Portuguese Andrew J, Yeh Albert C, Banerjee Rahul, Holmberg Leona, Wuliji Natalie, Green Damian J, Mielcarek Marco, Gopal Ajay K, Gooley Ted, Stevenson Philip, Cowan Andrew J
Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Seattle, Washington; University of Washington, Seattle, Washington.
Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Seattle, Washington; University of Washington, Seattle, Washington.
Transplant Cell Ther. 2024 Aug;30(8):774.e1-774.e12. doi: 10.1016/j.jtct.2024.05.016. Epub 2024 May 18.
Most transplant-eligible multiple myeloma (MM) patients undergo autologous peripheral blood stem cell collection (PBSC) using G-CSF with on-demand plerixafor (G ± P). Chemomobilization (CM) can be used as a salvage regimen after G ± P failure or for debulking residual tumor burden ahead of autologous peripheral blood stem cell transplantation (ASCT). Prior studies utilizing cyclophosphamide-based CM have not shown long-term benefits. At our center, intensive CM (ICM) using a PACE- or HyperCVAD-based regimen has been used to mitigate "excessive" residual disease based on plasma cell (PC) burden or MM-related biomarkers. Given the lack of efficacy of non-ICM, we sought to determine the impact of ICM on event-free survival (EFS), defined as death, progressive disease, or unplanned treatment escalation. We performed a retrospective study of newly diagnosed MM patients who collected autologous PBSCs with the intent to proceed immediately to ASCT at our center between 7/2020 and 2/2023. Patients were excluded if they underwent a tandem autologous or sequential autologous-allogeneic transplant, had primary PC leukemia, received non-ICM treatment (i.e., cyclophosphamide and/or etoposide), or had previously failed G ± P mobilization. To appropriately evaluate the impact of ICM among those who potentially could have received it, we utilized a propensity score matching (PSM) approach whereby ICM patients were compared to a cohort of non-CM patients matched on pre-ASCT factors most strongly associated with the receipt of ICM. Of 451 patients identified, 61 (13.5%) received ICM (PACE-based, n = 45; hyper-CVAD-based, n = 16). Post-ICM/pre-ASCT, 11 patients (18%) required admission for neutropenic fever and/or infection. Among 51 evaluable patients, the overall response rate was 31%; however, 46 of 55 evaluable patients (84%) saw a reduction in M-spike and/or involved free light chains. Among those evaluated with longitudinal peripheral blood flow cytometry (n = 8), 5 patients (63%) cleared circulating blood PCs post-ICM. Compared to patients mobilized with non-CM, ICM patients collected a slightly greater median number of CD34 cells (10.8 versus 10.2 × 10⁶/kg, P = .018). The median follow-up was 30.6 months post-ASCT. In a PSM multivariable analysis, ICM was associated with significantly improved EFS (hazard ratio [HR] 0.30, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.67, P = .003), but not improved OS (HR 0.38, 95% CI 0.10 to 1.44, P = .2). ICM was associated with longer post-ASCT inpatient duration (+4.1 days, 95% CI, 2.4 to 5.8, P < .001), more febrile days (+0.96 days, 95% CI 0.50 to 1.4, P < .001), impaired platelet engraftment (HR 0.23, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.87, P = .031), more bacteremia (OR 3.41, 95% CI 1.20 to 9.31, P = .018), and increased antibiotic usage (cefepime: +2.3 doses, 95% CI 0.39 to 4.1, P = .018; vancomycin: +1.0 doses, 95% CI 0.23 to 1.8, P = .012). ICM was independently associated with improved EFS in a matched analysis involving MM patients with excessive disease burden at pre-ASCT workup. This benefit came at the cost of longer inpatient duration, more febrile days, greater incidence of bacteremia, and increased antibiotic usage in the immediate post-ASCT setting. Our findings suggest that ICM could be considered for a subset of MM patients, but its use must be weighed carefully against additional toxicity.
大多数符合移植条件的多发性骨髓瘤(MM)患者使用粒细胞集落刺激因子(G-CSF)联合按需使用的普乐沙福(G±P)进行自体外周血干细胞采集(PBSC)。化疗动员(CM)可作为G±P失败后的挽救方案,或在自体外周血干细胞移植(ASCT)前减轻残留肿瘤负荷。先前使用基于环磷酰胺的CM的研究未显示出长期益处。在我们中心,基于PACE或HyperCVAD方案的强化CM(ICM)已被用于根据浆细胞(PC)负荷或MM相关生物标志物减轻“过多”的残留疾病。鉴于非ICM缺乏疗效,我们试图确定ICM对无事件生存期(EFS)的影响,EFS定义为死亡、疾病进展或计划外治疗升级。我们对2020年7月至2023年2月期间在我们中心采集自体PBSC并打算立即进行ASCT的新诊断MM患者进行了一项回顾性研究。如果患者接受了串联自体或序贯自体-异基因移植、患有原发性PC白血病、接受了非ICM治疗(即环磷酰胺和/或依托泊苷)或先前G±P动员失败,则将其排除。为了适当地评估ICM对那些可能接受ICM的患者的影响,我们采用了倾向评分匹配(PSM)方法,将ICM患者与一组在ASCT前因素上匹配的非CM患者进行比较,这些因素与接受ICM最密切相关。在451名确定的患者中,61名(13.5%)接受了ICM(基于PACE的,n = 45;基于HyperCVAD的,n = 16)。ICM后/ASCT前,11名患者(18%)因中性粒细胞减少性发热和/或感染需要住院。在51名可评估的患者中,总体缓解率为31%;然而,55名可评估患者中的46名(84%)的M峰和/或游离轻链减少。在通过纵向外周血流式细胞术评估的患者中(n = 8),5名患者(63%)在ICM后清除了循环血液中的PC。与非CM动员的患者相比,ICM患者采集的CD34细胞中位数略多(10.8对10.2×10⁶/kg,P = 0.018)。ASCT后的中位随访时间为30.6个月。在PSM多变量分析中,ICM与显著改善的EFS相关(风险比[HR] 0.30,95% CI 0.14至0.67,P = 0.003),但未改善总生存期(HR 0.38,95% CI 0.10至1.44,P = 0.2)。ICM与ASCT后住院时间延长(+4.1天,95% CI,2.4至5.8,P < 0.001)、发热天数增加(+0.96天,95% CI 0.50至1.4,P < 0.001)、血小板植入受损(HR 0.23,95% CI 0.06至0.87,P = 0.031)、更多菌血症(OR 3.41,95% CI 1.20至9.31,P = 0.018)以及抗生素使用增加(头孢吡肟:+2.3剂,95% CI 0.39至4.1,P = 0.018;万古霉素:+1.0剂,95% CI 0.23至1.8,P = 0.012)相关。在一项涉及ASCT前检查时疾病负担过重的MM患者的匹配分析中,ICM与改善的EFS独立相关。这种益处是以更长的住院时间、更多的发热天数、更高的菌血症发生率以及ASCT后立即增加的抗生素使用为代价的。我们的研究结果表明,对于一部分MM患者可以考虑使用ICM,但其使用必须仔细权衡额外的毒性。