Skip to main content

Main menu

  • HOME
  • ONLINE FIRST
  • CURRENT ISSUE
  • ALL ISSUES
  • AUTHORS & REVIEWERS
  • SUBSCRIBE
  • BJGP LIFE
  • MORE
    • About BJGP
    • Conference
    • Advertising
    • eLetters
    • Alerts
    • Video
    • Audio
    • Librarian information
    • Resilience
    • COVID-19 Clinical Solutions
  • RCGP
    • BJGP for RCGP members
    • BJGP Open
    • RCGP eLearning
    • InnovAIT Journal
    • Jobs and careers

User menu

  • Subscriptions
  • Alerts
  • Log in

Search

  • Advanced search
British Journal of General Practice
Intended for Healthcare Professionals
  • RCGP
    • BJGP for RCGP members
    • BJGP Open
    • RCGP eLearning
    • InnovAIT Journal
    • Jobs and careers
  • Subscriptions
  • Alerts
  • Log in
  • Follow bjgp on Twitter
  • Visit bjgp on Facebook
  • Blog
  • Listen to BJGP podcast
  • Subscribe BJGP on YouTube
British Journal of General Practice
Intended for Healthcare Professionals

Advanced Search

  • HOME
  • ONLINE FIRST
  • CURRENT ISSUE
  • ALL ISSUES
  • AUTHORS & REVIEWERS
  • SUBSCRIBE
  • BJGP LIFE
  • MORE
    • About BJGP
    • Conference
    • Advertising
    • eLetters
    • Alerts
    • Video
    • Audio
    • Librarian information
    • Resilience
    • COVID-19 Clinical Solutions
Editorials

Diagnosing myeloma in general practice: how might earlier diagnosis be achieved?

Lesley Smith, Jonathan Carmichael, Gordon Cook, Bethany Shinkins and Richard D Neal
British Journal of General Practice 2022; 72 (723): 462-463. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3399/bjgp22X720737
Lesley Smith
Leeds Diagnosis and Screening Unit, Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds.
Roles: Senior Research Fellow
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Lesley Smith
Jonathan Carmichael
Cancer Research UK Clinical Trials Unit, Leeds Institute of Clinical Trial Research, University of Leeds, Leeds; NIHR (Leeds) Medtech & In Vitro Diagnostics Cooperative, Leeds.
Roles: NIHR Health Informatics Fellow
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Jonathan Carmichael
Gordon Cook
Cancer Research UK Clinical Trials Unit, Leeds Institute of Clinical Trial Research, University of Leeds, Leeds; NIHR (Leeds) Medtech & In Vitro Diagnostics Cooperative, Leeds.
Roles: Professor of Haematology & Myeloma Studies
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Gordon Cook
Bethany Shinkins
Leeds Diagnosis and Screening Unit, Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds; NIHR (Leeds) Medtech & In Vitro Diagnostics Cooperative, Leeds.
Roles: Associate Professor
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Bethany Shinkins
Richard D Neal
University of Exeter, Exeter.
Roles: Professor of Primary Care
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Richard D Neal
  • Article
  • Info
  • eLetters
  • PDF
Loading

Multiple myeloma, the third most common blood cancer, is often discovered following multiple prediagnostic consultations, with delays in diagnosis resulting from the ubiquitous nature of presenting symptoms.1 Delays result in high disease burden, greater end-organ damage, and emergency presentation, all of which are associated with poorer outcomes.2 Improving the early diagnosis of myeloma remains an area of unmet clinical need. In this editorial, we describe the issues with the current diagnostic process, explore the potential impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, and identify alternative strategies that may improve the early diagnosis of myeloma.

DIAGNOSTIC PROBLEM

Myeloma has one of the longest diagnostic intervals of all cancers. Around half of myeloma patients have three or more pre-referral consultations and around one-third are diagnosed through emergency presentation.1,2 There are various reasons for this. It is a relatively rare cancer; an average GP will see one new case every 8–10 years. Patients present with a range of non-specific symptoms, including back pain, bone pain, fatigue, and blood test abnormalities (hypercalcaemia, renal impairment, anaemia, and raised CRP), which are all common in an ageing population and often attributable to concurrent conditions. Early diagnosis of myeloma is crucial in limiting disease-related complications, such as lytic bone disease, pathological fractures, kidney injury, and severe infection, all of which may impact long-term quality of life, eligibility for routine or experimental therapy, treatment tolerance, response rates, and survival.

