scholarly journals 20 Years of Transplant Program in Multiple Myeloma - a Single Centre Experience

Blood ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 132 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 5749-5749
Author(s):  
Jiri Minarik ◽  
Edgar Faber ◽  
Ludek Raida ◽  
Tomas Szotkowski ◽  
Jaroslav Bacovsky ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Partial Remission ◽  
Response Rates ◽  
Individual Treatment ◽  
Cell Transplant ◽  
Conventional Chemotherapy ◽  
Post Transplant ◽  
Treatment Line ◽  
Novel Drugs ◽  
Significant Difference

Abstract Aims: The aim is to present the results of 20 years of autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) program in multiple myeloma (MM) at our site. Patients and methods: Since 1997 till 2017, a cohort of 348 patients underwent ASCT at the Department of Hemato-Oncology of the University Hospital Olomouc. Altogether 274 were 1st ASCT, 62 were 2nd transplants, the rest were tandem or third ASCT. The patients had standard baseline characteristics, including age, gender, immunoglobulin and light chain type, Durie-Salmon (DS) and International Staging System (ISS). The induction regimens for 1st ASCT included VAD (vincristin, adriamycine, dexamethasone) in 34%, THAL in 15%, BTZ based regimens in 34%, the rest (17%) were combined polychemotherapeutic regimens. The re-induction regimens before 2nd ASCT included CAD (cyclophosphamide, adriamycine, dexamethasone) in 27%, BTZ in 31% and THAL based regimens in 18%, other patients (24%) had LEN based regimens, polychemotherapy or no re-induction. 163 patients (47%) had maintenance, mostly interferon based (25%), conventional chemotherapy based (9%) or THAL based (7%), and 53% of patients had no maintenance. We assessed response rates, ie the rate of complete remission (CR), very good partial remission (VGPR), partial remission (PR), minimal response (MR), stable disease (SD), progressive disease (PG) and overall response rate (ORR) based on International Myeloma Working Group (IMWG) criteria. The survival measures of individual treatment lines were assessed by means of progression free survival (PFS). We assessed the efficacy of ASCT with respect to treatment line, pre-transplant and post transplant response achieved (day+100), and with respect to DS and ISS as well as to treatment modality used for induction and maintenance. For statistical estimation we used Kaplan-Meier curves, Log rank test (Mantel-Cox), Post-hoc tests according to Dunn, Pearson ChiSquare test, Fisher´s Exact Test, Kruskal-Wallis test, and McNemar-Bowker Test. Results: The response rates after 1st ASCT were following: CR 32,1%, VGPR 26,5%. PR 34,8%, MR and SD 3% and PG 3,4%. Median PFS after 1st ASCT was 35 months and it corresponded to the depth of treatment response: CR 48 months, VGPR 36 months, PR 33 months, MR and SD 13 months, PG 9 months, p<0,0001. Pre-transplant responses showed a trend towards better outcomes with deeper responses but beyond statistical significance (p = 0,077). Advanced DS stage correlated with worse PFS (stage I 58 months, stage II 42 months, stage III 31 months). Patients under age 59 years tended to have slightly better PFS (37 vs 34 months, p = 0,078). Both pre and posttransplant responses were significantly better after novel drugs than conventional chemotherapy, still, there was no statistically significant difference in PFS. None of the maintenance (chemotherapy, interferon, THAL-based) lead to a better PFS. There were very few patients treated with BTZ, LEN or ixazomib maintenance precluding valid statistical analysis. There were no differences in either responses or PFS with regard to treatment line but there were only 19 patients not having ASCT as their first regimen. The response rates after 2nd ASCT were as follows: CR 26,7%, VGPR 13,3%, PR 38,3%, MR+SD 8,3% and PG 13,3%. Median PFS after 2nd ASCT was 20 months, decreasing with inferior responses (CR 34,8 months, VGPR 22,5 months, PR 33,1 months, MR and SD 18,8 months, PG 6,6 months p<0,0001). There were no differences in PFS with respect to either ISS, DS stage or re-induction regimen. Patients transplanted in their first relapse tended to have better PFS than in later relapses. Conclusion: The use of ASCT is still the gold standard in MM. Regardless of treatment line, it achieves significant outcomes. Novel drugs induce deeper pre-transplant responses, still, the major advantage against conventional chemotherapy is in the speed of response and absence of severe adverse events, enabling more patients to reach ASCT. Maintenance therapy accounts for better survival, however, this is true only for novel drugs (such as bortezomib, lenalidomide) whereas older modalities including interferone, post-transplant chemotherapy, steroids or thalidomide do not possess such activity. The second ASCT is comparable to to current treatment modalities in relapsed MM with fair post-transplant outcomes as well as PFS, with high rate of complete responses. Supported by the grant IGA-LF-2018-004 andMH CR - RVO (FNOl, 00098892). Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

