BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to compare the long-term safety and efficacy of oral busulfan 12 mg/kg plus melphalan 140 mg/m(2) and melphalan 200 mg/m(2) as conditioning regimens for autologous stem cell transplantation in newly diagnosed patients with multiple myeloma in the GEM2000 study. DESIGN AND METHODS: The first 225 patients received oral busulfan 12 mg/kg plus melphalan 140 mg/m(2); because of a high frequency of veno-occlusive disease, the protocol was amended and a further 542 patients received melphalan 200 mg/m(2). RESULTS: Engraftment and hospitalization times were similar in both groups. Oral busulfan 12 mg/kg plus melphalan 140 mg/m(2) resulted in higher transplant-related mortality (8.4% versus 3.5%; P=0.002) due to the increased frequency of veno-occlusive disease in this group. Response rates were similar in both arms. With respective median follow-ups of 72 and 47 months, the median progression-free survival was significantly longer with busulfan plus melphalan (41 versus 31 months; P=0.009), although survival was similar to that in the melphalan 200 mg/m(2) group. However, access to novel agents as salvage therapy after relapse/progression was significantly lower for patients receiving busulfan plus melphalan (43%) than for those receiving melphalan 200 mg/m(2) (58%; P=0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Conditioning with oral busulfan 12 mg/kg plus melphalan 140 mg/m(2) was associated with longer progression-free survival but equivalent survival to that achieved with melphalan 200 mg/m(2) but this should be counterbalanced against the higher frequency of veno-occlusive disease-related deaths. This latter fact together with the limited access to novel salvage therapies in patients conditioned with oral busulfan 12 mg/kg plus melphalan 140 mg/m(2) may explain the absence of a survival difference. Oral busulfan was used in the present study; use of the intravenous formulation may reduce toxicity and result in greater efficacy, and warrants further investigation in myeloma patients. (Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT00560053).
BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to compare the long-term safety and efficacy of oral busulfan 12 mg/kg plus melphalan 140 mg/m(2) and melphalan 200 mg/m(2) as conditioning regimens for autologous stem cell transplantation in newly diagnosed patients with multiple myeloma in the GEM2000 study. DESIGN AND METHODS: The first 225 patients received oral busulfan 12 mg/kg plus melphalan 140 mg/m(2); because of a high frequency of veno-occlusive disease, the protocol was amended and a further 542 patients received melphalan 200 mg/m(2). RESULTS: Engraftment and hospitalization times were similar in both groups. Oral busulfan 12 mg/kg plus melphalan 140 mg/m(2) resulted in higher transplant-related mortality (8.4% versus 3.5%; P=0.002) due to the increased frequency of veno-occlusive disease in this group. Response rates were similar in both arms. With respective median follow-ups of 72 and 47 months, the median progression-free survival was significantly longer with busulfan plus melphalan (41 versus 31 months; P=0.009), although survival was similar to that in the melphalan 200 mg/m(2) group. However, access to novel agents as salvage therapy after relapse/progression was significantly lower for patients receiving busulfan plus melphalan (43%) than for those receiving melphalan 200 mg/m(2) (58%; P=0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Conditioning with oral busulfan 12 mg/kg plus melphalan 140 mg/m(2) was associated with longer progression-free survival but equivalent survival to that achieved with melphalan 200 mg/m(2) but this should be counterbalanced against the higher frequency of veno-occlusive disease-related deaths. This latter fact together with the limited access to novel salvage therapies in patients conditioned with oral busulfan 12 mg/kg plus melphalan 140 mg/m(2) may explain the absence of a survival difference. Oral busulfan was used in the present study; use of the intravenous formulation may reduce toxicity and result in greater efficacy, and warrants further investigation in myelomapatients. (Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT00560053).
