented with renal dysfunction as initial symptom underwent renal biopsy. Most common age group of the study population was between 50-70 years. In 47 (74.6%) patients the renal dysfunction was the initial presenting symptom of myeloma. The presenting features were acute renal failure, nephrotic syndrome and acute nephritis. The renal biopsy findings included myeloma cast nephropathy, amyloidosis, proliferative glomerulonephritis and tubulointerstitial nephritis with cast nephropathy being most common pattern. Acute renal failure was more common in cast nephropathy while amyloidosis presented with nephrotic syndrome. The serum creatinine and calcium levels, plasma cell counts and degree of anaemia had a correlation with histological pattern of injury.

Conclusion: Acute kidney injury due to myeloma cast nephropathy is a medical emergency and prompt therapy with measures to reduce light chain load along with correction of dehydration can reduce renal damage and increase the patient survival. Many newly described entities like fibrillary and immunotactoid nephropathy can occur in myeloma and these can be identified only by electron microscopic evaluation of kidney tissue. They have important prognostic impact and significance when renal transplants are planned for. So, renal biopsy supported by newer methods like immunohistochemistry and electron microscopy is a must to keep pace with newer advances in myeloma treatment like autologous stem cell transplantation.

Keywords

Clinical profile, Haematological, Renal biopsy

Renal dysfunction is one of the most important causes for mortality and morbidity in myeloma patients. Frequently, it is the presenting complaint or it may develop during the course of disease. The immunoglobulins and light chains produced by the neoplastic clone of plasma cells are excreted through the kidney which makes them vulnerable to damage. Renal involvement may take various forms as cast nephropathy, amyloidosis or renal tubular defects, each of which has distinct therapeutic and prognostic effects. The extent of renal damage is also an important prognostic factor in myeloma. Therefore, even though haematology, serology, radiology and bone marrow studies are needed for confirmation of myeloma, a renal biopsy is a must in the management of myeloma patients who present with renal dysfunction. It is required for evaluation of the extent of renal damage and for categorising the type of kidney involvement which aids in further treatment decisions and prognostication of the disease. Even though, myeloma comprises about 2% of malignancies in Kerala, India, no data regarding renal biopsy findings in myeloma are available from Kerala (1).

Hence, the present study was conducted with an aim to describe the various histopathological patterns of involvement of kidney in all patients with myeloma who presented with renal dysfunction and required a renal biopsy. A correlation of biopsy findings with clinical and haematological parameters was also made.

Material and Methods

This was a retrospective, descriptive study conducted at Government Medical College, Kozhikode, India, a tertiary care centre, retrospectively from 1st January 2016 to 31st December 2019. Data was collected in March 2020 and ethical approval was obtained from the Institutional Ethics Committee (IRC2017/Protocol 142). A total 451 cases of myeloma were diagnosed by examination of bone marrow in the institutional lab during this period. Myeloma diagnosis was made based on the 2016 updated International Myeloma Working Group criteria (2).

Inclusion criteria: Cases with clonal marrow plasmacytosis confirmed by M band in serum or urine and an adequate renal biopsy done cases were included in the study.

Exclusion criteria: All patients in which monoclonality of plasma cell population was not confirmed or had an inadequate renal biopsy sample were excluded from the study.

A clonal marrow plasmacytosis was confirmed based on the presence of monoclonal immunoglobulins in serum or urine along with any two of the following features as anaemia, lytic bone lesions, renal dysfunction or hypercalcaemia to diagnose myeloma. A total of 63 patients of myeloma who underwent a renal biopsy for evaluation of renal dysfunction as the initial presentation or immediately after diagnosis were included in the present study. Serum electrophoresis, skeletal survey Complete Blood Counts (CBC), bone marrow study and biochemical evaluation for serum creatinine, total protein, albumin globulin ratio were done in all patients. Serum free light chain assay or Immunohistochemistry (IHC) for Kappa, Lambda was done in a few cases.

Statistical Analysis

Statistical analysis of data was done by entering data in the spread sheets of Microsoft excel. The variables were analysed using standard analytical techniques with SPSS software version 16.0 for windows. The quantitative variables were expressed as mean and qualitative variables were expressed as percentages. The association between variables was analysed using Chi-square test. The p-value was calculated and values <0.05 were taken as statistically significant. The correlation was done using Pearson’s Chi-square test and r-value of ±1 was noted.