Immunologic Recovery after Autologous Transplant in Multiple Myeloma and Progression Free Survival

Blood ◽  
2008 ◽  
Vol 112 (11) ◽  
pp. 4444-4444
Author(s):  
Fernanda Maria Rodrigues Trigo-Miranda ◽  
Rui Cordeiro Bergantim ◽  
Ricardo Moreira Pinto ◽  
Patricia Guimarães ◽  
Jose E. Guimaraes
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Response To Treatment ◽  
Cell Transplant ◽  
Haematopoietic Progenitor Cell ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Post Transplant ◽  
Historical Comparison ◽  
Significant Difference

Abstract Several factors influencing disease progression and survival have been identified in multiple myeloma (MM). We analysed a series of 49 consecutive patients with MM that underwent autologous haematopoietic progenitor cell transplant (HPCT) in one center regarding the following variables: use of G-CSF for haematopoietic recovery post-transplant; recovery of normal IgM levels at day +100 post-transplant; levels of lymphocytes namely of the CD4+ and CD8+ subsets also at day +100. Before 2006, all patients had G-CSF starting 24 hours after the cell infusion until neutrophil &gt; 500×10^9/L in two consecutive days; in the years 2006–2008, no G-CSF was given to transplanted patients. A historical comparison was done and at the time of this study no significant difference in progression free survival (Kaplan-Meyer analysis), was detected between the two groups, possibly due to the shorter follow-up of the “no G-CSF” (n=19) group; nevertheless median progression free survival (PFS) in the “G-CSF” group was 12 months while median PFS was not attained in the “no G-CSF” group (median follow-up = 7 months). Post transplant IgM levels were also determined in 39 patients. Eighteen patients recovered normal IgM levels at day +100 (46.8 %) and 21 (53.8 %) did not. Comparison of Kaplan-Meyer curves for the two groups did not show any statistically significant difference but there is a sharp difference between median PFS of the “low IgM” (10 months) and the “normal IgM” (27 months) groups. CD4/CD8 ratio was determined in 18 patients at day +100. The ratio varied between 0 and 0.63 (median – 0.305). No correlation was found between post-transplant IgM recovery and CD4/CD8 ratio. In conclusion, in our series of MM patients treated with autologous HPCT we could not find a definite relationship between immunologic recovery and response to treatment although there is a trend to a better outlook of the patients which recover normal IgM levels. It is also uncertain whether use of G-CSF in the post-transplant period would have any effect on disease behaviour.

scholarly journals High-Dose Carfilzomib Recaptures Response in Relapsed/Refractory Multiple Myeloma Resistant to Low-Dose Carfilzomib By Co-Inhibiting β2 Subunit of Proteasome Complex: The First in Human Evidence

Blood ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 138 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 818-818
Author(s):  
Xiang Zhou ◽  
Andrej Besse ◽  
Jessica Peter ◽  
Max Mendez Lopez ◽  
Larissa Haertle ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Partial Remission ◽  
Low Dose ◽  
Mononuclear Cells ◽  
Proteasome Inhibition ◽  
Proteasome Activity ◽  
High Dose ◽  
Cell Transplant ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Proteasome Subunits

