Search

Objectives: The aim of this study was to compare the effect of the intensity of conditioning approaches used in allogeneic transplantation in myeloma-reduced intensity conditioning (RIC), non-myeloablative (NMA), myeloablative conditioning (MAC) or Auto-AlloHCT-on outcomes in patients who had had a prior autologous transplant., Methods: A retrospective analysis of the EBMT database (1991-2012) was performed., Results: A total of 344 patients aged between 40 and 60 years at the time of alloHCT were identified: 169 RIC, 69 NMA, 65 MAC and 41 Auto-Allo transplants. At a median follow-up of 54 months, the probabilities of overall survival (OS) at 5 years were 39% (95% CI 31%-47%), 45% (95% CI 32%-57%), 19% (95% CI 6%-32%) and 34% (95% CI 17%-51%), respectively. Status at allogeneic HCT other than CR or PR conferred a 70% higher risk of death and a 40% higher risk of relapse. OS was markedly lower in the MAC group (P = .004). MAC alloHCT was associated with a higher risk of death than RIC alloHCT until 2002 (HR = 4.1, P < .001) but not after 2002 (HR = 1.2, P = .276)., Conclusion: From 1991 to 2002, MAC was associated with poorer OS. Between 2003 and 2012, there were no significant differences in outcomes based on these different approaches., (© 2019 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Plerixafor plus granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) enhances the mobilization of hematopoietic stem cells (HSCs) for collection and subsequent autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) in patients with multiple myeloma (MM). This international, multicenter, noninterventional registry study (NCT01362972), evaluated long-term outcomes for MM patients who received plerixafor versus other mobilization regimens. The comparisons were: G-CSF + plerixafor (G-CSF + P) versus G-CSF-; G-CSF + P versus G-CSF + chemotherapy (G-CSF + C); and G-CSF + P + C versus G-CSF + C. Propensity score matching was used to balance groups. Primary outcome measures were progression free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and cumulative incidence of relapse (CIR) after transplantation. After propensity matching, 77 versus 41 patients in the G-CSF + P versus G-CSF cohorts, 129 versus 129 in the G-CSF + P versus G-CSF + C cohorts, and 117 versus 117 in the G-CSF + P + C versus G-CSF + C cohorts were matched, respectively. Propensity score matching resulted in a smaller sample size and imbalances were not completely overcome. For both PFS and OS, the upper limits of the hazard ratio 95% confidence intervals exceeded prespecified boundaries; noninferiority was not demonstrated. CIR rates were higher in the plerixafor cohorts. G-CSF + P remains an option for the mobilization of HSCs in poor mobilizers with MM with no substantial differences in PFS, OS, and CIR in comparison with other regimens.

We investigated extramedullary disease in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma patients and its impact on outcome following first-line autologous stem cell transplantation. We identified 3744 adult myeloma patients who received up-front single (n=3391) or tandem transplantation (n=353) between 2005 and 2014 with available data on extramedullary involvement at diagnosis. The overall incidence of extramedullary disease was 18.2% (n=682) and increased per year from 6.5% (2005) to 23.7% (2014). Paraskeletal involvement was found in 543 (14.5%) and extramedullary organ involvement in 139 (3.7%). More patients with extramedullary organ involvement had multiple involved sites (≥2; P <0.001). In a comparison of patients with single sites with patients without the disease, up-front transplantation resulted in at least similar 3-year progression-free survival (paraskeletal: P =0.86, and extramedullary organ: P =0.88). In single paraskeletal involvement, this translated less clearly into worse 3-year overall survival ( P =0.07) while single organ involvement was significantly worse ( P =0.001). Multiple organ sites were associated with worse outcome ( P <0.001 and P =0.01). First-line treatment with tandem compared with single transplantation resulted in similar survival in patients with extramedullary disease at diagnosis ( P =0.13 for both)., (Copyright © 2018 Ferrata Storti Foundation.)