Results

Of the 451 patients diagnosed with myeloma during the study period, 63 (14%) developed evidence of renal dysfunction requiring a renal biopsy. The most common age group involved was between 50-70 years, only 8 (12.7%) patients were below 50 years and majority were males (60%). In 47 (74.6%) patients, the initial presentation was a symptom related to renal dysfunction and in the rest it was related to bone or marrow involvement like bone pains, lytic lesions and anaemia. The most common clinical symptoms identified were features of acute kidney injury like oliguria, low back ache and oedema, fever and tiredness. The distribution of presenting complaints is shown in (Table/Fig 1).

Acute renal failure was the most common clinical presentation of renal involvement followed by nephrotic syndrome, sub nephrotic proteinuria, rapidly progressive renal failure and chronic kidney injury. A precipitating event for renal dysfunction was identified in 36 (57.1%) patients, the most common being drugs like Non Steroidal Anti-inflammatory Drugs (NSAIDs) and indigenous medications (89%) followed by infections. A 15 patients had associated diabetes and four had underlying hypertension.

Anaemia which was defined as haemoglobin below 10 mg/dL, which was seen in 40/57 (70.1%) of cases, 9/57 (15.7%) had severe anaemia with haemoglobin below 5 gm/dL and 8/57 (14.03%) had normal values with haemoglobin above 10 gm/dL (Table/Fig 2). The Erythrocyte Sedimentation Ratio (ESR) values were available only in 44 patients of which elevated ESR was seen in 98% of the cases. Plasma cells in marrow were increased in 55 (87.3%) patients and were more than 50% in approximately 32% with one having a plasmablastic morphology. Serum creatinine levels of more than 1.4 mg/dL were seen in 92% of patients and of this, it was more than 5 mg in 38% of patients. Serum calcium was available in 36 patients only and in this hypercalcaemia was seen only in 36%. Urine free light chains were increased in 61% and the serum electrophoresis revealed M band in 69% of the cases. Skeletal survey showed lytic lesion in 40% cases which involved commonly a single bone or rarely multiple sites. Ultrasound abdomen was done in 28 cases, of which nine showed enlargement of the kidneys.

Renal histology revealed a spectrum of abnormalities affecting the glomerular, tubular, interstitial or vascular components. The spectrum of patterns revealed in renal biopsy is given in (Table/Fig 3).

Myeloma cast nephropathy was the most common histological pattern of injury. This was characterised by intratubular fractured casts with giant cell reaction as displayed in (Table/Fig 4). The renal tubules usually showed pale eosinophilic casts on Periodic Acid-Schiff (PAS) stained sections with fracture planes and mononuclear or a giant cell reaction; in comparison to the usual hyaline casts which were brightly PAS positive and lacked the cellular reaction. In 41 patients typical myeloma casts were identified and 26 (41.2%) had multiple fractured casts. In amyloidosis, the glomerular mesangium was expanded with pale eosinophilic acellular material which was congophilic in Congo red stain and negative by Jones methenamine silver staining. The amyloid deposits were also seen in the interstitium and around vessels. In two of the cases, amyloid deposits were seen in bone marrow and in one the liver also showed a perisinusoidal distribution of the same (Table/Fig 5). One patient showed nodular eosinophilic glomerular deposits which were negative for Congo red stain and positive for PAS stain. This showed Lambda restriction on IHC confirming a light chain deposition disease. Two cases showed a membranoproliferative pattern on renal biopsy. An electron microscopical examination could not be done in them. Tubulointerstitial nephritis with plasma cell infiltrates and eosinophils were seen in 11 patients. A 20 patients underwent immunofixation or immune histochemistry and of this 14 had lambda restriction and the rest had Kappa.

Discussion

Involvement of the kidney in myeloma cases occurs in 15-20% of patients [3-5]. In this study, 14% of the patients had evidence of renal dysfunction at the initial diagnosis, requiring a renal biopsy. In 47 (74.6%) of the patients, the initial presentation was a symptom related to renal dysfunction and in the rest, it was related to bone or marrow involvement like bone pains, lytic lesions and anaemia. The most common clinical symptoms identified were body ache, joint pain, oliguria, oedema and tiredness.