Abstract Background Proteasome, a complex involved in the intracellular protein degradation, consists of multiple subunits, but only three subunits have enzymatic activity to cleave and degrade proteins, namely β1, β2 and β5. Carfilzomib (CFZ), a second-generation proteasome inhibitor (PI), can induce cell death by selective and irreversible inhibition of β5 subunit of proteasome. Preclinical data suggested that high-dose CFZ could co-inhibit predominantly β2 proteasome activity, followed by β1 inhibition (Besse et al, Cell Chem Biol. 2019). Over the past few years, CFZ has become a corner stone for multiple myeloma (MM) therapy. Currently, CFZ is approved by the FDA in different dosing schedules in combination with lenalidomide or daratumumab and dexamethasone. However, the optimal CFZ dosing is still a matter of debate, with the approved dosage ranging from 20to 70mg/m 2 in different regimens. In addition, if response can be recaptured by escalating CFZ dose in patients progressing from low-dose CFZ has yet to be determined. The aim of our current study was to analyse the profile of proteasome inhibition in the respective dose cohorts and to elucidate if high-dose CFZ could recapture response in patients resistant to low-dose CFZ. Methods We prospectively collected clinical data and peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMC) of 32 patients with relapsed/refractory (RR) MM before and 1-8 hours after CFZ administration. PBMC were lysed and labelled for the activity of individual proteasome subunits using activity based proteasome probes and the proteasome subunits were separated using SDS-PAGE. The activity of constitutive and immunoproteasome β1, β2 and β5 subunits was evaluated by densitometry analysis and combination of the activity of constitutive and immunoproteasome individual subunit was used for further analysis. Results Overall, six, nine, twelve and five patients received CFZ at a dose of 20, 27, 36 and 56 mg/m 2, respectively. As expected, the total activity of proteasome decreased with higher doses of CFZ. Significant inhibition (median inhibition &gt; 50%) of β5 subunit was observed already at 20 mg/m 2 dose, while β2 subunit started to be co-inhibited only at a dose of ≥27 mg/m 2. Significant co-inhibition of β2 activity was seen at 36 mg/m 2 dose, at which also β1 subunit started to be co-inhibited. Finally, at 56 mg/m 2, the activity of all active subunits was inhibited with a median inhibition of &gt; 50%, with the strongest inhibition of the β5 subunit, followed by β2 and then β1. When we compared the patient groups low-dose CFZ (20 or 27 mg/m 2) versus high-dose CFZ (36 or 56 mg/m 2), we observed a significant difference in β2 (P=0.002) and β5 (P=0.02) subunit inhibition between the both groups. In terms of total proteasome activity, high-dose CFZ demonstrated a significantly higher proteasome inhibition in comparison with patients receiving low-dose CFZ (P=0.01). In brief, our results suggested that high-dose CFZ, in contrast to low-dose CFZ, could obtain superior proteasome inhibition by co-inhibiting β2 subunit of proteasome complex. In light of this finding, we successfully treated six RRMM patients who were resistant to low-dose CFZ with CFZ dose escalation. All six patients were heavily pretreated with 3-12 lines of therapy including daratumumab, two PIs, two immunomodulatory drugs and autologous stem cell transplant. Additionally, one and two patients received prior treatment with B-cell maturation antigen targeted bi-specific antibody and chimeric antigen receptor modified T-cell, respectively. In the last line of treatment, these six patients showed progression during CFZ based regimens with low-dose CFZ, namely 20 or 27 mg/m 2. We therefore increased the CFZ dose to 36 or 56 mg/m 2 and the doses of agents other than CFZ in the combination regimens remained the same. High-dose CFZ dose recaptured response in all six patients with four and two patients that achieved partial remission and very good partial remission, respectively, and the progression free survival ranged from 1-13 months. Conclusion In summary, high-dose CFZ, namely ≥ 36mg/m 2, showed more effective proteasome inhibition via blocking β5 and β2 subunits, while low-dose CFZ could not achieve a sufficient inhibition of β2 subunit. We provided the first in human evidence that high-dose CFZ could recapture response in RRMM patients resistant to low-dose CFZ by co-inhibiting the β2 subunit activity of proteasome complex. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Einsele: Janssen, Celgene/BMS, Amgen, GSK, Sanofi: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding.