Authors: Bruno Paiva; Maria-Belén Vidriales; Jorge Cerveró; Gema Mateo; Jose J Pérez; Maria A Montalbán; Anna Sureda; Laura Montejano; Norma C Gutiérrez; Alfonso García de Coca; Natalia de Las Heras; Maria V Mateos; Maria C López-Berges; Raimundo García-Boyero; Josefina Galende; Jose Hernández; Luis Palomera; Dolores Carrera; Rafael Martínez; Javier de la Rubia; Alejandro Martín; Joan Bladé; Juan J Lahuerta; Alberto Orfao; Jesús F San Miguel Journal: Blood Date: 2008-07-31 Impact factor: 22.113
Authors: K R Desikan; G Tricot; M Dhodapkar; A Fassas; D Siegel; D H Vesole; S Jagannath; S Singhal; J Mehta; D Spoon; E Anaissie; B Barlogie; N Munshi Journal: Bone Marrow Transplant Date: 2000-03 Impact factor: 5.483
Authors: Laura Rosiñol; José Antonio Pérez-Simón; Anna Sureda; Javier de la Rubia; Felipe de Arriba; Juan José Lahuerta; José David González; Joaquín Díaz-Mediavilla; Belén Hernández; Javier García-Frade; Dolores Carrera; Angel León; Miguel Hernández; Pascual Fernández Abellán; Juan Miguel Bergua; Jesús San Miguel; Joan Bladé Journal: Blood Date: 2008-07-08 Impact factor: 22.113
Authors: Margarita Blanes; Javier de la Rubia; Juan J Lahuerta; José D González; Paz Ribas; Carlos Solano; Adrián Alegre; Miguel A Sanz Journal: Leuk Lymphoma Date: 2009-02
Authors: Juan José Lahuerta; Maria Victoria Mateos; Joaquin Martínez-López; Laura Rosiñol; Anna Sureda; Javier de la Rubia; José García-Laraña; Rafael Martínez-Martínez; Miguel T Hernández-García; Dolores Carrera; Joan Besalduch; Felipe de Arriba; José María Ribera; Lourdes Escoda; Belén Hernández-Ruiz; Javier García-Frade; Concepción Rivas-González; Adrían Alegre; Joan Bladé; Jesús F San Miguel Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2008-11-10 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: P Kebriaei; T Madden; X Wang; P F Thall; C Ledesma; M de Lima; E J Shpall; C Hosing; M Qazilbash; U Popat; A Alousi; Y Nieto; R E Champlin; R B Jones; B S Andersson Journal: Bone Marrow Transplant Date: 2012-06-25 Impact factor: 5.483
Authors: Neeraj Saini; Qaiser Bashir; Denái R Milton; Guilin Tang; Ruby Delgado; Gabriela Rondon; Uday R Popat; Chitra M Hosing; Yago Nieto; Partow Kebriaei; Amin M Alousi; Rohtesh Mehta; Samer Srour; Issa F Khouri; Donna M Weber; Sheeba K Thomas; Hans C Lee; Krina K Patel; Robert Z Orlowski; Richard E Champlin; Muzaffar H Qazilbash Journal: Blood Adv Date: 2020-10-13
Authors: Laura Rosiñol; Albert Oriol; Rafael Rios; Anna Sureda; María Jesús Blanchard; Miguel Teodoro Hernández; Rafael Martínez-Martínez; Jose M Moraleda; Isidro Jarque; Juan Bargay; Mercedes Gironella; Felipe de Arriba; Luis Palomera; Yolanda González-Montes; Josep M Martí; Isabel Krsnik; Jose M Arguiñano; Maria Esther González; Ana Pilar González; Luis Felipe Casado; Lucia López-Anglada; Bruno Paiva; Maria-Victoria Mateos; Jesus F San Miguel; Juan-José Lahuerta; Joan Bladé Journal: Blood Date: 2019-10-17 Impact factor: 22.113
Authors: M Martino; G Tripepi; G Messina; I D Vincelli; G Console; A G Recchia; M Gentile; S Molica; F Morabito Journal: Bone Marrow Transplant Date: 2016-04-18 Impact factor: 5.483
Authors: Patrick Hagen; Anita D'Souza; Parameswaran Hari; Omar Davila; Mei-Jie Zhang; David H Vesole; Scott E Smith; Tulio E Rodriguez; Patrick J Stiff Journal: Leuk Lymphoma Date: 2020-08-31