A wide spectrum of histological lesions were seen in the kidney, predominant being cast nephropathy (57%), glomerular deposition diseases like amyloidosis (21%), light chain deposition disease (1.6%), membranoproliferative glomerulonephritis (3%) and tubulointerstitial nephritis (17.5%). These findings are similar to the studies by Sakhuja V et al., Montseny JJ et al., and Nasr SH et al., (3),(6),(7). As per Nasr SH et al., 75% of renal dysfunction in myeloma occur due to monoclonal immune deposits and the rest are caused by other associated renal diseases like acute tubular necrosis, diabetic nephropathy, drug toxicity, etc., which have to be treated differently. The differentiation of these possibilities can only be made by a renal biopsy. In cast nephropathy, the renal tubules showed pale eosinophilic casts on PAS stained sections with fracture planes and mononuclear or a giant cell reaction; in comparison to usual hyaline casts which were PAS positive and lacked the cellular reaction. In cases of amyloidosis, the glomerular mesangium was expanded with pale eosinophilic acellular material which was congophilic in Congo red stain and negative in Jones methenamine silver staining (Table/Fig 5). The amyloid deposits were also seen in the interstitium and around vessels. In two of the cases, amyloid deposits were seen in marrow and in one the liver also showed a perisinusoidal distribution of the same. One patient showed nodular eosinophilic glomerular deposits which was negative for Congo red and positive for PAS stain but showed Lambda restriction on IHC confirming a light chain deposition disease. Proliferative glomerulonephritis with a predominantly membranoproliferative pattern can also be produced by monoclonal deposits as in two of the present cases. These may be due to newly described entities like C3 glomerulonephritis, fibrillary and immunotactoid glomerulonephritis or cryoglobulinaemia (8),(9). Electron microscopy is a must to differentiate them since prognosis of fibrillary glomerulonephritis is poor and in addition they may show an increased tendency to recur after renal transplant. Immunohistochemistry with DNAJ B9 can identify fibrillary GN in cases where electron microscopy is not available. But both could not be done in the present study patients.

The crux of all the pathology in plasma cell dyscrasias is increase in quantity of light chains, whole immunoglobulins and rarely heavy chains in the blood followed by its deposition in various tissues. Though, every immunoglobulin molecule is produced by two light and heavy chains; in the body the production of light chains is 40% more than heavy chains (9). These free light chains in plasma are filtered through the slit diaphragm and reach the proximal tubules, were they are endocytosed by the megalin cubilin complex of the tubular epithelial cells and get metabolised within them. During this process, they are not deposited in the kidney and so do not produce any renal damage.

Why some patients with myeloma develop cast nephropathy and some others develop glomerular amyloid or light chain deposits have been pondered for long. This may be due to the alteration in the quantity or quality of the monoclonal deposits. In 80% myeloma patients, there is increase in serum immunoglobulins and 95% of them also show a concomitant increase in free monoclonal light chains (10). The increased quantity of free light chains produced gets filtered into proximal convoluted tubules. When the ability of tubular epithelial threshold of uptake of free light chains is crossed, they spill over to the distal convoluted tubules. The Tamm-Horsfall proteins normally produced in the distal convoluted tubules have a very high affinity for the light chains and thereby create an optimal environment for formation of intratubular casts. These casts may cause obstruction and sometimes rupture of the distal tubules leading to tubulointerstitial nephritis with inflammatory reaction to the casts. Free light chains get easily filtered through urine and sulphosalicylic acid tests will be positive. But the urine dipstick test will be negative as this will not be associated with albuminuria.

In contrast to myeloma cast nephropathy which is caused by increase in quantity of the monoclonal light chains; the glomerular deposits like amyloid and light chain deposition results from alteration in the quality of secreted globulins. Kappa light chains are more common in myeloma cast nephropathy and light chain deposition disease, while lambda chains are more amyloidogenic.

The glomerular deposits occur due to trapping of the whole immunoglobulin secretions by the glomerular mesangial cells. They are larger than free light chains and so are less easily filtered by the glomerulus. These deposits lead to alteration in the mesangial matrix and rarely mesangial cell proliferation (11),(12),(13). When the monoclonal proteins interact with serum amyloid P and get organised in a beta pleated configuration it produces amyloidosis whereas if they are deposited without any definite structure, they form light chain deposition disease. In both of these the glomerular filtration barrier is affected and so the patients present with albuminuria and nephrotic syndrome in contrast to myeloma cast nephropathy.

