Leiba Merav, Kedmi Meirav, Duek Adrian, Freidman Tzachi, Weiss Mia, Leiba Ronit, Nagler Arnon, Avigdor Abraham
Division of Haematology and Bone marrow Transplantation, Sheba Medical Centre, Tel-Hashomer and Sackler School of Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel.
Br J Haematol. 2014 Sep;166(5):702-10. doi: 10.1111/bjh.12946. Epub 2014 May 26.
Three-drug induction regimens have become the standard of care in newly diagnosed transplant-eligible multiple myeloma patients. Two frequently used protocols are bortezomib, cyclophosphamide and dexamethasone (VCD) and bortezomib, thalidomide and dexamethasone (VTD). Comparisons between the two are lacking. The present study aimed to identify the differences in response rate and toxicity between the two regimens. Databases were searched using the terms 'VTD' or 'VCD' and 'induction regimens for newly diagnosed multiple myeloma'. Prospective trials evaluating initial response in transplant eligible patients were included. The main outcome measures were response rates and adverse events. Eight clinical trials were eligible for analysis. Overall 672 patients were treated with either VCD (n = 157) or VTD (n = 515) as induction therapy. Patients treated with VTD presented with a significantly higher complete/near complete response (34% vs. 6%, P = 0·002) as well as a higher very good partial response rate or better, following induction therapy (62% vs. 27%, P < 0·0001). Although grade 3-4 neurotoxicity was more frequent during VTD therapy (11% vs. 6%, P = 0·057), a higher incidence of overall grade 3-4 adverse events was found in the VCD-treated patients (74% vs. 51%, P < 0·001). VTD induction therapy may be superior in achieving deeper response rate following induction therapy, and is better tolerated.
三药诱导方案已成为新诊断的适合移植的多发性骨髓瘤患者的标准治疗方案。两种常用方案是硼替佐米、环磷酰胺和地塞米松(VCD)以及硼替佐米、沙利度胺和地塞米松(VTD)。目前尚缺乏两者之间的比较。本研究旨在确定两种方案在缓解率和毒性方面的差异。使用“VTD”或“VCD”以及“新诊断多发性骨髓瘤的诱导方案”等术语检索数据库。纳入评估适合移植患者初始缓解情况的前瞻性试验。主要观察指标为缓解率和不良事件。八项临床试验符合分析要求。共有672例患者接受了VCD(n = 157)或VTD(n = 515)诱导治疗。接受VTD治疗的患者诱导治疗后完全/接近完全缓解率显著更高(34%对6%,P = 0·002),以及非常好的部分缓解率或更高缓解率也更高(62%对27%,P < 0·0001)。虽然VTD治疗期间3-4级神经毒性更常见(11%对6%,P = 0·057),但VCD治疗的患者3-4级总体不良事件发生率更高(74%对51%,P < 0·001)。VTD诱导治疗在诱导治疗后实现更深缓解率方面可能更优,且耐受性更好。