Comparison of engraftment following different stem cell mobilization modalities in patients with multiple myeloma treated with a uniform induction regimen containing bortezomib, cyclophosphamide and dexamethasone

Filgrastim alone versus cyclophosphamide and filgrastim for mobilization in multiple myeloma patients

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

High-dose chemotherapy followed by autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) is standard treatment approach in most multiple myeloma (MM) patients. Before ASCT, chemomobilization or only granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) mobilization can be preferred in stem cell mobilization. The primary aim of the study is to compare the effect of the two mobilization regimens on hematopoietic engraftment times, CD34+cell counts and number of apheresis required to harvest stem cells.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The records of MM patients who applied to our hospital between 2010 and 2020 were analysed retrospectively. Patients were divided into two groups (Group A: Cyclophosphamide plus filgrastim, Group B: Filgrastim alone) according to the mobilization regimen.

RESULTS

A total of 223 MM patients were included in this study (Group A:153, Group B:70 patients). When the patients in Group A and Group B were compared, the number of collected CD34+ cells were higher in Group A (p < 0.001). However, there was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of median times to neutrophil and platelet engraftment, and number of apheresis required to harvest stem cells (p > 0.05). The rate of infection development during mobilization in the patients in group A and the duration of hospitalization of these patients were higher than the patients in group B (p < 0.001). Patients receiving >6 cycles of chemotherapy and immunomodulatory treatment had lower collected CD34+ cells than other patients (p = 0.012 and p = 0.054).

CONCLUSION

Based on our findings, filgrastim alone seems to provide a sufficient amount of stem cells in MM patients.

Comparison of the efficiency, safety, and survival outcomes in two stem cell mobilization regimens with cyclophosphamide plus G-CSF or G-CSF alone in multiple myeloma: a meta-analysis

Autologous stem cell transplantation as a frontline treatment for patients with multiple myeloma (MM) requires an adequate peripheral blood stem cell (PBSC) collection before processing. Granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) with or without cyclophosphamide (CTX) is a common regimen for PBSC mobilization; their benefits and risks are controversial. To compare the efficiency, safety, and survival outcomes between the two regimens, we conducted a meta-analysis including 18 studies with 4 prospective and 14 retrospective studies; a total of 2770 patients with MM were analyzed. The CTX plus G-CSF regimen had higher yields of total CD34⁺ cells (SMD = 0.39, 95% CI (0.30, 0.49)), and higher mobilization rates of the target ⩾ 2 × 10⁶/kg (OR = 3.34, 95% CI (1.82, 6.11)) and 4 × 10⁶/kg (OR = 2.16, 95% CI (1.69, 2.76)) cells. A favorable event-free survival (EFS) (HR = 0.73, 95% CI (0.58, 0.93), p = 0.01) and better 3-year EFS rate (OR = 1.65, 95% CI (1.1, 2.47), p = 0.02) were also reached in the patients with CTX plus G-CSF mobilization, although the risks of admission (OR = 26.49, 95% CI (7.31, 95.97)) and fever (OR = 13.66, 95% CI (6.21, 30.03)) during mobilization were increased, the treatment-related mortality was consistent (p = 0.26). The CTX plus G-CSF regimen was superior to the G-CSF-alone regimen for PBSC mobilization in patients with MM.

Cyclophosphamide-bortezomib-dexamethasone compared with bortezomib-dexamethasone in transplantation-eligible patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma

Introduction

Cyclophosphamide-bortezomib-dexamethasone (CyBorD) is considered a standard induction regimen for transplant-eligible patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (mm). It has not been prospectively compared with bortezomib-dexamethasone (Bor-Dex). We aimed to compare the efficacy of CyBorD and Bor-Dex induction in transplant-eligible patients.

Methods

In a retrospective observational study at a single tertiary centre, all patients with transplant-eligible mm who received induction with CyBorD or Bor-Dex between March 2008 and April 2016 were enrolled. Progression-free survival (pfs), response, and stem-cell collection for a first autologous stem-cell transplantation (ahsct) were compared.