Acute renal failure was the most common clinical presentation of renal involvement followed by nephrotic syndrome, sub nephrotic proteinuria, rapidly progressive renal failure and chronic kidney injury which was in accordance with most previous studies (7),(14). Acute kidney injury was the most common presentation in myeloma cast nephropathy and tubulointerstitial nephritis, but nephrotic proteinuria was also present in four of these cases. Incidence of nephrotic syndrome in myeloma as per previous studies is 15-25% of the total cases and in the present study was 21%. The renal histology in 62% of patients with nephrotic syndrome showed amyloidosis and the rest had light chain deposition or a normal glomerular histology on light microscopy.

The precipitating factors for renal damage could be identified in 57% of cases, incidence of which is similar to previous studies but the commonest triggering factor identified in the present series were drugs similar to the series by Balwani MR et al., (15). In most of the other series it had been hypercalcaemia and infections (3),(16). The most common drugs identified were NSAID and indigenous medications. The incidence of hypercalcaemia was 36% which is similar to that reported by Prakash J et al., (16). Hypercalcaemia and NSAID causes vasoconstriction leading to reduced Glomerular Filtration Rate (GFR) and oliguria due to which precipitation of light chains within tubules occur and predisposes to cast nephropathy. Dehydration leads to reduced plasma volume in turn a reduced urine output which also causes precipitation of myeloma casts (16),(17).

The serum creatinine levels at diagnosis are found to be an important prognostic factor in myeloma (16),(17). A serum creatinine levels of more than 1.4 mg/dL were seen in 92% of patients and of this, it was more than 5 mg in 38% of patients. This is similar to the previous studies. Though, the association of creatinine levels and histological diagnosis was not found to be significant, majority of patients with cast nephropathy had markedly elevated creatinine values while in amyloidosis it was either normal or less than 5 mg/dL.

The plasma cell numbers were also seen to be increased in cast nephropathy compared to those with the glomerular deposition diseases. Only 2% of the patients with cast nephropathy had plasma cell numbers less than 10%. This indicates increased tumor burden in cast nephropathy and thereby an increased quantity of light chain production leading to acute severe renal injury. Anaemia which was defined as haemoglobin below 10 mg/dL was seen in 80% of cases, of which 21% had severe anaemia with haemoglobin below 5 gm/dL. The incidence of anaemia, lytic bone lesions and hypercalcaemia were also more common in cast nephropathy. Hypercalcaemia was seen only in 13 (36%) cases of the present study, of which 11 (85%) had a myeloma cast nephropathy. Hypercalcaemia in myeloma occurs due to dysregulated bone turnover, leading to secretion of osteoclast activating and osteoblast inhibiting factors. Lytic lesions were seen in 21 cases of which 16 had myeloma cast nephropathy on renal biopsy. A 94% of cast nephropathy patients had anaemia while only 30% with amyloidosis had a low haemoglobin. This has been described in previous studies (17). Urine free light chains were increased in 61% and the serum electrophoresis revealed a M band in 69% of the cases. A 20 patients underwent immunofixation or immune histochemistry and of this 14 had lambda restriction and the rest had kappa.

In previous studies, there was increased significant association of renal failure with male gender. Hence, Bence Jones protein excretion, anaemia, thrombocytopaenia, hypercalcaemia, elevated serum Lactate Dehydrogenase (LDH), low albumin, high serum b2 micro globulin, higher International Staging System (ISS) stage, light chain only myeloma and IgD myeloma (17),(18). In present series too, a raised creatinine, hypercalcaemia and anaemia were more in myeloma cast nephropathy. Also, there was no significant difference in interstitial or tubular changes between cast nephropathy and glomerular deposition disease.

The most common age group involved was between 50-70 years and majority was males (60%). The male preponderance and the median age of involvement were in accordance with previous studies by Sakhuja V et al., and Prakash J et al., (3),(16). Patients belonging to less than 50 years were only 13%. Similar to the earlier studies the most common clinical presentation was acute kidney injury, oedema and body ache (19). Elevated ESR is a common feature of plasma cell dycrasias due to the hyperglobulinaemia causing an increase in rouleaux formation. Elevated ESR was seen in 94% which is in accordance with an earlier studies by Hussain S et al., and Alexandrakis MG et al., (20),(21).