IMPACT OF COVID-19 AND CHANGES TO GENERAL PRACTICE CONSULTATIONS

The COVID-19 pandemic resulted in a substantial decrease in myeloma referrals and diagnoses, in parallel with an increase in emergency presentations.3 Reductions in overall urgent referrals for suspected cancer were mainly due to changes in patient attendance, rather than GP referral behaviour. Consultation rates for specific symptoms for other cancers, including red-flag symptoms (such as breast lump and rectal bleeding), reduced during the first lockdown and returned to expected rates within months. However, consultation rates for non-specific symptoms common in myeloma patients (such as back pain, bone pain, and fatigue) remained below expected levels at the end of 2020.4 Given the current workload pressures in general practice, patients with non-specific symptoms may prioritise other health concerns, or fail to present at all due to concerns about wasting doctors’ time. GPs have adopted alternative approaches to triage and consulting, including electronic data capture to triage patients and alternatives to face-to-face consultations. GPs may not prioritise non-specific symptoms, as e-consults will automatically ‘red flag’ some symptoms but not non-specific symptoms. We need to understand how this affects patients’ behaviour with non-specific cancer symptoms and presentation in general practice, especially for older patients and those with lower health literacy.

POTENTIAL OVERDIAGNOSIS OF MGUS

Strategies to facilitate the early diagnosis of myeloma must consider the precursor condition monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance (MGUS), often diagnosed incidentally via routine blood tests. MGUS is common, with a prevalence of 3–5% and a risk of progression to myeloma of approximately 1% per year.5 Once diagnosed, regular monitoring of blood tests and clinical symptoms is recommended, often guided by MGUS risk-stratification strategies. This has cost and workload implications for the NHS, as well as for the mental health of these patients, the majority of whom will never require treatment for MGUS. Any screening programme for myeloma is likely to increase diagnoses of MGUS and increase the pressures outlined above. A population-based screening trial for MGUS is ongoing in Iceland, where participants with MGUS are randomised to different follow-up strategies.6 The results from this will provide vital evidence on the cost-effectiveness of screening and monitoring approaches.

ALTERNATIVE DIAGNOSTIC STRATEGIES

Many myeloma patients have complex diagnostic journeys and may be seen by other specialists before haematology, potentially delaying diagnosis.7 A fundamental challenge is prompting the clinician to consider myeloma and initiate appropriate investigations. Once myeloma is suspected, the diagnostic workup is generally straightforward. Serum protein electrophoresis, immunofixation, and serum free light chain assays are sensitive and specific initial tests for the majority of patients, followed by bone marrow biopsy. Therefore, it is essential that high-risk individuals are identified and appropriately investigated. Strategies to do this with minimal impact on existing NHS resources are needed, particularly in the current COVID-19-recovery phase.

Symptom awareness for both patients and GPs is important to ensure prompt presentation and appropriate referrals. The roll-out of rapid diagnostic centres (RDCs) may provide more timely diagnosis for those with non-specific symptoms by offering a single point of access for further diagnostic investigations, limiting instances of multiple specialty referrals for patients meeting the criteria for multiple site-specific pathways. Evidence emerging from RDC evaluations have shown that around 13% of cancers diagnosed via RDCs are haematological cancers.8

Over recent years there has been a major increase in the development of clinical risk prediction models (or algorithms) based on electronic health records. Specifically for myeloma, clinical prediction models developed from general practice records have combined symptom data and blood test results to identify patients at higher risk of developing myeloma.9,10 There is potential to implement such algorithms into decision support tools within GP electronic systems, but challenges remain before these can be fully integrated, such as how this would trigger alerts prospectively and how these would fit with current GP workflows.11

Changes in routine blood parameters can be detected several years prior to myeloma diagnosis, before the onset of symptoms or disease complications.12 Algorithms based on minor abnormalities and subtle changes in routine blood parameters (such as haemoglobin, liver function tests, and inflammatory markers) may be implemented in hospital laboratories to trigger automatic reflex testing of high-risk individuals for myeloma. This would enable large-scale, low-cost case finding for myeloma, independent of the patient’s ability to articulate their symptoms and the GP considering myeloma as part of the differential diagnosis. Setting appropriate thresholds for testing are challenging and there are legitimate concerns about risk communication, with further research required to explore the acceptability of this approach.