scholarly journals Conventional Therapy for Amyloid Light-Chain Amyloidosis

2020 ◽  
Vol 143 (4) ◽  
pp. 365-372
Author(s):  
Paolo Milani ◽  
Giovanni Palladini
Keyword(s):  
Stem Cell ◽  
Plasma Cell ◽  
Light Chain ◽  
Cell Clone ◽  
Alkylating Agents ◽  
Proteasome Inhibitors ◽  
Response Rates ◽  
Al Amyloidosis ◽  
Cell Transplant ◽  
Conventional Chemotherapy

The vast majority of patients with light-chain (AL) amyloidosis are not eligible for stem cell transplant and are treated with conventional chemotherapy. Conventional regimens are based on various combinations of dexamethasone, alkylating agents, proteasome inhibitors, and immunomodulatory drugs. The choice of these regimens requires a careful risk stratification, based on the extent of amyloid organ involvement, comorbidities, and the characteristics of the amyloidogenic plasma cell clone. Most patients are treated upfront with bortezomib and dexamethasone combined with cyclophosphamide or melphalan. Cyclophosphamide does not compromise stem cell mobilization and harvest and is more manageable in renal failure. Melphalan can overcome the effect of t(11;14), which is associated with lower response rates and shorter survival in subjects treated with bortezomib and dexamethasone, or in combination with cyclophosphamide. Lenalidomide and pomalidomide are the mainstay of rescue treatment. They are effective in patients exposed to bortezomib, dexamethasone, and alkylators, but deep hematologic responses are rare. Ixazomib, alone or in combination with lenalidomide, increases the rate of complete responses in relapsed/refractory patients. Conventional chemotherapy regimens will represent the backbone for future combinations, particularly with anti-plasma-cell immunotherapy, that will further improve response rates and outcomes.

Dose Intensive Induction Chemotherapy Does Not Decrease Tumor Contamination of Autograft or Improve Survival for Multiple Myeloma Patients Undergoing Autologous Stem Cell Transplant.

Blood ◽  
2005 ◽  
Vol 106 (11) ◽  
pp. 2932-2932
Author(s):  
Farzana A. Sayani ◽  
Nizar J. Bahlis ◽  
Peter Faris ◽  
Mary Lynn Savoie ◽  
Ahsan Chaudhry ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Stem Cells ◽  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Stem Cell ◽  
Small Sample ◽  
Cell Transplant ◽  
Intensive Chemotherapy ◽  
Kaplan Meier ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Time To Relapse

