Cargando…
Prospective Comparative Study of Etoposide plus G-CSF versus G-CSF Alone, Followed by Risk-Adapted Plerixafor for Peripheral Blood Stem Cell Mobilization in Patients with Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma: CAtholic REsearch Network for Multiple Myeloma Study (CAREMM-2001)
SIMPLE SUMMARY: We conducted a prospective trial comparing single-dose etoposide (375 mg/m(2) for one day) plus G-CSF versus G-CSF alone, followed by risk-adapted plerixafor in myeloma patients. Despite significantly less frequent (p = 0.045) use of plerixafor in the etoposide group, the optimal col...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
MDPI
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10572075/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37835477 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/cancers15194783 |
_version_ | 1785120150860595200 |
---|---|
author | Park, Sung-Soo Shin, Seung-Hwan Lee, Jung-Yeon Jeon, Young-Woo Yhang, Seung-Ah Min, Chang-Ki |
author_facet | Park, Sung-Soo Shin, Seung-Hwan Lee, Jung-Yeon Jeon, Young-Woo Yhang, Seung-Ah Min, Chang-Ki |
author_sort | Park, Sung-Soo |
collection | PubMed |
description | SIMPLE SUMMARY: We conducted a prospective trial comparing single-dose etoposide (375 mg/m(2) for one day) plus G-CSF versus G-CSF alone, followed by risk-adapted plerixafor in myeloma patients. Despite significantly less frequent (p = 0.045) use of plerixafor in the etoposide group, the optimal collection rates (CD34+ cells ≥ 6 × 10(6)/kg) were not significantly different between the two groups (p = 0.195). In addition, the rate of collected CD34+ cells of ≥ 8.0 × 10(6)/kg was significantly higher in the etoposide group. Our results suggest that single-dose etoposide plus G-CSF may be a better option for patients who are expected to receive two or more transplantations. ABSTRACT: To explore the optimal mobilization for multiple myeloma (MM) patients, we conducted a prospective trial comparing single-dose etoposide (375 mg/m(2) for one day) plus G-CSF versus G-CSF alone, followed by risk-adapted plerixafor. After randomization, 27 patients in the etoposide group and 29 patients in the G-CSF alone group received mobilizations. Six (22.2%) patients in the etoposide group and 15 (51.7%) patients in the G-CSF alone group received plerixafor based on a peripheral blood CD34+ cell count of < 15/mm(3) (p = 0.045). The median count of CD34+ cells collected was significantly higher in the etoposide group (9.5 × 10(6)/kg vs. 7.9 × 10(6)/kg; p = 0.018), but the optimal collection rate (CD34+ cells ≥ 6 × 10(6)/kg) was not significantly different between the two groups (96.3% vs. 82.8%; p = 0.195). The rate of CD34+ cells collected of ≥ 8.0 × 10(6)/kg was significantly higher in the etoposide group (77.8% vs. 44.8%; p = 0.025). Although the rates of grade II–IV thrombocytopenia (63.0% vs. 31.0%; p = 0.031) and grade I–IV nausea (14.8% vs. 0%; p = 0.048) were significantly higher in the etoposide group, the rates of adverse events were low in both groups, with no neutropenic fever or septic shock. Thus, both single-dose etoposide plus G-CSF and G-CSF alone with risk-adapted plerixafor were effective and safe, but the former may be the better option for patients who are expected to receive two or more transplantations. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10572075 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | MDPI |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-105720752023-10-14 Prospective Comparative Study of Etoposide plus G-CSF versus G-CSF Alone, Followed by Risk-Adapted Plerixafor for Peripheral Blood Stem Cell Mobilization in Patients with Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma: CAtholic REsearch Network for Multiple Myeloma Study (CAREMM-2001) Park, Sung-Soo Shin, Seung-Hwan Lee, Jung-Yeon Jeon, Young-Woo Yhang, Seung-Ah Min, Chang-Ki Cancers (Basel) Article SIMPLE SUMMARY: We conducted a prospective trial comparing single-dose etoposide (375 mg/m(2) for one day) plus G-CSF versus G-CSF alone, followed by risk-adapted plerixafor in myeloma patients. Despite significantly less frequent (p = 0.045) use of plerixafor in the etoposide group, the optimal collection rates (CD34+ cells ≥ 6 × 10(6)/kg) were not significantly different between the two groups (p = 0.195). In addition, the rate of collected CD34+ cells of ≥ 8.0 × 10(6)/kg was significantly higher in the etoposide group. Our results suggest that single-dose etoposide plus G-CSF may be a better option for patients who are expected to receive two or more transplantations. ABSTRACT: To explore the optimal mobilization for multiple myeloma (MM) patients, we conducted a prospective trial comparing single-dose etoposide (375 mg/m(2) for one day) plus G-CSF versus G-CSF alone, followed by risk-adapted plerixafor. After randomization, 27 patients in the etoposide group and 29 patients in the G-CSF alone group received mobilizations. Six (22.2%) patients in the etoposide group and 15 (51.7%) patients in the G-CSF alone group received plerixafor based on a peripheral blood