Results

Of 155 patients enrolled, 78 (50.3%) had received CyBorD, and 77 (49.7%), Bor-Dex. The patients in the Bor-Dex cohort were younger than those in the CyBorD cohort (median: 57 years vs. 62 years; p = 0.0002) and more likely to have had treatment held, reduced, or discontinued (26% vs. 14.5%, p = 0.11). The stem-cell mobilization regimen for both cohorts was predominantly cyclophosphamide and granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (gcsf). Plerixafor was used more often for the CyBorD cohort (p = 0.009), and more collection failures occurred in the CyBorD cohort (p = 0.08). In patients receiving Bor-Dex, more cells were collected (9.9×10⁶ cells/kg vs. 7.7×10⁶cells/kg, p = 0.007). At day +100, a very good partial response or better was achieved in 75% of the CyBorD cohort and in 73% of the Bor-Dex cohort (p = 0.77). Median pfs was 3.2 years in the Bor-Dex cohort and 3.7 years in the CyBorD cohort (p = 0.56).

Conclusions

Overall efficacy was similar in our patients receiving CyBorD and Bor-Dex. After ahsct, no difference in depth of response or pfs was observed. Cyclophosphamide-gcsf seems to increase collection failures and hospitalizations in patients receiving CyBorD. Prospective studies are required to examine that relationship.

High efficacy and safety of VTD as an induction protocol in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma eligible for high dose therapy and autologous stem cell transplantation: A report of the Polish Myeloma Study Group

The present retrospective analysis evaluated the efficacy and safety of the VTD (bortezomib, thalidomide, dexamethasone) regimen in 205 newly-diagnosed patients with multiple myeloma (MM) eligible for high dose therapy and autologous stem cell transplantation (HDT/ASCT) in routine clinical practice. With a median of 6 cycles (range, 1–8), at least partial response was achieved in 94.6% and at least very good partial response (VGPR) was achieved in 67.8% of patients. Peripheral neuropathy (PN) grade 2–4 was observed in 28.7% of patients. In 72% of patients undergoing stem cell mobilization one apheresis allowed the number of stem cells sufficient for transplantation to be obtained. Following HDT/ASCT the sCR rate increased from 4.9 to 14.4% and CR from 27.8 to 35.6%. The results demonstrated that VTD as an induction regimen was highly efficient in transplant eligible patients with MM with increased at least VGPR rate following prolonged treatment (≥6 cycles). Therapy exhibited no negative impact on stem cell collection, neutrophils and platelets engraftment following ASCT. Therapy was generally well tolerated and PN was the most common reason of dose reduction or treatment discontinuation.

The impact of multiple myeloma induction therapy on hematopoietic stem cell mobilization and collection: 25-year experience

While first-line induction therapy for patients with multiple myeloma has changed over the years, autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation still plays a significant role, improving both depth of response and progression-free survival of myeloma patients. Our 25-year experience in mobilizing hematopoietic stem and progenitor cells for 472 transplant-eligible myeloma patients was retrospectively reviewed. Patients were stratified according to the remission induction therapy received, and the outcomes were compared among the cohorts that received vincristine, adriamycin and dexamethasone (VAD) (n = 232), bortezomib and dexamethasone (BD) (n = 86), cyclophosphamide, bortezomib and dexamethasone (CyBorD) (n = 82) and other regimens (n = 67). Cyclophosphamide plus granulocyte colony-stimulating factor was the predominant mobilization regimen given. A greater number of CD34⁺ cells (9.9 × 10E6/kg, p = 0.026) was collected with less hospital admissions in BD patients (13%, p = 0.001), when compared to those receiving VAD (7.5 × 10E6/kg, 29%), CyBorD (7.6 × 10E6/kg, 19%), or other regimens (7.9 × 10E6/kg, 36%). Induction therapy did not influence the overall rate of unscheduled visits or the length of hospitalization because of complications following mobilization. The myeloma response was not significantly deepened following the cyclophosphamide administered for mobilization. This analysis demonstrates the importance of monitoring the impact of initial treatment on downstream procedures such as stem cell mobilization and collection.