Validation of a new AL International Staging System shows improved risk stratification and overall survival in systemic AL amyloidosis patients treated with modern therapies.
Background Outcomes in systemic AL amyloidosis have improved with modern therapy limiting utility of existing risk stratification models. We validate a new staging system, incorporating longitudinal strain (LS) to the biomarker-based (NT-proBNP and Troponin-T) staging system in the contemporary treatment era (2015-2024). Methods AL International Staging System (AL-ISS) was derived from a cohort of patients with AL amyloidosis from the UK National Amyloidosis Centre (2015-2019). The model was validated in patient cohorts from Europe (Greece, Italy, Netherlands, Switzerland), USA (2015-2024) and UK (2020-2024). Results 2493 patients were included (derivation, n=573; validation n=1920). In a multivariable model for the derivation cohort, LS≥-9% and cardiac biomarkers at previously validated thresholds (NT-proBNP 332 ng/L and 8500 ng/L and hs-TnT>50 ng/L) were independent poor prognostic factors stratifying patients into stages I, II, IIIA, IIIB and IIIC. In the validation cohort, the patient stages were stage I: 317 (17%), II: 782 (41%), IIIA: 551 (29%), IIIB: 174 (9%) and IIIC: 96 (5%), respectively (first-line daratumumab treated: 826; 43%). With a median follow-up of 34 months, median overall survival (OS) was not reached (NR); estimated 1-year, 2-year and 3-year OS was 82%, 74% and 70% respectively. Median survival for stages I-II, IIIA, IIIB and IIIC were NR, 67, 26 and 7 months (1-year OS IIIC 53% v 68% for IIIB in the daratumumab-treated patients), respectively (p<0.001). External validation exhibited good predictive performance: 12-month calibration slope was 1.09, Harrell's C 0.69, Royston’s D 1.19, R 2 D 0.25. Stage IIIC independently discriminated the poorest outcome across all cohorts. Conclusion This defines and validates a new staging system from systemic AL amyloidosis with robust identification of an ultra-poor risk stage (IIIC) in contemporarily treated patients.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Milani et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: