Literature DB >> 12535504

Early versus deferred treatment for early stage multiple myeloma.

Y He, K Wheatley, O Clark, A Glasmacher, H Ross, B Djulbegovic.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Early stage multiple myeloma (MM) represents about 20% of MM. Most of the patients are asymptomatic. Thus, it is far less dramatic than advanced disease and may require different treatment strategies. For these patients, it is not clear whether it is better to start chemotherapy right after the diagnosis or to delay the treatment until symptoms become obvious as the disease progresses.
OBJECTIVES: To identify and synthesize all available research evidence on whether early treatment intervention results in improved clinical outcomes when compared with observation alone. The main outcomes of interest that were examined included mortality, disease progression, response rate, and toxicity of early treatment. SEARCH STRATEGY: Searches of the following electronic databases were undertaken: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CANCERLIT, LILLIACS and Cochrane Database of RCTs. We have recently compiled a comprehensive database of RCTs in myeloma. This search was updated and supplemented by hand-search of abstracts from main society meetings such as the ASH (American Society of Hematology), ASCO (American Society of Clinical Oncology), and EHA (European Haematology Association). In addition, we compared our list with a list of RCTs maintained by the Oxford Clinical Trial Service Unit. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomized controlled trials (RCT) with a parallel design that compared early versus deferred treatment of patients with early stage multiple myeloma based on Durie-Salmon (D-S) staging system. We also considered those trials that did not define early stage myeloma according to D-S staging system, but enrolled patients according to clinical uncertainty about the benefits of immediate intervention. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Data synthesis was performed for all studies and according to the defined quality criteria. The first reviewer and the contact reviewer of this proposal independently extracted data. Disagreement was resolved by consensus. Revman software (ver 4.1) was used to combine results from all studies and expressed as an overall odds ratio or Peto's Odds Ratio, with 95% confidence interval. MAIN
RESULTS: Three trials were included with a total of 131 patients in each of the early treatment and deferred treatment groups. Early MM is asymptomatic stage I in these trials. All trials used standard Melphalan treatment but not stem cell transplantation. No statistically significant heterogeneity among the studies was detected. Beneficial effects of early treatment were seen in delay of myeloma progression (Peto's OR = 0.16, 95% CI: 0.09-0.29), and reduced vertebral compression (OR = 0.18, 95%CI: 0.02-1.59, NNT = 23, 95% CI: an NNT of 11, via infinity, to an NNH of 50). No significant effects on mortality and response rate were seen (Peto's OR = 1.11, 95% CI: 0.67-1.84, and OR = 0.63, 95% CI: 0.33-1.23, respectively). Early treatment may increase the risk of acute leukemia (Peto's OR = 3.20, 95% CI: 0.55-18.73, NNH = 44, 95% CI: an NNT of 63, via infinity, to an NNH of 15). REVIEWER'S
CONCLUSIONS: Early treatment of early stage multiple myeloma inhibits disease progression, and may reduce vertebral compression. However, early treatment may increase the risk of acute leukemia. However, the data on vertebral compression and leukaemic transformation may not be interpretable due to very small numbers. Based on the current evidence, mortality and response rate are not significantly affected by introducing early treatment in the progression of myeloma. However, it is quite possible that the lack of beneficial effects of early intervention in myeloma is a false negative result due to the paucity of the existing evidence. In addition, data on quality of life and toxicity were sparsely reported adding to additional difficulties about management decisions in early stage myeloma.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12535504      PMCID: PMC6485476          DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD004023

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev        ISSN: 1361-6137


  24 in total

Review 1.  The revised CONSORT statement for reporting randomized trials: explanation and elaboration.

Authors:  D G Altman; K F Schulz; D Moher; M Egger; F Davidoff; D Elbourne; P C Gøtzsche; T Lang
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2001-04-17       Impact factor: 25.391

2.  The Delphi list: a criteria list for quality assessment of randomized clinical trials for conducting systematic reviews developed by Delphi consensus.

Authors:  A P Verhagen; H C de Vet; R A de Bie; A G Kessels; M Boers; L M Bouter; P G Knipschild
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  1998-12       Impact factor: 6.437

3.  NCCN practice guidelines for multiple myeloma. National Comprehensive Cancer Network.

Authors: 
Journal:  Oncology (Williston Park)       Date:  1998-11       Impact factor: 2.990

Review 4.  Systematic reviews in health care: Assessing the quality of controlled clinical trials.

Authors:  P Jüni; D G Altman; M Egger
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2001-07-07

5.  Development of a highly sensitive search strategy for the retrieval of reports of controlled trials using PubMed.

Authors:  Karen A Robinson; Kay Dickersin
Journal:  Int J Epidemiol       Date:  2002-02       Impact factor: 7.196

Review 6.  Improving interpretation of clinical studies by use of confidence levels, clinical significance curves, and risk-benefit contours.