The understanding and treatment of multiple myeloma (MM) have dramatically improved in recent years. However, accurate assessment of the response of myeloma to therapy and its subsequent relapse remains a difficult task. Criteria have changed over time and new parameters have recently been incorporated to evaluate minimal residual disease status. We present a practical approach to assess response and relapse/progression in myeloma in the context of its treatment. A robust reporting schema is crucial to correctly evaluate any treatment protocol and compare results across trials. MM is a highly heterogeneous disease with multifarious manifestations. To assess the tumor load decline after treatment and its increase during relapse/progression, numerous parameters need to be taken into account. As our ability and the tools to measure low levels of disease have improved over time, so have the accepted definitions of response, most recently in August 2016. The goal of this article is to define, describe, and clarify the practical methodological aspects of disease evaluation in response to therapy and in progression or relapse. We expect this practical manual will help myeloma professionals and research workers in data collection for registries and databases and clinical trial reporting., (Copyright © 2017 The American Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

We have recently reported on the outcome of autologous transplantation in the rare myelomas (IgD, IgE, IgM, and nonsecretory [NS]) but there is no real information on the outcome of these conditions after allogeneic transplantation. We used the European Group for Blood and Marrow Transplantation myeloma database to compare the outcomes after allogeneic transplantation of 1354 common myelomas (IgG, IgA, and light chain myeloma) with the outcome in 26 IgD myelomas and 52 NS myelomas. There was little difference between common and the IgD and NS myeloma patients with respect to prognostic factors although the IgD group had a higher beta 2 microglobulin at diagnosis, shorter time to transplantation, and more T cell depletion. IgD and NS patients had a significantly greater achievement of complete remission at conditioning but this did not translate into equivalent progression-free survival and overall survival for the IgD patients although the NS outcome was very similar to that of common myeloma. The PFS and OS of IgD, common, and NS myelomas appear similar after allogeneic transplantation, despite a tendency for higher early relapse rate in IgD myeloma. Allogeneic transplantation may, therefore, be an option to investigate in prospective observational studies., (Copyright © 2015 American Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Long-term follow-up of prospective studies comparing allogeneic transplantation to autologous transplantation in multiple myeloma is few and controversial. This is an update at a median follow-up of 96 months of the European Group for Blood and Marrow Transplantation Non-Myeloablative Allogeneic stem cell transplantation in Multiple Myeloma (NMAM)2000 study that prospectively compares tandem autologous/reduced intensity conditioning allogeneic transplantation (auto/RICallo) to autologous transplantation alone (auto). There are 357 myeloma patients up to age 69 years enrolled. Patients with an HLA-identical sibling were allocated to auto/RICallo (n = 108) and those without to auto alone (n = 249). At 96 months progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were 22% and 49% vs 12% (P = .027) and 36% (P = .030) with auto/RICallo and auto respectively. The corresponding relapse/progression rate (RL) was 60% vs 82% (P = .0002). Non-relapse mortality at 36 months was 13% vs 3% (P = .0004). In patients with the del(13) abnormality corresponding PFS and OS were 21% and 47% vs 5% (P = .026), and 31% (P = .154). Long-term outcome in patients with multiple myeloma was better with auto/RICallo as compared with auto only and the auto/RICallo approach seemed to overcome the poor prognostic impact of del(13) observed after autologous transplantation. Follow up longer than 5 years is necessary for correct interpretation of the value of auto/RICallo in multiple myeloma.

Background: As rare myelomas, i.e. the IgD, IgE, IgM and non-secretory forms, constitute only a small proportion of any study, relatively little is known about their prognosis in the era of peripheral stem cell transplantation., Design and Methods: We used the European Group for Blood and Marrow Transplantation Myeloma Database to compare the outcome following autologous transplantation of over 20,000 patients with common myelomas (IgG, IgA and light chain myeloma) with the outcome of patients with rare myelomas: 379 IgD, 13 IgE, 72 IgM and 976 non-secretory cases., Results: The study confirms the multiple adverse prognostic factors seen in IgD myeloma. Somewhat surprisingly, patients with IgD and non-secretory myeloma both had higher complete remission rates before and after transplantation than patients with common myelomas. However, while the overall survival of patients with non-secretory myeloma was similar to that of the patients with common myelomas, the survival of patients with IgD myeloma was significantly worse (although better than survival rates reported for non-transplanted patients); this was due to higher transplant-related mortality and relapse/progression rates. The post-transplantation survival of patients with IgE or IgM myeloma appears to be very poor., Conclusions: This study provides data on the biological features of rare myelomas. The overall survival of patients with IgD, IgE or IgM myeloma is poor following autologous transplantation but substantially better than that reported for patients who were not transplanted.