Abstract Multiple dose intensive chemotherapy regimens have been used for induction/mobilization of stem cells for autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) in multiple myeloma. However, the exact role and regimens of such dose intensive chemotherapy has not been clearly defined. We therefore did a retrospective study to determine if dose intensive cyclophosphamide (Cyclo) 5.25 g/m2, etoposide 1.05 g/m2 and cisplatin 105 mg/m2 (DICEP) results in improved relapse rate and survival compared to standard mobilization with only Cyclo 2 g/m2. Between January 1998 and March 2004, a consecutive series of 57 newly diagnosed multiple myeloma patients receiving DICEP (38) or Cyclo (19) for in-vivo purging/mobilization were analyzed. Both groups were similar in regards to age and sex. There were no significant differences in IPI score, Durie-Salmon stage, B2 microglobulin, calcium, creatinine and albumin levels between treatment groups. Outcomes included time to relapse and time to death. Median follow up time was 799 days. Kaplan-Meier plots for time to relapse showed no significant difference (p=0.0992). Median relapse time in the DICEP group was 905 days (95% CI 580–1604) compared to 1112 days (95% CI 742-infinity) in the Cyclo group. Kaplan-Meier plots for overall survival showed no significant difference between both groups (p=0.8664). The median survival times have not yet been reached in either group and are not reported. Analysis revealed no discernable confounding risk factors. Effects of treatment on outcomes were not altered after adjusting for IPI score and Durie-Salmon staging using the stratified log-rank test. Small sample size and short duration of followup are potential limiting factors for this study, however, preliminary analysis of a larger sample of 91 multiple myeloma patients receiving either DICEP or a less intense induction/mobilization regimen, also revealed no significant difference in disease free or overall survival. Monoclonal plasma cell contamination of stem cell products was not significantly different between both groups (DICEP 42.9%, Cyclo 56.3%, p=0.5573). This study therefore suggests that the very intense DICEP induction/mobilization regimen results in no significant difference in survival outcomes. The more intense regimen does not significantly decrease tumor contamination of autograft stem cells. Overall, our experience suggests that novel induction therapies such as bortezomib, lenolidomide etc. should be pursued in preference to any further study of high dose cytotoxic chemotherapy induction. Figure Figure

Second Autologous Stem Cell Transplant (ASCT) as Salvage Therapy for Relapsed Multiple Myeloma.

Blood ◽  
2005 ◽  
Vol 106 (11) ◽  
pp. 1170-1170
Author(s):  
Rebecca L. Olin ◽  
David L. Porter ◽  
Selina M. Luger ◽  
Stephen J. Schuster ◽  
Donald Tsai ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Stem Cell ◽  
Stem Cell Transplant ◽  
Treatment Options ◽  
Univariate Analysis ◽  
Complete Response ◽  
Autologous Stem Cell Transplant ◽  
Response To Therapy ◽  
Cell Transplant ◽  
Significant Difference

Abstract Introduction: Autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) as part of initial therapy has been shown to prolong survival of patients with multiple myeloma, with some achieving durable complete remission. However, the majority of patients ultimately relapse after ASCT and require salvage treatment. Options for the treatment of such patients have increased significantly over recent years, including not only novel chemotherapeutic and biological agents but also additional ASCTs. We performed a retrospective analysis of our experience with salvage ASCT for multiple myeloma to determine which clinical variables influence outcome. Methods: Between October 1992 and February 2005, we performed 342 ASCTs for multiple myeloma. Twenty-six of these were salvage transplants for relapsed disease after prior ASCT, and all were included in the analysis. Patients who received two planned (tandem) ASCTs were not included. Results: The median age at diagnosis was 47 (range 25–66), and median ISS and DS stages at diagnosis were 1 and 2, respectively. The initial ASCT was melphalan-based in 21/26; six (23%) achieved a complete response (CR) to the initial transplant, and fifteen (58%) achieved a partial response (PR). The median event-free survival (EFS) after the initial transplant was 19.5 months (range 2–60). The median time between initial and salvage ASCT was 2.6 years (range 0.3–7.6). Twenty-two patients (85%) received non-transplant therapy between ASCTs, and the median number of lines of therapy prior to salvage ASCT was 3. At the time of salvage ASCT, the median age was 52.5 (range 28–69). Fourteen patients received melphalan alone, eight received melphalan/TBI, and four received other regimens. Eleven patients (42%) achieved a response to therapy (1 CR, 10 PR). One patient (4%) died of transplant-related toxicity. The median follow-up after salvage ASCT is 12 months (range 0.2–58). Median EFS is 9 months, and median overall survival (OS) is 36 months. The 2-year EFS is 14%, and 2-year OS is 52%. On univariate analysis, both response to and EFS after initial transplant significantly predict improved EFS after salvage transplant (p=0.0008 and p=0.0065 respectively). Both also predict improved OS (p=0.03 and 0.0005 respectively). A greater than 12 month interval between first and second transplant also correlated with OS (p=0.04). There was no significant difference in EFS or OS by preparative regimen. Interestingly, type of response to the salvage transplant (CR/PR or less than PR) did not predict improved EFS or OS. Conclusion: This study suggests that salvage ASCT after relapse from initial ASCT is a feasible therapy for patients with heavily treated multiple myeloma, particularly those with a prolonged response to the first transplant.