Authors:  T P Shakespeare; V J Gebski; M J Veness; J Simes
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2001-04-28       Impact factor: 79.321

7.  Evaluation and appraisal of randomized controlled trials in myeloma.

Authors:  B Djulbegovic; J R Adams; G H Lyman; M Lacevic; I Hozo; M Greenwich; C L Bennett
Journal:  Ann Oncol       Date:  2001-11       Impact factor: 32.976

8.  Single, sequential, and multiple alkylating agent therapy for multiple myeloma: a CALGB Study.

Authors:  M R Cooper; O R McIntyre; K J Propert; S Kochwa; K Anderson; M Coleman; R A Kyle; D Prager; S Rafla; B Zimmer
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  1986-09       Impact factor: 44.544

9.  A clinical staging system for multiple myeloma. Correlation of measured myeloma cell mass with presenting clinical features, response to treatment, and survival.

Authors:  B G Durie; S E Salmon
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  1975-09       Impact factor: 6.860

10.  Long-term survival of stage I multiple myeloma given chemotherapy just after diagnosis or at progression of the disease: a multicentre randomized study. Cooperative Group of Study and Treatment of Multiple Myeloma.

Authors:  A Riccardi; O Mora; C Tinelli; D Valentini; S Brugnatelli; R Spanedda; A De Paoli; L Barbarano; M Di Stasi; M Giordano; C Delfini; G Nicoletti; C Bergonzi; E Rinaldi; L Piccinini; E Ascari
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2000-04       Impact factor: 7.640

View more
  10 in total

1.  Multiple Myeloma presenting as sacroiliac joint pain: a case report.

Authors:  Danielle Southerst; John Dufton; Paula Stern
Journal:  J Can Chiropr Assoc       Date:  2012-06

2.  Steroid-resistant nephrotic syndrome secondary to primary focal segmental glomerulosclerosis and smoldering multiple myeloma.

Authors:  Rupin Shah; Nishi Shah; Arun Shah; Ankit N Mehta
Journal:  Proc (Bayl Univ Med Cent)       Date:  2014-01

3.  A man with a fracture from minor trauma.

Authors:  Siu Ming Yang; Chor Man Lo
Journal:  World J Emerg Med       Date:  2014

4.  Current approaches to the initial treatment of symptomatic multiple myeloma.

Authors:  Jagoda K Jasielec; Andrzej J Jakubowiak
Journal:  Int J Hematol Oncol       Date:  2013-02

Review 5.  The effect of intervention versus watchful waiting on disease progression and overall survival in smoldering multiple myeloma: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials.

Authors:  Ademola S Ojo; Somtochukwu G Ojukwu; Joseph Asemota; Oluwasegun Akinyemi; Mojisola O Araoye; Mohammed Saleh; Ahmed Ali; Ravi Sarma
Journal:  J Cancer Res Clin Oncol       Date:  2022-01-20       Impact factor: 4.553

6.  Early versus deferred treatment for smoldering multiple myeloma: a meta-analysis of randomized, controlled trials.

Authors:  Minjie Gao; Guang Yang; Van S Tompkins; Lu Gao; Xiaosong Wu; Yi Tao; Xiaojing Hu; Jun Hou; Ying Han; Hongwei Xu; Fenghuang Zhan; Jumei Shi
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-10-03       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  Early or deferred treatment of smoldering multiple myeloma: a meta-analysis on randomized controlled studies.

Authors:  Ai-Lin Zhao; Kai-Ni Shen; Ji-Nuo Wang; Lan-Qing Huo; Jian Li; Xin-Xin Cao
Journal:  Cancer Manag Res       Date:  2019-06-21       Impact factor: 3.989

8.  Testing Mayo Clinic's New 20/20/20 Risk Model in Another Cohort of Smoldering Myeloma Patients: A Retrospective Study.

Authors:  Camille Tessier; Thomas Allard; Jean-Samuel Boudreault; Rayan Kaedbey; Vincent Éthier; Fléchère Fortin; Michel Pavic
Journal:  Curr Oncol       Date:  2021-05-26       Impact factor: 3.677

9.  Advanced myeloma masquerading as chronic shoulder pain in a 48-year-old man: a diagnostic dilemma.

Authors:  Rajarshi Bhadra; Teodora Nikova; Meyappan Somasundaram; Keyvan Ravakhah
Journal:  BMJ Case Rep       Date:  2020-05-27

10.  Circulating miRNAs as Auxiliary Diagnostic Biomarkers for Multiple Myeloma: A Systematic Review, Meta-Analysis, and Recommendations.

Authors:  Yunhui Xiang; Liuyun Zhang; Pinpin Xiang; Juan Zhang
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2021-07-08       Impact factor: 6.244

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.