Literature DB >> 15148493

Randomized comparison of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor versus granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor plus intensive chemotherapy for peripheral blood stem cell mobilization and autologous transplantation in multiple myeloma.

Mukta Arora1, Linda J Burns, Juliet N Barker, Jeffrey S Miller, Todd E Defor, Adebayo B Olujohungbe, Daniel J Weisdorf.   

Abstract

Autologous peripheral blood stem cell transplantation for multiple myeloma offers higher response rates and improved survival compared with conventional chemotherapy. However, successful autografting requires effective cytoreduction and rapid hematologic reconstitution. We conducted a prospective randomized clinical trial to assess the efficacy of 2 cycles of priming chemotherapy with either granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) or granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF) for peripheral blood stem cell mobilization followed by autologous transplantation. The major study end points were the comparative utility of G-CSF versus GM-CSF, the percentage of patients achieving complete response after transplantation, and overall and progression-free survival. Priming chemotherapy included cyclophosphamide (4 g/m2), mitoxantrone (8 g/m2 every day for 2 days), and dexamethasone (20 mg/m2 every 12 hours for 2 days) followed by randomization to either G-CSF or GM-CSF daily until completion of leukapheresis. Conditioning for transplantation included cyclophosphamide (75 mg/kg every day for 2 days) plus total body irradiation (165 cGy twice daily for 3 days), and patients received maintenance immunotherapy with interferon alpha. Seventy-two patients were randomized, and 64 underwent autologous transplantation. The median age at transplantation was 52 years, and the median time from diagnosis to transplantation was 10 months; 58% of the patients had received >4 cycles of pretransplantation chemotherapy. The median number of CD34+ cells obtained after mobilization was 16.4 x 10(6)/kg in the G-CSF arm versus 12.8 x 10(6)/kg in the GM-CSF arm (P = .8). Neutrophil recovery was faster in the G-CSF group after both cycle 1 (median, 13 days with G-CSF and 16 days with GM-CSF; P < .01) and cycle 2 (median, 13 days versus 17 days in the 2 groups, respectively; P = .03). Although platelet recovery was similar after cycle 1, platelet recovery to >100000/microL was notably faster in the G-CSF group both after cycle 2 and after transplantation (P = .03). Response and overall and disease-free survival were similar in both cohorts. Overall, 23% of the patients achieved a complete response after priming chemotherapy, which improved to 33% after transplantation. An additional 47% attained a partial response after transplantation, for a total response rate of 80%. With a median follow-up of 2 years (range, 0.7-8 years), the overall survival was 88% (95% confidence interval [CI], 80%-96%) at 1 year and 65% (95% CI, 51%-79%) at 3 years. Progression-free survival was 73% (95% CI, 62%-84%) at 1 year and 40% (95% CI, 26%-54%) at 3 years. Relapse or progressive disease was the most common cause of death (25 [83%] of 30 deaths). We conclude that mobilization with chemotherapy plus G-CSF versus GM-CSF results in similar CD34+ progenitor collections, even in patients exposed to multiple cycles of alkylator-based chemotherapy. Earlier neutrophil and platelet recovery was seen with G-CSF priming. Two cycles of priming chemotherapy plus autologous transplantation yields survival rates similar to those in published reports, including those using tandem transplantation. Copyright 2004 American Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15148493     DOI: 10.1016/j.bbmt.2004.02.001

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Biol Blood Marrow Transplant        ISSN: 1083-8791            Impact factor:   5.742


  10 in total

1.  Successful mobilization of PBSCs predicts favorable outcomes in multiple myeloma patients treated with novel agents and autologous transplantation.

Authors:  A Brioli; G Perrone; F Patriarca; A Pezzi; F Nobile; F Ballerini; M R Motta; S Ronconi; P Tacchetti; L Catalano; B A Zannetti; S Rizzi; S Volpe; E Zamagni; A M Liberati; K Mancuso; M Boccadoro; F E Davies; G J Morgan; A Palumbo; M Cavo
Journal:  Bone Marrow Transplant       Date:  2015-02-02       Impact factor: 5.483

Review 2.  Role of autologous stem cell transplantation in multiple myeloma.

Authors:  Shaji Kumar
Journal:  Curr Hematol Malig Rep       Date:  2007-05       Impact factor: 3.952

3.  Peripheral blood stem cell mobilization in multiple myeloma comparison of two consecutive regimens in a limited resources country.

Authors:  N Ben Abdejlil; D Belloumi; M Mâammar; R El Fatimi; L Torjman; A Lakhal; F Jenhani; S Hmida; T Ben Othman; S Ladeb
Journal:  Bone Marrow Transplant       Date:  2016-10-24       Impact factor: 5.483

4.  Cyclophosphamide-based hematopoietic stem cell mobilization before autologous stem cell transplantation in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma.

Authors:  Sascha A Tuchman; Wendi A Bacon; Li-Wen Huang; Gwynn Long; David Rizzieri; Mitchell Horwitz; John P Chute; Keith Sullivan; Ashley Morris Engemann; Amanda Yopp; Zhiguo Li; Kelly Corbet; Nelson Chao; Cristina Gasparetto
Journal:  J Clin Apher       Date:  2014-10-08       Impact factor: 2.821

5.  Successful mobilization of peripheral blood stem cells with bortezomib + high-dose cyclophosphamide + G-CSF in a light chain myeloma patient after failure with Total Therapy 2.

Authors:  Gianfranco Giglio; Sante Romito; Francesco Carrozza; Michela Musacchio; Giustino Antuzzi; Rosanna Gigli; Marilù Magri; Pasqua Bavaro; Paolo Di Bartolomeo; Mario Dell'Isola; Patrizia Accorsi
Journal:  Int J Hematol       Date:  2009-06-16       Impact factor: 2.490

6.  Proposed definition of 'poor mobilizer' in lymphoma and multiple myeloma: an analytic hierarchy process by ad hoc working group Gruppo ItalianoTrapianto di Midollo Osseo.

Authors:  A Olivieri; M Marchetti; R Lemoli; C Tarella; A Iacone; F Lanza; A Rambaldi; A Bosi
Journal:  Bone Marrow Transplant       Date:  2011-05-30       Impact factor: 5.483

7.  Hematopoietic progenitor cell mobilization for autologous transplantation - a literature review.

Authors:  Marco Aurélio Salvino; Jefferson Ruiz
Journal:  Rev Bras Hematol Hemoter       Date:  2015-08-19

8.  Efficacy of hematopoietic stem cell mobilization regimens in patients with hematological malignancies: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Authors:  Chengxin Luo; Guixian Wu; Xiangtao Huang; Yali Zhang; Yanni Ma; Yarui Huang; Zhen Huang; Hui Li; Yu Hou; Jieping Chen; Xi Li; Shuangnian Xu
Journal:  Stem Cell Res Ther       Date:  2022-03-22       Impact factor: 6.832

9.  Bendamustine, etoposide and dexamethasone to mobilize peripheral blood hematopoietic stem cells for autologous transplantation in patients with multiple myeloma.

Authors:  D J Green; W I Bensinger; L A Holmberg; T Gooley; B G Till; L E Budde; J M Pagel; S L Frayo; J E Roden; L Hedin; O W Press; A K Gopal
Journal:  Bone Marrow Transplant       Date:  2016-05-23       Impact factor: 5.483

Review 10.  Peripheral blood stem cell mobilization in multiple myeloma: Growth factors or chemotherapy?

Authors:  Whitney D Wallis; Muzaffar H Qazilbash
Journal:  World J Transplant       Date:  2017-10-24
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.