The Use of Novel Agents In Patients with Multiple Myeloma Initially Treated with Allogeneic Stem Cell Transplantation Results In A Significant Prolongation of Post Relapse Survival.

Blood ◽  
2010 ◽  
Vol 116 (21) ◽  
pp. 4580-4580
Author(s):  
Christopher P. Venner ◽  
Heather Sutherland ◽  
John Shepherd ◽  
Yasser Abou Mourad ◽  
Michael J. Barnett ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Stem Cell ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Statistical Significance ◽  
Novel Agents ◽  
Cell Transplant ◽  
Hematopoietic Stem ◽  
Significant Prolongation ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Relapsed Disease

Abstract Abstract 4580 Background: The use of allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant (alloHSCT) in the treatment of Multiple Myeloma (MM) remains controversial. Although there is hope that alloHSCT may result in a cure, relapse continues to be a significant problem. The morbidity associated with late complications of allogeneic transplantation further compounds the issues faced when addressing relapsed disease. The use of Novel Agents (NA) in this patient population has been poorly characterized. Here we present our experience of NA use in patients initially treated with alloHSCT. Patients: 108 patients underwent an allografting procedure for their MM at our center between 1989 and 2009. 84 received a fully myeloablative procedure (15 received donor lymphocyte infusion). 24 received an autologous HSCT followed by a reduced intensity allogeneic procedure. 56 have relapsed with this population making up our primary cohort for analysis. 22 patients received NAs and very few patients received them prior to transplant (4/108). Endpoints examined were post relapse survival after the initial HSCT procedure (PRS), overall survival from time of initial treatment (OS) and progression free survival (PFS) measured in months (m). Results: Of the entire cohort of 108 patients median OS was 78.6m (95% CI; 24.5–132.6). Median PFS was 23.6m (95% CI; 15.4–31.8). Of the non-relapsed patients (n = 52) the median OS was 125.9m. In this cohort 67% of the deaths occurred within 1.5 years. Of the relapsed patients (n = 56) median PFS was 18.7m (95% CI; 14.6–22.8), median PRS was 31.5m (95% CI; 17.0–46.0), and median OS was 67.0m (95% CI; 31.6–102.5). The effect of NA was examined in the cohort of relapsed patients. No significant difference was noted in PFS between those exposed to NA and those who were not exposed (19.0m (95% CI; 10.1–22.8) vs 13.7m (95% CI; 5.8–21.6); p = 0.27). Exposure to NA showed improvements in PRS (42.3m (95% CI; 7.3–77.2) vs 10.4m (95% CI; 5.2–15.7); p = 0.01, Figure 1). A trend toward superior OS was noted (71.4m (95% CI; 37.9–105.5) vs 24.6m (95% CI; 3.0–46.1); p = 0.11) although this did not reach statistical significance. Conclusion: Ongoing management of relapsed patients with multiple myeloma in the post alloHSCT setting remains a significant challenge. This retrospective study demonstrates that the use of NA is both safe and effective in treating relapsed disease. The predominant impact of these drugs is seen in the relapsed setting. Exposure to NA correlates with a 22m improvement in PRS. A 46m improvement in OS is noted however, likely due to the small cohort, it failed to reach statistical significance. Disclosures: Sutherland: Celgene: Honoraria; Orthobiotech: Honoraria. Shepherd:Celgene: Honoraria; Orthobiotech: Honoraria. Nevill:Celgene: Honoraria. Toze:Hoffman La Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Genzyme: Honoraria, Research Funding; Glaxo Smith Kline: Honoraria.