CD34+ cell count of < 15/mm(3) (p = 0.045). The median count of CD34+ cells collected was significantly higher in the etoposide group (9.5 × 10(6)/kg vs. 7.9 × 10(6)/kg; p = 0.018), but the optimal collection rate (CD34+ cells ≥ 6 × 10(6)/kg) was not significantly different between the two groups (96.3% vs. 82.8%; p = 0.195). The rate of CD34+ cells collected of ≥ 8.0 × 10(6)/kg was significantly higher in the etoposide group (77.8% vs. 44.8%; p = 0.025). Although the rates of grade II–IV thrombocytopenia (63.0% vs. 31.0%; p = 0.031) and grade I–IV nausea (14.8% vs. 0%; p = 0.048) were significantly higher in the etoposide group, the rates of adverse events were low in both groups, with no neutropenic fever or septic shock. Thus, both single-dose etoposide plus G-CSF and G-CSF alone with risk-adapted plerixafor were effective and safe, but the former may be the better option for patients who are expected to receive two or more transplantations. MDPI 2023-09-28 /pmc/articles/PMC10572075/ /pubmed/37835477 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/cancers15194783 Text en © 2023 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Article Park, Sung-Soo Shin, Seung-Hwan Lee, Jung-Yeon Jeon, Young-Woo Yhang, Seung-Ah Min, Chang-Ki Prospective Comparative Study of Etoposide plus G-CSF versus G-CSF Alone, Followed by Risk-Adapted Plerixafor for Peripheral Blood Stem Cell Mobilization in Patients with Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma: CAtholic REsearch Network for Multiple Myeloma Study (CAREMM-2001) |
title | Prospective Comparative Study of Etoposide plus G-CSF versus G-CSF Alone, Followed by Risk-Adapted Plerixafor for Peripheral Blood Stem Cell Mobilization in Patients with Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma: CAtholic REsearch Network for Multiple Myeloma Study (CAREMM-2001) |
title_full | Prospective Comparative Study of Etoposide plus G-CSF versus G-CSF Alone, Followed by Risk-Adapted Plerixafor for Peripheral Blood Stem Cell Mobilization in Patients with Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma: CAtholic REsearch Network for Multiple Myeloma Study (CAREMM-2001) |
title_fullStr | Prospective Comparative Study of Etoposide plus G-CSF versus G-CSF Alone, Followed by Risk-Adapted Plerixafor for Peripheral Blood Stem Cell Mobilization in Patients with Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma: CAtholic REsearch Network for Multiple Myeloma Study (CAREMM-2001) |
title_full_unstemmed | Prospective Comparative Study of Etoposide plus G-CSF versus G-CSF Alone, Followed by Risk-Adapted Plerixafor for Peripheral Blood Stem Cell Mobilization in Patients with Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma: CAtholic REsearch Network for Multiple Myeloma Study (CAREMM-2001) |
title_short | Prospective Comparative Study of Etoposide plus G-CSF versus G-CSF Alone, Followed by Risk-Adapted Plerixafor for Peripheral Blood Stem Cell Mobilization in Patients with Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma: CAtholic REsearch Network for Multiple Myeloma Study (CAREMM-2001) |
title_sort | prospective comparative study of etoposide plus g-csf versus g-csf alone, followed by risk-adapted plerixafor for peripheral blood stem cell mobilization in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma: catholic research network for multiple myeloma study (caremm-2001) |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10572075/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37835477 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/cancers15194783 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT parksungsoo prospectivecomparativestudyofetoposideplusgcsfversusgcsfalonefollowedbyriskadaptedplerixaforforperipheralbloodstemcellmobilizationinpatientswithnewlydiagnosedmultiplemyelomacatholicresearchnetworkformultiplemyelomastudycaremm2001 AT shinseunghwan prospectivecomparativestudyofetoposideplusgcsfversusgcsfalonefollowedbyriskadaptedplerixaforforperipheralbloodstemcellmobilizationinpatientswithnewlydiagnosedmultiplemyelomacatholicresearchnetworkformultiplemyelomastudycaremm2001 AT leejungyeon prospectivecomparativestudyofetoposideplusgcsfversusgcsfalonefollowedbyriskadaptedplerixaforforperipheralbloodstemcellmobilizationinpatientswithnewlydiagnosedmultiplemyelomacatholicresearchnetworkformultiplemyelomastudycaremm2001 AT jeonyoungwoo prospectivecomparativestudyofetoposideplusgcsfversusgcsfalonefollowedbyriskadaptedplerixaforforperipheralbloodstemcellmobilizationinpatientswithnewlydiagnosedmultiplemyelomacatholicresearchnetworkformultiplemyelomastudycaremm2001 AT yhangseungah prospectivecomparativestudyofetoposideplusgcsfversusgcsfalonefollowedbyriskadaptedplerixaforforperipheralbloodstemcellmobilizationinpatientswithnewlydiagnosedmultiplemyelomacatholicresearchnetworkformultiplemyelomastudycaremm2001 AT minchangki prospectivecomparativestudyofetoposideplusgcsfversusgcsfalonefollowedbyriskadaptedplerixaforforperipheralbloodstemcellmobilizationinpatientswithnewlydiagnosedmultiplemyelomacatholicresearchnetworkformultiplemyelomastudycaremm2001 |