Laboratory practice is central to earlier myeloma diagnosis: Utilizing a primary care diagnostic tool and laboratory guidelines integrated into haematology services.

Treatment advances have greatly improved survival, but myeloma is among the worst of all cancers for delayed diagnosis, causing serious morbidities and early deaths. This delay is largely because the symptom profile of myeloma has very low specificity, and in primary care, myeloma is rare. However, initiating the journey to diagnosis simply requires considering myeloma and sending blood to test for monoclonal immunoglobulin. Laboratory tests reliably detect monoclonal immunoglobulin, which is present in 99% of myeloma cases, so why do health care systems have such a problem with delayed diagnosis? The Myeloma UK early diagnosis programme has brought together diverse expertise to investigate this problem, and this article was prepared by the programme's working group for laboratory best practice. It reviews evidence for test requesting, analysis and reporting, for which there is large variation in practice across the United Kingdom. It presents a 'GP Myeloma diagnostic tool' and how it can be integrated into laboratory practice alongside a laboratory best practice tool. It proposes improved requesting and integration with haematology services for reporting and interpretation. Here the laboratory has a central role in creating efficient and cost-effective pathways for appropriate and timely bone marrow examination for myeloma diagnosis.

An Economic Model to Establish the Costs Associated With Routes to Presentation for Patients With Multiple Myeloma in the United Kingdom.

OBJECTIVES: Patients with myeloma often face significant diagnostic delay, with up to one-third of UK patients diagnosed after an emergency presentation (EP). Compared with other routes, patients presenting as an emergency have more advanced disease, increased complications, and poorer prognosis. METHODS: An economic model was developed using a decision-tree framework and lifetime time horizon to estimate costs related to different presentation routes (EP, general practitioner [GP] 2-week wait, GP urgent, GP routine, and consultant to consultant) for UK patients diagnosed as having myeloma. After diagnosis, patients received one of 3 first-line management options (observation, active treatment, or end-of-life care). Inputs were derived from UK health technology assessments and targeted literature reviews, or based on authors' clinical experience where data were unavailable. Active treatment, complication, and end-of-life care costs were included. RESULTS: The average per-patient cost of treating myeloma (across all routes) was estimated at £146 261. The average per-patient cost associated with EP (£152 677) was the highest; differences were minimal compared with GP 2-week wait (£149 631) and consultant to consultant (£147 237). GP urgent (£140 025) and GP routine (£130 212) were associated with marginally lower costs. Complication (£42 252) and end-of-life care (£11 273) costs were numerically higher for EP than other routes (£25 021-£38 170 and £9772-£10 458, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: An economic benefit may be associated with earlier diagnosis, gained via reduced complication and end-of-life care costs. Strategies to expedite myeloma diagnosis and minimize EPs have the potential to improve patient outcomes and may result in long-term savings that could offset any upfront costs associated with their implementation.