Cell-free DNA (cfDNA) technologies are potentially paradigm shifting for cancer screening. These tests identify circulating tumour DNA and are often able to identify multiple tumour types with a single blood test. The most widely publicised example of this is the methylation-based Galleri® Test, used as part of the NHS-Galleri [GRAIL] study that is exploring population-level cancer screening in asymptomatic individuals (https://www.nhs-galleri.org/). This test can identify plasma cell disorders such as myeloma; however, myeloma and MGUS are genetically very similar and it is not yet clear how well the Galleri test differentiates between the two conditions. There therefore remains a risk of overdiagnosis of low-risk MGUS, the consequences of which may be significant and will only be borne out by prospective studies.

CONCLUSIONS

Improving the timeliness of myeloma diagnosis is vital to improving patient outcomes, but is difficult to achieve because of complex, non-specific, and varied presentations. Improving GP education on the salient features of multiple myeloma presentation and the investigations required for diagnosis, alongside ensuring adequate safety netting for patients with persistent, unexplained symptoms, should be urgent priorities. Changes to general practice consultations following the COVID-19 pandemic have made myeloma diagnosis more difficult, and, over the longer term, research is required to develop intelligent and technological strategies that support physician decision making and reduce diagnostic delay. These approaches must minimise low-risk MGUS diagnosis, demonstrate economic viability, and have prospective evidence of improvements in objective parameters such as diagnostic speed, disease stage at diagnosis, quality of life, and ultimately survival.

Notes

Provenance

Commissioned; not externally peer reviewed.

Funding

Lesley Smith is funded by a Cancer Research UK (CRUK) Early Detection and Diagnosis Primer award (EDDPMA-May21\100024). This work arises from the CanTest Collaborative, which is funded by CRUK (ref: C8640/A23385), where Richard D Neal is an Associate Director and Bethany Shinkins a Senior Faculty Member.

Competing interests

All authors are working on a CRUK-funded grant looking at risk prediction of myeloma from routine blood tests taken for other reasons; potentially leading to commercial, academic, and financial gain. Richard D Neal is Co-Chief Investigator of the NHS-Galleri Trial.

  • © The Authors
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

This article is Open Access: CC BY 4.0 licence (http://creativecommons.org/licences/by/4.0/).

REFERENCES

  1. 1.↵
    1. Lyratzopoulos G,
    2. Neal RD,
    3. Barbiere JM,
    4. et al.
    (2012) Variation in number of general practitioner consultations before hospital referral for cancer: findings from the 2010 National Cancer Patient Experience Survey in England. Lancet Oncol 13, 4, 353–365.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  2. 2.↵
    1. Howell D,
    2. Smith A,
    3. Appleton S,
    4. et al.
    (2017) Multiple myeloma: routes to diagnosis, clinical characteristics and survival — findings from a UK population-based study. Br J Haematol 177, 1, 67–71.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  3. 3.↵
    1. National Disease Registration Service
    (2022) COVID-19 rapid cancer registration and treatment data. https://www.cancerdata.nhs.uk/ (accessed 5 Sep 2022).
  4. 4.↵
    1. Nicholson BD,
    2. Ordonez-Mena JM,
    3. Lay-Flurrie S,
    4. et al.
    (2022) Consultations for clinical features of possible cancer and associated urgent referrals before and during the COVID-19 pandemic: an observational cohort study from English primary care. Br J Cancer 126, 6, 948–956.
    OpenUrl
  5. 5.↵
    1. Wadhera RK,
    2. Rajkumar SV
    (2010) Prevalence of monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance: a systematic review. Mayo Clin Proc 85, 10, 933–942.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  6. 6.↵
    1. Rognvaldsson S,
    2. Love TJ,
    3. Thorsteinsdottir S,
    4. et al.
    (2021) Iceland screens, treats, or prevents multiple myeloma (iStopMM): a population-based screening study for monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance and randomized controlled trial of follow-up strategies. Blood Cancer J 11, 5, 94.
    OpenUrl
  7. 7.↵
    1. Howell DA,
    2. Hart RI,
    3. Smith AG,
    4. et al.
    (2018) Myeloma: patient accounts of their pathways to diagnosis. Plos One 13, 4, e0194788.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  8. 8.↵
    1. Dolly SO,
    2. Jones G,
    3. Allchorne P,
    4. et al.
    (2021) The effectiveness of the Guy’s Rapid Diagnostic Clinic (RDC) in detecting cancer and serious conditions in vague symptom patients. Br J Cancer 124, 6, 1079–1087.
    OpenUrl
  9. 9.↵
    1. Koshiaris C,
    2. Van den Bruel A,
    3. Nicholson BD,
    4. et al.
    (2021) Clinical prediction tools to identify patients at highest risk of myeloma in primary care: a retrospective open cohort study. Br J Gen Pract, DOI: https://doi.org/10.3399/BJGP.2020.0697.
  10. 10.↵
    1. Shephard EA,
    2. Neal RD,
    3. Rose P,
    4. et al.
    (2015) Quantifying the risk of multiple myeloma from symptoms reported in primary care patients: a large case–control study using electronic records. Br J Gen Pract. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3399/bjgp15X683545.
  11. 11.↵
    1. Bradley PT,
    2. Hall N,
    3. Maniatopoulos G,
    4. et al.
    (2021) Factors shaping the implementation and use of Clinical Cancer Decision Tools by GPs in primary care: a qualitative framework synthesis. BMJ Open 11, 2, e043338.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  12. 12.↵
    1. Koshiaris C,
    2. Van den Bruel A,
    3. Oke JL,
    4. et al.
    (2018) Early detection of multiple myeloma in primary care using blood tests: a case–control study in primary care. Br J Gen Pract, DOI: https://doi.org/10.3399/bjgp18X698357.
Back to top
Previous ArticleNext Article