The severity of kidney injury is always related to the quantity of free light chains in myeloma and renal function can be preserved by reducing the free light chain load in the kidney. Various methods have been tried like plasmapheresis and high cut-off dialysis for the same. Another fact that was identified by Paul and Sanders in 1990 was that the affinity of free light chains for Tamm-Horsfall proteins depend on not only the type of light chains; but also the difference in Complement Determining Region 3 (CDR3) of the light chains (22). So, studies are being done to identify the use of a competitive inhibitor peptide to CDR3 which can depress the binding of free light chains with Tamm-Horsfall protein and thereby decreasing its intratubular precipitation and cast formation (23).

Limitation(s)

An electron microscopical examination of renal tissue is essential to assess even small amounts and the nature of monoclonal deposits in glomerular mesangium. This could not be done and is a limitation of this study.

Conclusion

Incidence of renal dysfunction at initial diagnosis is 14% in myeloma. The renal pattern of injury is varied the main being cast nephropathy and amyloidosis. Acute kidney injury, a high marrow plasma cell count, lytic lesions of bone and anaemia are more common in myeloma cast nephropathy while a nephrotic presentation with low marrow plasma cell burden favour amyloidosis. Involvement of heart should be ruled out in cases of amyloidosis as it affects the patient survival. Acute kidney injury due to myeloma cast nephropathy is a medical emergency and prompt therapy with measures to reduce light chain load like plasmapheresis and early chemotherapy assisted by correction of dehydration and hypercalcaemia can reduce renal damage and increase the patient survival. Many newly described entities like fibrillary and immunotactoid nephropathy can occur in myeloma and these can be identified only by electron microscopy. They have important prognostic impact and significance when planning for renal transplant. So, a renal biopsy supported by newer methods like immunohistochemistry and electron microscopy is a must to keep pace with newer advances in myeloma treatment like autologous stem cell transplantation.