Efficacy of Novel Agents in Multiple Myeloma in Comparison to Autologous Stem Cell Transplant: A Retrospective Study in a Single Inner City Institution

Blood ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 118 (21) ◽  
pp. 5118-5118
Author(s):  
Tareq Braik ◽  
Dayra Avila ◽  
Shivi Jain ◽  
Manila Gaddh ◽  
Barabara Yim ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Stem Cell ◽  
Median Survival ◽  
Standard Of Care ◽  
High Dose Chemotherapy ◽  
Novel Agents ◽  
High Dose ◽  
Cell Transplant ◽  
Conventional Chemotherapy ◽  
Novel Therapy

Abstract Abstract 5118 Introduction: Since the mid 1990s, high dose chemotherapy with hematopoietic stem cell rescue has been considered the standard of care for front-line treatment in younger patients with multiple myeloma. This standard of care has been based on randomized controlled trials that compared autologus stem cell transplant (ASCT) with conventional chemotherapy. During the past decade, novel agents (NA), thalidomide, bortezomib and lenalinomide, have replaced conventional chemotherapy in the treatment of myeloma. These agents, used frontline, have shown promise in improving the outcome of myeloma patients without increasing toxicity. There are no studies to date comparing NA therapy to ASCT to determine whether there is a survival difference or whether NA therapy may reduce the need for transplantation. Many of our patients have no health insurance coverage and transplant is not a therapeutic option for them. We have attempted to compare the outcome of such patients receiving NA therapy with those in the literature who received conventional chemotherapy followed by ASCT. Methods: Ninety nine patients with multiple myeloma were treated at John H Stroger Hospital of Cook County between 2001 and 2011. All patients received novel agents (thalidomide, bortezomib and lenalinomide) as part of their therapy. Only 18/99 (18.2%) went for high-dose chemotherapy with ASCT and the remaining 81/99 (81.8%) received novel therapy without ASCT. We compared the outcome of patients who received novel therapy alone to a historical control group from the literature who received ASCT with conventional therapy (N Engl J Med 2003;348:1875–83). Overall survival was determined by Kaplan-Meier estimates. Results: We evaluated 99 consecutive myeloma patients (38% males and 61% female) of which 65% were African Americans, 19% Hispanics and 7% whites. All 3 stages (international staging system) of myeloma were equally represented. The median age at diagnosis was 60 years (40–85yr). Median follow up was 48 months (12–120). During the ten year follow up period, 60 patients (60.4%) have died. Twenty four out of 99 patients (24.2%) received only one line of therapy. 75 patients received more than one line of therapy. 75% received thalidomide-based therapy, 13% received bortezomib-based therapy and 12% received lenalinomide-based therapy. The median survival of patients who received novel therapy without ASCT (n=81) was 60 months, which is higher than the median survival of the historical controls who received ASCT reported by Child et al, N Engl J Med 2003;348:1875–83, (median survival = 54.1 months), the difference was statistically significant (P=0.0329). There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups by sex (p=0.927) and race (p=0.421). The 5-year survival of patients who received novel therapy without ASCT (n=81) was 48.2%. For those who were younger than 65 years (n=54), the median survival was 72 months and the 5-year survival was 58.1% in comparison to those who were 65 years and older (n=27), the median survival was 46 months and the 5-year survival was 29.2% (P=0.029). Conclusion: Novel agents are effective frontline therapy for multiple myeloma, especially in patients younger than 65. Our cohort had remarkable results in comparison to a historical population of patients who had ASCT with conventional chemotherapy. Since there is no curative therapy to date, a prospective randomized trial comparing NA with ASCT will be essential to clarify the role of ASCT in the era of novel therapy. Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

Outcomes of autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) in multiple myeloma from a tertiary cancer center in India.