In this issue

British Journal of General Practice: 72 (723)
British Journal of General Practice
Vol. 72, Issue 723
October 2022
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Or,
sign in or create an account with your email address
Email Article

Thank you for recommending British Journal of General Practice.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person to whom you are recommending the page knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Diagnosing myeloma in general practice: how might earlier diagnosis be achieved?
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from British Journal of General Practice
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from British Journal of General Practice.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Diagnosing myeloma in general practice: how might earlier diagnosis be achieved?
Lesley Smith, Jonathan Carmichael, Gordon Cook, Bethany Shinkins, Richard D Neal
British Journal of General Practice 2022; 72 (723): 462-463. DOI: 10.3399/bjgp22X720737

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
Diagnosing myeloma in general practice: how might earlier diagnosis be achieved?
Lesley Smith, Jonathan Carmichael, Gordon Cook, Bethany Shinkins, Richard D Neal
British Journal of General Practice 2022; 72 (723): 462-463. DOI: 10.3399/bjgp22X720737
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One
  • Mendeley logo Mendeley

Jump to section

  • Top
  • Article
    • DIAGNOSTIC PROBLEM
    • IMPACT OF COVID-19 AND CHANGES TO GENERAL PRACTICE CONSULTATIONS
    • POTENTIAL OVERDIAGNOSIS OF MGUS
    • ALTERNATIVE DIAGNOSTIC STRATEGIES
    • CONCLUSIONS
    • Notes
    • REFERENCES
  • Info
  • eLetters
  • PDF

More in this TOC Section

  • Socioeconomic deprivation and post-stroke care in the community
  • Advocating for patients through laboratory tests: what do GPs’ use of blood tests for suspected cancer tell us?
  • Diagnosis of prostate cancer in primary care: navigating updated clinical guidance
Show more Editorials

Related Articles

Cited By...

Intended for Healthcare Professionals

BJGP Life

BJGP Open

 

@BJGPjournal's Likes on Twitter

 
 

British Journal of General Practice

NAVIGATE

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • All Issues
  • Online First
  • Authors & reviewers

RCGP

  • BJGP for RCGP members
  • BJGP Open
  • RCGP eLearning
  • InnovAiT Journal
  • Jobs and careers

MY ACCOUNT

  • RCGP members' login
  • Subscriber login
  • Activate subscription
  • Terms and conditions

NEWS AND UPDATES

  • About BJGP
  • Alerts
  • RSS feeds
  • Facebook
  • Twitter

AUTHORS & REVIEWERS

  • Submit an article
  • Writing for BJGP: research
  • Writing for BJGP: other sections
  • BJGP editorial process & policies
  • BJGP ethical guidelines
  • Peer review for BJGP

CUSTOMER SERVICES

  • Advertising
  • Contact subscription agent
  • Copyright
  • Librarian information

CONTRIBUTE

  • BJGP Life
  • eLetters
  • Feedback

CONTACT US

BJGP Journal Office
RCGP
30 Euston Square
London NW1 2FB
Tel: +44 (0)20 3188 7400
Email: journal@rcgp.org.uk

British Journal of General Practice is an editorially-independent publication of the Royal College of General Practitioners
© 2023 British Journal of General Practice

Print ISSN: 0960-1643
Online ISSN: 1478-5242