High-dose cyclophosphamide with or without etoposide for mobilization of peripheral blood progenitor cells in patients with multiple myeloma: efficacy and toxicity

被引:0
作者
I Gojo
C Guo
C Sarkodee-Adoo
B Meisenberg
A Fassas
A P Rapoport
M Cottler-Fox
M Heyman
N Takebe
G Tricot
机构
[1] Greenebaum Cancer Center,
[2] University of Maryland School of Medicine,undefined
[3] City of Hope Samaritan BMT Program,undefined
[4] University of Arkansas Myeloma Research Center,undefined
来源
Bone Marrow Transplantation | 2004年 / 34卷
关键词
mobilization; multiple myeloma; peripheral blood stem cells;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
The purpose of the study was to examine the yield of CD34+ cells, response rates, and toxicity of high-dose cyclophosphamide with or without etoposide in patients with multiple myeloma. In total, 77 myeloma patients received either cyclophosphamide 4.5 g/m2 (n=28) alone or with etoposide 2 g/m2 (n=49) in a nonrandomized manner, followed by G-CSF 10 μg/kg/day for the purpose of stem cell mobilization. The effects of various factors on CD34+ cell yield, response rate and engraftment were explored. A median of 22.39 × 106 CD34+ cells/kg were collected on the first day of leukapheresis (range 0.59–114.71 × 106/kg) in 71 (92%) of patients. Greater marrow plasma cell infiltration (P=0.02) or prior radiation therapy (P=0.02) adversely affected CD34+ cell yield. In total, 45% of patients receiving cyclophosphamide and 56% of those receiving cyclophosphamide/etoposide had at least a minimum response by EBMT criteria. In all, 25% of patients who received cyclophosphamide alone vs 75.5% of patients who received combined chemotherapy required hospitalization mainly for treatment of neutropenic fever. Cyclophosphamide alone is associated with impressive CD34+ cell yields and clear antimyeloma activity. The addition of etoposide resulted in increased toxicity without significant improvement in CD34+ cell yield or response rates.
引用
收藏
页码:69 / 76
页数:7
相关论文
共 51 条
[1]  
Attal M(1996)A prospective, randomized trial of autologous bone marrow transplantation and chemotherapy in multiple myeloma. Intergroupe Francais du Myelome N Engl J Med 335 91-97
[2]  
Harousseau JL(2001)Randomized trial experience of the Intergroupe Francophone du Myelome Semin Hematol 38 226-230
[3]  
Stoppa AM(1999)Total therapy with tandem transplants for newly diagnosed multiple myeloma Blood 93 55-65
[4]  
Attal M(2002)Negative selection of peripheral blood stem cells to support a tandem autologous transplantation programme in multiple myeloma Br J Haematol 116 202-210
[5]  
Harousseau JL(2000)Selection and use of chemotherapy with hematopoietic growth factors for mobilization of peripheral blood progenitor cells Curr Opin Hematol 7 191-196
[6]  
Barlogie B(1998)Criteria for evaluating disease response and progression in patients with multiple myeloma treated by high-dose therapy and haemopoietic stem cell transplantation. Myeloma Subcommittee of the EBMT. European Group for Blood and Marrow Transplant Br J Haematol 102 1115-1123
[7]  
Jagannath S(1998)High-dose therapy and autologous peripheral blood stem cell transplantation in multiple myeloma: up-front or rescue treatment? Results of a multicenter sequential randomized clinical trial Blood 92 3131-3136
[8]  
Desikan KR(1996)Randomised trial of filgrastim-mobilised peripheral blood progenitor cell transplantation versus autologous bone-marrow transplantation in lymphoma patients Lancet 347 353-357
[9]  
Barbui AM(2001)Randomized trial of filgrastim versus chemotherapy and filgrastim mobilization of hematopoietic progenitor cells for rescue in autologous transplantation Blood 98 2059-2064
[10]  
Galli M(1998)A combination of low-dose cyclophosphamide and colony-stimulating factors is more cost-effective than granulocyte-colony-stimulating factors alone in mobilizing peripheral blood stem and progenitor cells Transfusion 38 209-215