AccScience Publishing / CP / Online First / DOI: 10.36922/CP025390062
ORIGINAL RESEARCH ARTICLE

A systematic analysis of the global burden of multiple myeloma from 1990 to 2021

Xuan Su1 Lijie Zeng2 Xuena Wang1* Qi Mei3*
Show Less
1 Department of Oncology, Shanxi Bethune Hospital, Shanxi Academy of Medical Sciences, Third Hospital of Shanxi Medical University, Tongji Shanxi Hospital, Taiyuan, Shanxi Province, China
2 Department of Hematology, Beijing Tongren Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China
3 Department of Oncology, Tongji Hospital, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, Hubei, China
Received: 25 September 2025 | Revised: 15 October 2025 | Accepted: 3 December 2025 | Published online: 5 January 2026
© 2026 by the Author(s). This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ )
Abstract

Multiple myeloma (MM) is a hematological malignancy characterized by the proliferation of plasma cells in the bone marrow, leading to organ dysfunction. Globally, the incidence of MM has increased substantially in recent decades, necessitating an updated understanding of its global burden and epidemiological trends. This study utilized data from the Global Burden of Disease database to analyze the incidence of MM, deaths, and disability-adjusted life years from 1990 to 2021. Age-standardized rates (ASRs) were used to adjust for variations in age distribution and population size. The estimated annual percentage changes (EAPCs) were used to evaluate temporal trends. Pearson’s correlation coefficient was employed to assess the relationship between EAPC values and sociodemographic index (SDI) levels. From 1990 to 2021, the global incident cases increased dramatically from 55.71 × 103 to 148.75 × 103, with the age-standardized incidence rate rising from 1.47 to 1.74/100,000 population. Deaths also increased significantly from 47.57 × 103 to 116.36 × 103. High-SDI regions consistently maintained the highest disease burden, while low- to middle-SDI regions demonstrated the most rapid increase in MM incidence. The EAPC of ASRs was negatively correlated with SDI in 2021. The global burden of MM substantially increased from 1990 to 2021, with significant regional and sociodemographic disparities. While high-SDI regions benefited from advances in diagnosis and treatment, low-SDI regions faced mounting challenges that require targeted interventions and coordinated international actions to effectively reduce the global MM burden.

Keywords
Multiple myeloma
Global burden of disease
Cancer epidemiology
Cancer statistics
Funding
This research was supported by the Shanxi Provincial Basic Research Program under the project titled “Shanxi Provincial Basic Research Program” with grant numbers: 202403021212263 and 202303021221191; the Talent Introduction and Research Initiation Project from Shanxi Province of China under the project titled “Talent Introduction and Research Initiation Project” with grant number: 2023RC44; the Research and Innovation Team Project for Scientific Breakthroughs at Shanxi Bethune Hospital under the project titled “Research and Innovation Team Project for Scientific Breakthroughs” with grant number: 2024AOXIANG04; the National Emergency Medical Rescue Base 2023 Translational Research Projects under the project titled “2023 Translational Research Projects” with grant number: JYJD2023-03; and the 2024 Shanxi Science and Technology Cooperation and Exchange Special Program under the project titled “2024 Shanxi Science and Technology Cooperation and Exchange Special Program” with Project ID 202404041101026.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare they have no competing interests.
References
  1. Van De Donk NW, Pawlyn C, Yong KL. Multiple myeloma. Lancet. 2021;397(10272):410-427. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(21)00135-5

 

  1. Siegel RL, Miller KD, Wagle NS, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2023. CA Cancer J Clin. 2023;73(1):17-48. doi: 10.3322/caac.21763

 

  1. Malard F, Neri P, Bahlis NJ, et al. Multiple myeloma. Nat Rev Dis Primers. 2024;10(1):45. doi: 10.1038/s41572-024-00529-7

 

  1. Cowan AJ, Allen C, Barac A, et al. Global burden of multiple myeloma: A systematic analysis for the global burden of disease study 2016. JAMA Oncol. 2018;4(9):1221-1227. doi: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2018.2128

 

  1. Zhou L, Yu Q, Wei G, et al. Measuring the global, regional, and national burden of multiple myeloma from 1990 to 2019. BMC Cancer. 2021;21(1):606. doi: 10.1186/s12885-021-08280-y

 

