| Literature DB >> 22220254 |
A Khalafallah1, K McDonnell, H U Dawar, I Robertson, D Woods.
Abstract
Few studies exist that consider health-related quality of life (HR-QoL) in patients with multiple myeloma (MM) undergoing tandem autologous stem cell transplantation (TASCT). Eighteen patients with advanced MM who underwent dose-modified TASCT were enrolled in this study between March 2006 and March 2008. Patients <60 year old (10) received conditioning with melphalan 140 mg/m(2) and patients who were ≥60 years (8) received 100 mg/m(2). The median age was 57.5 years (range 35-69). We conducted the European Organization of Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QLQ-C30 and the QLQ-MY24 questionnaires via interviews at presentation, after each ASCT and thereafter every 3 months for 24 months. Mean global health measure improved from 3.44 before transplant to 4.50 (1=very poor, 7=excellent) at the second and subsequent follow-up visits (P<0.001) and the mean global quality of life score improved from 3.61 to 4.71 (P<0.001). Pain symptoms were reduced (P=0.001), and physical functioning improved (P<0.001) throughout the period of post-transplant follow-up. Our study showed that dose-reduced TASCT is well tolerated with low toxicity albeit the transient reduction in QoL during both transplants. Post-transplant follow-up showed significant improvement in overall HR-QoL that reflects positively on the overall disease-outcome. Furthermore, a sole focus on patient-survival does not adequately provide indication regarding the tolerability and effectiveness of a proposed treatment on the patient's perceived quality of life. As clinicians, our primary concern should be toward patient-welfare as well as survival. Therefore, we should employ the tools of QoL in conjunction with overall survival in order to deliver the best possible patient outcomes. The EORTC-QLQ-MY24 is a practical tool in measuring QoL in myeloma patients.Entities:
Year: 2011 PMID: 22220254 PMCID: PMC3248334 DOI: 10.4084/MJHID.2011.057
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Mediterr J Hematol Infect Dis ISSN: 2035-3006 Impact factor: 2.576
Patient characteristics.
| No. of patients | 18 |
|
| |
| Median age (range) | 57.5 (35–69) |
| >60 | 8 |
| <60 | 10 |
|
| |
| Sex (M : F) | 16 : 2 |
|
| |
| IIIA | 17 |
| IIIB | 1 |
|
| |
| Type of myeloma: | |
| IgG | 12 |
| IgA | 2 |
| Light Chain | 4 |
|
| |
| Upfront therapy | 16 |
| After achieving remission in a relapsed disease | 2 |
|
| |
| VAD | 3 |
| Dexamethasone and Thalidomide | 9 |
| Velcade | 4 |
| Lenalidomide | 2 |
|
| |
| Time followed up since diagnosis (Months) | 47.5 (35–81) |
|
| |
| Time followed up since First transplant (Months) | 35 (29–49) |
|
| |
| High risk disease; stage III with hypercalcaemia, renal failure, high B2 Microglobulin | 8 |
| High cytogenetic risk (e.g. 13q-, 17p-, t(4,14)) | 6 |
| Patients with stage III disease with standard risk factors | 4 |
|
| |
| Outcome of the disease | |
| Alive | 16 |
| Complete remission | 4 |
| Partial remission | 12 |
| Deceased due to disease progression | 2 |
Figure 1Percentile distribution of symptom scores (pain, fatigue and loss of appetite) and quality of life scores (physical functioning, global health and global Quality of Life) at different times of treatment with tandem autologous stem cell transplants in 18 patients treated for multiple myeloma. P-values for trend were estimated by repeated-measures, second-order polynomial {time (T) and time2 (T2)}, ordinal logistic regression. Trend lines were estimated by repeated-measures, second-order polynomial, general linear modeling for illustrative purposes only. In the QoL scale; 0 represents the worst functioning quality of life and 100 the best quality of life, while in the symptoms scales; 0 represents absence of symptoms and 100 represents maximum presence of symptoms.