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e17003-e17003 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bhausaheb Pandurang Bagal ◽  
Navin Khattry ◽  
Amol Dongre ◽  
Sadhana Kanan ◽  
Hari Menon ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Prognostic Factors ◽  
Maintenance Treatment ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Cancer Center ◽  
Cell Transplant ◽  
Early Stage Disease ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Post Transplant ◽  
Stage Disease

e17003 Background: ASCT is part of standard treatment in multiple myeloma (MM).We report the results of such transplants and evaluate the role of prognostic factors if any in our patients. Methods: Sixty-one patients who underwent ASCT between June 1993 and March 2010 were included. Twenty four patients received VAD like regimen. Nineteen patients received novel agent based therapies. Ten patients underwent cyclophosphamide based mobilisation while only G-CSF based mobilisation done in 51 patients. Stem cells were harvested from peripheral blood in all patients. Melphalan was used at 200 mg/m2 in 24 patients. Prognostic factors evaluated for overall (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were baseline hemoglobin and albumin, ISS stage, disease status at day 100 post transplant, use of maintenance treatment post transplant, response to first line chemotherapy, use of novel agents before transplant and time to transplant from diagnosis. Results: Median age was 46 years. Median baseline haemoglobin (Hb) and albumin were 9.7 g/dl and 3.9 g/dl respectively. At the time of transplant 36% were in complete remission (CR), 5% in very good partial response (VGPR) and 28% in partial remission (PR). Median time to engraftment of neutrophils and platelets was 12 and 17 days respectively. Grade III–IV oral mucositis was seen in 35%. Transplant related mortality was 8.0 %. The 5 year overall survival (OS) and progression free survival (PFS) were 73% and 33% respectively. OS was better for patients with pre-transplant Hb greater than 9.7 g/dl (P= .04) and those who achieved CR at day 100 post transplant (P= .03). Patients who received maintenance therapy showed trend towards better OS (P= .07). PFS was better for patients with baseline albumin greater than 3.9g/dl (P = .043), Hb greater than 9.7 g/dl (P = .027) and early stage disease by ISS staging system (P=.001). Conclusions: Our study confirms that ASCT in such patients is safe and effective. Baseline albumin and Hb, ISS stage, day 100 disease response and use of maintenance treatment are important prognostic factors affecting survival.

scholarly journals Comparison of Two Post-Transplant Predictive Indexes: Day 100 is a Better Time-Point for Response Evaluation after Autologous Stem Cell Transplantation in Multiple Myeloma: Ass Retrospective Study

2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (8) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ma’koseh M ◽  
◽  
Sa’deh S ◽  
Halahleh K ◽  
Abu-Jazar H ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Stem Cell ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Complete Response ◽  
High Dose Chemotherapy ◽  
High Dose ◽  
Cell Transplant ◽  
Response Evaluation ◽  
Therapeutic Implications ◽  
Significant Difference

In Multiple Myeloma (MM), response to High-Dose Chemotherapy (HDC) and Autologous Stem Cell Transplant (ASCT) has important prognostic and therapeutic implications. Best timing for response evaluation after ASCT is not well studied. Our study evaluated the correlation between response on day 30 and day 100 after ASCT with Progression Free Survival (PFS) and Overall Survival (OS) in 119 MM patients. Median follow-up was 39.8 months. Complete Response (CR) was achieved in 53.8% and 55.5% of patients on D 30 and D 100, respectively. On D30, there was no significant difference in PFS or OS in CR vs. no CR group (35.4 vs. 22.1 months, p: 0.058) and (92.6 months vs. not reached p: 0.96) respectively nor in responders (R) vs. Non-Responders (NR) group (97.8 vs. 47.1 months p: 0.08) and (30.2 vs. 18.9 months, p: 0.09) respectively. While on D100, PFS was significantly better in CR vs. no CR group (33.8 vs. 18.1 months, p: 0.0047) as well as in R vs. NR (30.6 vs. 16.9 months p: 0.015). However, OS was not better in either (92.6 vs. 52.1 months p: 0.46) and (92.6 months vs. not reached p: 0, 88) respectively. In conclusion, after HDC and ASCT for MM, we recommend doing response evaluation on D100 rather than D30 as it better correlates with PFS. Further studies are required to confirm this finding in the era of consolidation and maintenance treatment.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document