Background: Amyloidosis is a multisystem disease with extracellular deposition of pathological insoluble beta-fibrillar proteins. Involvement of the heart is seen in more than one-half of the patients with systemic AL amyloidosis and it is the most important determinant of clinical outcome. Cardiac amyloidosis is a restrictive infiltrative cardiomyopathy in which, despite declines in stroke volume that accompany disease progression, the ejection fraction (EF) often remains preserved even in advanced stages of the disease. King et al. proposed a novel index of myocardial function, the myocardial contraction fraction (MCF), defined as the ratio of stroke volume (SV) to myocardial volume (MV). MCF is a measure of myocardial shortening, which differentiated myocardial performance in patients with similar degrees of hypertrophy and in a recent small cohort of AL amyloidosis patients appeared superior to left ventricular ejection fraction (EF) in predicting overall survival (OS). It was our goal to assess the prognostic role of MCF in a large cohort of patients with AL amyloidosis in the context of other prognostic variables.

Methods: Patients seen between 4/1/1999 and 2/1/2015 were eligible for this retrospective study if they had an ECHO at the Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN within 30 days of their AL amyloidosis diagnosis with measurements of left ventricular chamber size and wall thickness needed to calculate MCF, EF, and the presence or absence of pericardial effusion. To capture the full cohort, modeling was done first excluding Mayo (2012) staging and global averaged left ventricular longitudinal peak systolic strain (LV strain) since limited numbers of patients had these studies, 342 and 294, respectively. Thresholds of continuous variables were chosen based on receiver operator curves targeting death at 1-year. Cox proportional hazards analysis was used to identify factors that were prognostic for OS. Statistical analyses were done using JMP 9.0 (SAS, Cary, NC).

Results: Among the 722 patients satisfying entry criteria,median age was 64 years (range 32-94) and 66% were male. The best cutoff for MCF was 21% (sensitivity: 74%, specificity: 60%; AUC=0.699) and distinguished two groups with different OS (median 53 vs. 9 months, P<0.0001; Figure). On univariate analysis the baseline ECHO variables predicting OS were interventricular septum thickness (IVS) >12 mm (RR 1.8, P=0.0002), EF <60% (RR 1.7), MCF ≤21% (RR 2.1), and presence of pericardial effusion (RR 2.0), all with P<0.0001. On multivariate MCF ≤21% (RR 1.6, P <0.0001), EF <60% (RR 1.4, P=0.0007) and the presence of pericardial effusion (RR 1.3, P=0.002) were independent predictors of OS.

Additional modeling was done with the subset of 342 patients who were assessable for Mayo (2012) staging, (i.e. measurements of immunoglobulin free light chain, NT-proBNP, and troponin T). On univariate analysis, patients with a Mayo (2012) stage ≥ 3 had a RR 2.1, p<0.0001. On multivariate, only MCF ≤21% (RR 1.5, P =0.01), Mayo (2012) stage ≥ 3 (RR 1.5, P=0.01) and EF<60% (RR 1.7, P=0.0006) were independent prognostic determinants.

Finally, we addressed LV-strain among the 294 patients in whom the study was performed. There was a significant correlation between MCF and LV strain (rho =-0.86, P<0.0001). On univariate, LV-strain less negative than -13 generated a RR of 2.3, p<0.0001. In contrast to the model containing MCF, on LV-strain multivariate, EF was no longer significant, but LV-strain less negative than -13 (RR 2.0, P=0.008) and Mayo (2012) stage ≥ 3 (RR 2.0, P=0.008) predicted independently OS.

Conclusions: MCF ≤21% identified a subgroup of patients with a high mortality risk, and it was independent of the Mayo (2012) staging but highly correlated with LV strain. An advantage of MCF, which is a novel volumetric measurement of the left ventricular chamber, is that, unlike LV-strain, MCF is simple to calculate from routine ECHO measures.

Figure 1.

Overall survival of 722 patients according to MCF<21%.

Figure 1.

Overall survival of 722 patients according to MCF<21%.

Close modal
Disclosures

Kumar:AbbVie: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Skyline, Noxxon: Honoraria; Celgene, Millenium, Sanofi, Skyline, BMS, Onyx, Noxxon,: Other: Consultant, no compensation,; Sanofi: Research Funding; Millenium/Takeda: Research Funding; Onyx: Research Funding.

Author notes

*

Asterisk with author names denotes non-ASH members.

Sign in via your Institution