Ludwig H, Cohen A M, Polliack A, Huber H, Nachbaur D, Senn H J, Morant R, Eckhardt S, Günczler P, Seewann H L
1st Department of Medicine and Oncology, Wilhelminenspital, Vienna, Austria.
Ann Oncol. 1995 May;6(5):467-76. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.annonc.a059217.
Interferon (IFN) treatment trials in multiple myeloma have yielded discordant results regarding response rates, maintenance duration, and survival times. Further randomized trials and global evaluations of available data are urgently needed for clarification.
256 patients participated in a randomized trial, 125 on IFN + VMCP, and 131 on VMCP alone. 100 patients were randomized to IFN maintenance (n = 46) or were untreated controls (n = 54). Global evaluations are based on 1,518 patients in induction and 924 in maintenance trials.
The induction trial demonstrated a significantly (p < 0.05) lower rate of progressive disease under IFN + VMCP (10.6%) than under VMCP (22.9%), but this benefit was limited to stage I or II patients. Median progression-free survival was longer in the IFN + VMCP arm (23.2 months vs. 15.8 months); median overall survival did not differ significantly (38.9 vs. 30.2 months). The IFN maintenance treatment trial showed significantly superior results in the IFN arm versus controls (median maintenance duration: 17.8 months and 8.2 months (p < 0.01), survival: 50.6 and 34.4 months (p < 0.05), respectively). Previous IFN treatment increased the benefits of IFN maintenance therapy. Adverse effects of IFN during induction were hematologic toxicity, fever, and infections, requiring dose reductions. Toxic effects of IFN maintenance treatment were mild. Global evaluations of randomized trials showed small but significant benefits of combined IFN induction therapy and significantly prolonged maintenance duration and survival under IFN maintenance.
Presently available data support the use of IFN maintenance treatment because it significantly prolongs maintenance duration and survival. IFN added to induction chemotherapy resulted in minor improvements at the expense of increased toxicity, highlighting the need for better induction regimens.
在多发性骨髓瘤的干扰素(IFN)治疗试验中,关于缓解率、维持时间和生存时间的结果不一致。迫切需要进一步的随机试验和对现有数据的全面评估以进行澄清。
256名患者参与了一项随机试验,125名接受IFN + VMCP治疗,131名仅接受VMCP治疗。100名患者被随机分为IFN维持治疗组(n = 46)或未治疗对照组(n = 54)。全面评估基于1518名诱导期患者和924名维持期试验患者。
诱导试验表明,IFN + VMCP组(10.6%)的疾病进展率显著低于VMCP组(22.9%)(p < 0.05),但这种益处仅限于I期或II期患者。IFN + VMCP组的无进展生存期更长(23.2个月对15.8个月);总生存期无显著差异(38.9个月对30.2个月)。IFN维持治疗试验显示,IFN组的结果明显优于对照组(中位维持时间:17.8个月对8.2个月(p < 0.01),生存期:50.6个月对34.4个月(p < 0.05))。既往IFN治疗增加了IFN维持治疗的益处。诱导期IFN的不良反应为血液学毒性、发热和感染,需要减少剂量。IFN维持治疗的毒性作用较轻。随机试验的全面评估表明,联合IFN诱导治疗有小但显著的益处,且IFN维持治疗下的维持时间和生存期显著延长。
现有数据支持使用IFN维持治疗,因为它能显著延长维持时间和生存期。诱导化疗中添加IFN虽有微小改善,但以增加毒性为代价,凸显了需要更好的诱导方案。