Progress of functioning and quality of life in patients receiving tandem autologous stem cell transplantation for multiple myeloma
| EORTC QLQ-C30 Scale | Mean (SD) | Mean Difference | OR | 95% CI | P-value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pre-transplant | 57.5 (25.2) | 1.00 | (T:<0.001) | ||
| After 1st Tx | 67.8 (30.8) | 10.3 | 2.48 | (0.78 to 7.89) | 0.25 |
| After 2nd Tx | 66.7 (30.7) | 9.2 | 2.22 | (0.77 to 6.36) | 0.14 |
| 1st Follow-up | 83.8 (18.2) | 26.3 | 6.78 | (2.81 to 16.4) | <0.001 |
| 2nd and subsequent Follow-up | 83.8 (16.7) | 26.3 | 6.40 | (2.00 to 20.5) | 0.005 |
|
| |||||
| Pre-transplant | 56.3 (25.0) | 1.00 | (T:0.38 & T2:0.68) | ||
| After 1st Tx | 52.8 (36.3) | −3.5 | 0.84 | (0.26 to 2.77) | >0.9 |
| After 2nd Tx | 52.8 (40.1) | −3.5 | 0.86 | (0.24 to 3.05) | 0.81 |
| 1st Follow-up | 90.6 (20.2) | 34.4 | 12.43 | (3.45 to 44.8) | 0.001 |
| 2nd and subsequent Follow-up | 65.6 (23.9) | 9.4 | 1.70 | (0.74 to 3.90) | 0.63 |
|
| |||||
| Pre-transplant | 72.9 (28.5) | 1.00 | (T:0.43 & T2:0.47) | ||
| After 1st Tx | 66.7 (23.6) | −6.3 | 0.52 | (0.19 to 1.46) | 0.86 |
| After 2nd Tx | 67.6 (21.0) | −5.3 | 0.56 | (0.19 to 1.62) | 0.86 |
| 1st Follow-up | 72.2 (20.6) | −0.7 | 0.81 | (0.39 to 1.70) | 0.58 |
| 2nd and subsequent Follow-up | 67.7 (32.5) | −5.2 | 0.71 | (0.31 to 1.64) | 0.84 |
|
| |||||
| Pre-transplant | 81.3 (27.1) | 1.00 | (T:0.91 & T2:0.96) | ||
| After 1st Tx | 83.8 (19.7) | 2.5 | 0.88 | (0.24 to 3.23) | >0.9 |
| After 2nd Tx | 83.8 (19.9) | 2.5 | 0.95 | (0.25 to 3.58) | 0.94 |
| 1st Follow-up | 92.2 (13.5) | 11.0 | 2.13 | (0.79 to 5.76) | 0.55 |
| 2nd and subsequent Follow-up | 83.9 (26.4) | 2.6 | 1.27 | (0.52 to 3.11) | >0.9 |
|
| |||||
| Pre-transplant | 62.5 (15.5) | 1.00 | (T:0.021& T2:0.009) | ||
| After 1st Tx | 51.9 (27.3) | −10.6 | 0.42 | (0.17 to 1.03) | 0.18 |
| After 2nd Tx | 52.8 (26.4) | −9.7 | 0.45 | (0.19 to 1.07) | 0.14 |
| 1st Follow-up | 65.6 (25.6) | 3.1 | 1.25 | (0.35 to 4.44) | 0.73 |
| 2nd and subsequent Follow-up | 76.0 (18.2) | 13.5 | 3.16 | (1.42 to 7.02) | 0.019 |
|
| |||||
| Pre-transplant | 29.2 (29.5) | 1.00 | (T:0.008 & T2:0.003) | ||
| After 1st Tx | 48.1 (38.3) | 19.0 | 2.55 | (0.93 to 6.96) | 0.21 |
| After 2nd Tx | 48.1 (38.3) | 19.0 | 2.55 | (0.93 to 6.96) | 0.21 |
| 1st Follow-up | 26.7 (31.4) | −2.5 | 0.84 | (0.30 to 2.38) | 0.74 |
| 2nd and subsequent Follow-up | 12.5 (24.0) | −16.7 | 0.28 | (0.10 to 0.81) | 0.077 |
|
| |||||
| Pre-transplant | 38.5 (25.6) | 1.00 | (T:<0.001) | ||
| After 1st Tx | 40.7 (23.7) | 2.2 | 1.17 | (0.40 to 3.40) | 0.78 |
| After 2nd Tx | 45.4 (24.8) | 6.8 | 1.81 | (0.61 to 5.33) | 0.57 |
| 1st Follow-up | 61.1 (23.3) | 22.6 | 5.51 | (1.30 to 23.3) | 0.061 |
| 2nd and subsequent Follow-up | 65.6 (15.5) | 27.1 | 7.99 | (2.67 to 23.9) | 0.001 |
|
| |||||
| Pre-transplant | 41.7 (29.2) | 1.00 | (T:<0.001) | ||
| After 1st Tx | 43.5 (27.5) | 1.9 | 1.22 | (0.47 to 3.20) | 0.68 |
| After 2nd Tx | 48.1 (30.7) | 6.5 | 1.77 | (0.66 to 4.74) | 0.51 |
| 1st Follow-up | 71.1 (20.4) | 29.4 | 7.12 | (2.23 to 22.7) | 0.003 |
| 2nd and subsequent Follow-up | 70.8 (18.8) | 29.2 | 7.06 | (2.74 to 18.2) | <0.001 |
EORTC Quality of Life Functioning Scales: each have a range of 0–100 with 0 being worst functioning and 100 best functioning. Mean difference QoL scale scores at specified times compared to initial pre-transplant assessment, estimated by general linear modelling (GLM) corrected for repeated measures (this treats the scale scores as continuous interval data, which is not appropriate, but shown for illustrative purposes only). Comparison of QoL scale scores at specified times compared to initial pre-transplant assessment, estimated by ordinal logistic regression (OLR) corrected for repeated measures and expressed as odds ratio with 95% confidence intervals and P-values (OLR is a non-parametric version of GLM that treats the scale scores as rank order data). P-values shown are: 1) in the Pre-transplant row, the P-value for 2nd-order polynomial trend (T=time, and T2=time-squared) demonstrating (or not) the reversal of the effects of the receiving dual autologous stem cell transplant; and 2) in subsequent rows, the comparisons of the other time periods to the pre-transplant assessment corrected for multiple comparisons by the Holm method (against the OR 1.00, all estimated by OLR which does not assume linearity of time)
Figure 2Overall survival in the months following treatment with dose-reduced tandem ASCT in 18 patients treated for multiple myeloma