References

1.
Regional Cancer Centre, Annual Report. 2018-2019. Available from:www.rcctvm.org/RCC AR 2018-2019 pdf, Page 32-33.
2.
Rajkumar SV, Dimopoulos MA, Palumbo A, Blade J, Merlini G, Mateos MV, et al. International Myeloma Working Group updated criteria for the diagnosis of multiple myeloma. Lancet Oncol. 2014;15(12):e538-48. [crossref]
3.
Sakhuja V, Jha V, Varma S, Joshi K, Gupta KL, Sud K, et al. Renal involvement in multiple myeloma: A 10-year study. Ren Failure. 2000;22(4):465-77. [crossref] [PubMed]
4.
Kyle RA, Gertz MA, Witzig TE, Lust JA, Lacy MQ, Dispenzier A, et al. Review of 1027 patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. Mayo Clin Proc. 2003;78(1):21-33. [crossref] [PubMed]
5.
Goldschmidt H, Lannert H, Bommer J, Ho AD. Multiple myeloma and renal failure. Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2000;15(3):301-04. [crossref] [PubMed]
6.
Montseny JJ, Kleinknecht D, Meyrier A, Vanhille P, Simon P, Pruna A, Eladari D. 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. PMID: 9641173. [crossref] [PubMed]
7.
Nasr SH, Valeri AM, Sethi S, Fidler ME, Cornell LD, Gertz MA, et al. Clinicopathologic correlations in multiple myeloma: A case series of 190 patients with kidney biopsies. Am J Kidney Dis. 2012;59(6):786-94. [crossref] [PubMed]
8.
Sethi S, Rajkumar SV, D’Agati VD. The complexity and heterogeneity of monoclonal immunoglobulin-associated renal diseases. J Am Soc Nephrol. 2018;29(7):1810-23. [crossref] [PubMed]
9.
Motwani SS, Herlitz L, Monga D, Jhaveri KD, Lam AQ; American Society of Nephrology Onco-Nephrology Forum. Paraprotein-Related Kidney Disease: Glomerular Diseases Associated with Paraproteinemias. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2016;11(12):2260-72. [crossref] [PubMed]
10.
Waldmann TA, Strober W, Mogielnicki RP. The renal handling of low molecular weight proteins. II. Disorders of serum protein catabolism in patients with tubular proteinuria, the nephrotic syndrome, or uremia. J Clin Invest. 1972;51(8):2162-74. [crossref] [PubMed]
11.
Doshi M, Lahoti A, Danesh FR, Batuman V, Sanders PW; American Society of Nephrology Onco-Nephrology Forum. Paraprotein-Related Kidney Disease: Kidney Injury from Paraproteins-What Determines the Site of Injury?. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2016;11(12):2288-94. [crossref] [PubMed]
12.
Heher EC, Rennke HG, Laubach JP, Richardson PG. Kidney disease and multiple myeloma. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2013;8(11):2007-17. [crossref] [PubMed]
13.
Dimopoulos M, Kastritis E, Rosinol L, Bladé J, Ludwig H. Pathogenesis and treatment of renal failure in multiple myeloma. Leukemia. 2008;22:1485-93. [crossref] [PubMed]
14.
Mussap M, Merlini G. Pathogenesis of renal failure in multiple myeloma: Any role of contrast media? Biomed Res Int. 2014;2014:167125. [crossref] [PubMed]
15.
Balwani MR, Gumber MR, Shah PR, Kute VB, Patel HV, Engineer DP, et al. Clinical profile of kidney involvement preceding diagnosis of multiple myeloma; a single center experience. J Nephropharmacol. 2015;5(2):98-101.
16.
Prakash J, Mandal AK, Vohra R, Wani IA, Hota JK, Raja R, et al. Renal disease is a prodrome of multiple myeloma: An analysis of 50 patients from eastern India. Ren Fail. 2009;31(4):267-71. [crossref] [PubMed]
17.
Eleutherakis-Papaiakovou V, Bamias A, Gika D, Simeonidis A, Pouli A, Anagnostopoulos A, et al; Greek Myeloma Study Group. Renal failure in multiple myeloma: Incidence, correlations, and prognostic significance. Leuk Lymphoma. 2007;48(2):337-41. [crossref] [PubMed]
18.
Bladé J, Fernández-Llama P, Bosch F, Montolíu J, Lens XM, Montoto S, et al. Renal failure in multiple myeloma: Presenting features and predictors of outcome in 94 patients from a single institution. Arch Intern Med. 1998;158(17):1889-93. [crossref] [PubMed]
19.
Panda T, Das S, Jena RK, Das BP, Rout SB. Haematological, biochemical and renal changes in patients of multiple myeloma treated with Bortezomib based triple drug chemotherapy. J Assoc Physicians India. 2019;67:54-57.
20.
Hussain A, Almenfi HF, Almehdewi AM, Hamza MS, Bhat MS, Vijayashankar NP. Laboratory features of newly diagnosed multiple myeloma patients. Cureus. 2019;11(5):e4716. Doi: 10.7759/cureus.4716. PMID: 31355076; PMCID: PMC6650180. [crossref]
21.
Alexandrakis MG, Passam FH, Ganotakis ES, Sfiridaki K, Xilouri I, Perisinakis K, et al. The clinical and prognostic significance of erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), serum interleukin-6 (IL-6) and acute phase protein levels in multiple myeloma. Clin Lab Haem. 2003;25(1):41-46. [crossref] [PubMed]
22.
Ying WZ, Sanders PW. Mapping the binding domain of immunoglobulin light chains for Tamm-Horsfall protein. Am J Pathol. 2001;158(5):1859-66. [crossref]
23.
Ying WZ, Allen CE, Curtis LM, Aaron KJ, Sanders PW. Mechanism and prevention of acute kidney injury from cast nephropathy in a rodent model. J Clin Invest. 2012;122(5):1777-85. [crossref] [PubMed]

DOI and Others

DOI: 10.7860/JCDR/2022/51274.16368

Date of Submission: Jul 19, 2021
Date of Peer Review: Aug 19, 2021
Date of Acceptance: Jan 21, 2022
Date of Publishing: May 01, 2022

AUTHOR DECLARATION:
• Financial or Other Competing Interests: None
• Was Ethics Committee Approval obtained for this study? Yes
• Was informed consent obtained from the subjects involved in the study? No
• For any images presented appropriate consent has been obtained from the subjects. No

PLAGIARISM CHECKING METHODS:
• Plagiarism X-checker: Jul 17, 2021
• Manual Googling: Jan 11, 2022
• iThenticate Software: Jan 24, 2022 (5%)

ETYMOLOGY: Author Origin

JCDR is now Monthly and more widely Indexed .
  • Emerging Sources Citation Index (Web of Science, thomsonreuters)
  • Index Copernicus ICV 2017: 134.54
  • Academic Search Complete Database
  • Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ)
  • Embase
  • EBSCOhost
  • Google Scholar
  • HINARI Access to Research in Health Programme
  • Indian Science Abstracts (ISA)
  • Journal seek Database
  • Google
  • Popline (reproductive health literature)
  • www.omnimedicalsearch.com