  1. Huang J, Chan SC, Lok V, et al. The epidemiological landscape of multiple myeloma: A global cancer registry estimate of disease burden, risk factors, and temporal trends. Lancet Haematol. 2022;9(9):e670-e677. doi: 10.1016/s2352-3026(22)00165-x

 

  1. Costa LJ, Brill IK, Omel J, Godby K, Kumar SK, Brown EE. Recent trends in multiple myeloma incidence and survival by age, race, and ethnicity in the United States. Blood Adv. 2017;1(4):282-287. doi: 10.1182/bloodadvances.2016002493

 

  1. Kumar SK, Dimopoulos MA, Kastritis E, et al. Natural history of relapsed myeloma, refractory to immunomodulatory drugs and proteasome inhibitors: A multicenter IMWG study. Leukemia. 2017;31(11):2443-2448. doi: 10.1038/leu.2017.138

 

  1. Chang-Chan DY, Rios-Tamayo R, Rodriguez Barranco M, et al. Trends of incidence, mortality and survival of multiplemyeloma in Spain. A twenty-three-year population-based study. Clin Transl Oncol. 2021;23(7):1429-1439. doi: 10.1007/s12094-020-02541-1

 

  1. Rosinol Dachs L, Oriol A, Teruel AI, et al. VTD (bortezomib/thalidomide/dexamethasone) as pretransplant induction therapy for multiple myeloma: Definitive results of a randomized phase 3 pethema/GEM study. Blood. 2018;132(Suppl 1):126. doi: 10.1182/blood-2018-99-111924

 

  1. Tacchetti P, Dozza L, Di Raimondo F, et al. Bortezomib-thalidomide-dexamethasone versus thalidomide-dexamethasone before and after double autologous stem cell transplantation for newly diagnosed multiple myeloma: Final analysis of phase 3 gimema-MMY-3006 study and prognostic score for survival outcomes. Blood. 2018;132(Suppl 1):125. doi: 10.1182/blood-2018-99-116716

 

  1. Mateos MV, Ailawadhi S, Costa LJ, et al. Global disparities in patients with multiple myeloma: A rapid evidence assessment. Blood Cancer J. 2023;13(1):109. doi: 10.1038/s41408-023-00877-9

 

  1. Martinez-Lopez J, Bailey A, Lambert A, et al. Real-world treatment patterns, healthcare resource use and disease burden in patients with multiple myeloma in Europe. Future Oncol. 2023;19(31):2103-2121. doi: 10.2217/fon-2023-0021

 

  1. Ludwig H, Novis Durie S, Meckl A, Hinke A, Durie B. Multiple myeloma incidence and mortality around the globe; interrelations between health access and quality, economic resources, and patient empowerment. Oncologist. 2020;25(9):e1406-e1413. doi: 10.1634/theoncologist.2020-0141

 

  1. Alexander DD, Mink PJ, Adami HO, et al. Multiple myeloma: A review of the epidemiologic literature. Int J Cancer. 2007;120(Suppl 12):40-61. doi: 10.1002/ijc.22718

 

  1. Kyle RA, Therneau TM, Rajkumar SV, Larson DR, Plevak MF, Melton LJ 3rd. Incidence of multiple myeloma in olmsted county, minnesota: Trend over 6 decades. Cancer. 2004;101(11):2667-2674. doi: 10.1002/cncr.20652

 

  1. Wallin A, Larsson SC. Body mass index and risk of multiple myeloma: A meta-analysis of prospective studies. Eur J Cancer. 2011;47(11):1606-1615. doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2011.01.020

 

  1. Turesson I, Velez R, Kristinsson SY, Landgren O. Patterns of multiple myeloma during the past 5 decades: Stable incidence rates for all age groups in the population but rapidly changing age distribution in the clinic. Mayo Clin Proc. 2010;85(3):225-230. doi: 10.4065/mcp.2009.0426

 

  1. Urban VS, Cegledi A, Mikala G. Multiple myeloma, a quintessential malignant disease of aging: A geroscience perspective on pathogenesis and treatment. Geroscience. 2023;45(2):727-746. doi: 10.1007/s11357-022-00698-x

 

  1. Cowan AJ, Green DJ, Kwok M, et al. Diagnosis and management of multiple myeloma: A review. JAMA. 2022;327(5):464-477. doi: 10.1001/jama.2022.0003

 

  1. Martinez-Cordero H, Fuentes-Lacouture C, Von Glasenapp A, Pena C. The 5T’s of health disparities in multiple myeloma in Latin America. Curr Opin Oncol. 2024;36(6):610-614. doi: 10.1097/cco.0000000000001088

 

  1. Pozzi S, Marcheselli L, Bari A, et al. Survival of multiple myeloma patients in the era of novel therapies confirms the improvement in patients younger than 75 years: A population-based analysis. Br J Haematol. 2013;163(1): 40-46. doi: 10.1111/bjh.12465

 

  1. Anderson KC. The 39th David A. Karnofsky lecture: Bench-to-bedside translation of targeted therapies in multiple myeloma. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30(4):445-452. doi: 10.1200/jco.2011.37.8919

 

  1. Mhaskar R, Kumar A, Miladinovic B, Djulbegovic B. Bisphosphonates in multiple myeloma: An updated network meta-analysis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017;12(12):Cd003188. doi: 10.1002/14651858.cd003188.pub4

 

  1. Kannan A, Jeffrey K, Misbah S, Ramasamy K. Practical guidance on the prevention and management of infection in multiple myeloma patients: A case-based approach. Blood Rev. 2025;72:101287. doi: 10.1016/j.blre.2025.101287

 

  1. Hsia RY, Mbembati NA, Macfarlane S, Kruk ME. Access to emergency and surgical care in sub-Saharan Africa: The infrastructure gap. Health Policy Plan. 2012;27(3):234-244. doi: 10.1093/heapol/czr023

 

  1. Nagar A, Madamanchi D, Nair GR, et al. Barriers to cancer diagnosis and treatment: A pilot qualitative study of patient and practitioner perspectives in rural India. Cureus. 2024;16(8):e67249. doi: 10.7759/cureus.67249

 

  1. Hui CY, Abdulla A, Ahmed Z, et al. Mapping national information and communication technology (ICT) infrastructure to the requirements of potential digital health interventions in low- and middle-income countries. J Glob Health. 2022;12:04094. doi: 10.7189/jogh.12.04094

 

  1. Dong R, Liu W, Weng L, et al. Temporal trends of sepsis-related mortality in China, 2006-2020: A population-based study. Ann Intensive Care. 2023;13(1):71. doi: 10.1186/s13613-023-01166-1

 

  1. Tu YK, Gunnell D, Gilthorpe MS. Simpson’s paradox, lord’s Paradox, and Suppression effects are the same phenomenon- -the reversal paradox. Emerg Themes Epidemiol. 2008;5:2. doi: 10.1186/1742-7622-5-2

 

  1. Nephew LD, Gupta D, Carter A, et al. Social determinants of health impact mortality from HCC and cholangiocarcinoma: A population-based cohort study. Hepatol Commun. 2023;7(3):e0058. doi: 10.1097/hc9.0000000000000058

 

  1. Hu K, Ding P, Wu Y, Tian W, Pan T, Zhang S. Global patterns and trends in the breast cancer incidence and mortality according to sociodemographic indices: An observational study based on the global burden of diseases. BMJ Open. 2019;9(10):e028461. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2018-028461

 

  1. Yi M, Li T, Niu M, Luo S, Chu Q, Wu K. Epidemiological trends of women’s cancers from 1990 to 2019 at the global, regional, and national levels: A population-based study. Biomark Res. 2021;9(1):55. doi: 10.1186/s40364-021-00310-y

 

  1. Manojlovic Z, Christofferson A, Liang WS, et al. Comprehensive molecular profiling of 718 multiple myelomas reveals significant differences in mutation frequencies between African and European descent cases. PLoS Genet. 2017;13(11):e1007087. doi: 10.1371/journal.pgen.1007087

 

  1. Landgren O, Kyle RA, Pfeiffer RM, et al. Monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance (MGUS) consistently precedes multiple myeloma: A prospective study. Blood. 2009;113(22):5412-5417. doi: 10.1182/blood-2008-12-194241

 

  1. Waxman AJ, Mink PJ, Devesa SS, et al. Racial disparities in incidence and outcome in multiple myeloma: A population-based study. Blood. 2010;116(25):5501-5506. doi: 10.1182/blood-2010-07-298760
Share
Back to top
Cancer Plus, Electronic ISSN: 2661-3840 Print ISSN: 2661-3832, Published by AccScience Publishing