Cargando…
Comparison of efficacy, safety, patients’ quality of life, and doctors’ occupational stress between lenalidomide‐based and bortezomib‐based induction in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma
BACKGROUND: In the new therapeutic era, comparisons between regimens containing lenalidomide and bortezomib are needed. METHODS: In this single‐center, prospective study, patients received four to six cycles of lenalidomide+liposomal doxorubicin+dexamethasone (RAD) or bortezomib+liposomal doxorubici...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7940229/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33527753 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cam4.3762 |
_version_ | 1783661908142850048 |
---|---|
author | Xu, Limei Liu, Junru Huang, Beihui Kuang, Lifen Gu, Jingli Chen, Meilan Zou, Waiyi Li, Juan |
author_facet | Xu, Limei Liu, Junru Huang, Beihui Kuang, Lifen Gu, Jingli Chen, Meilan Zou, Waiyi Li, Juan |
author_sort | Xu, Limei |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: In the new therapeutic era, comparisons between regimens containing lenalidomide and bortezomib are needed. METHODS: In this single‐center, prospective study, patients received four to six cycles of lenalidomide+liposomal doxorubicin+dexamethasone (RAD) or bortezomib+liposomal doxorubicin+dexamethasone (PAD) every 4 weeks, with subsequent autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) and maintenance therapy. We compared the efficacy, safety, patients’ quality of life, and doctors’ occupational stress between RAD and PAD induction in newly diagnosed MM patients. RESULTS: The complete response (CR) rate was comparable between the RAD and PAD groups after induction (30.8% vs. 32.0%, p = 0.92). Common adverse events, including infections, peripheral neuropathy, and gastrointestinal disturbances, were more frequent in the PAD group, while leukopenia and rashes were more common in the RAD group. Compared with PAD, RAD improved patients’ quality of life more quickly and caused less occupational stress for doctors. However, only 31.6% of patients collected adequate CD34+ cells (≥2 × 10(6)/kg) in the RAD group, which was significantly lower than that in the PAD group (95.5%, p < 0.001). The number of CD34+ cells collected was significantly higher in patients within three courses of RAD than in patients with four or five to six courses (14.18 ± 13.57 vs. 2.07 ± 2.42 vs. 1.51 ± 1.81 × 10(6)/kg, p = 0.028). The median progression‐free survival and overall survival of the two groups were not reached by the end of follow‐up. CONCLUSION: Compared to PAD, RAD induction had comparable efficacy and a significantly better safety profile, improved quality of life for patients, and reduced occupational stress for doctors. However, RAD induction may need to be limited to four cycles to avoid irreversible damage to hematopoietic stem cells. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study was registered at www.chictr.org.cn (ChiCTR1900021558). |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7940229 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | John Wiley and Sons Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-79402292021-03-16 Comparison of efficacy, safety, patients’ quality of life, and doctors’ occupational stress between lenalidomide‐based and bortezomib‐based induction in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma Xu, Limei Liu, Junru Huang, Beihui Kuang, Lifen Gu, Jingli Chen, Meilan Zou, Waiyi Li, Juan Cancer Med Clinical Cancer Research BACKGROUND: In the new therapeutic era, comparisons between regimens containing lenalidomide and bortezomib are needed. METHODS: In this single‐center, prospective study, patients received four to six cycles of lenalidomide+liposomal doxorubicin+dexamethasone (RAD) or bortezomib+liposomal doxorubicin+dexamethasone (PAD) every 4 weeks, with subsequent autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) and maintenance therapy. We compared the efficacy, safety, patients’ quality of life, and doctors’ occupational stress between RAD and PAD induction in newly diagnosed MM patients. RESULTS: The complete response (CR) rate was comparable between the RAD and PAD groups after induction (30.8% vs. 32.0%, p = 0.92). Common adverse events, including infections, peripheral neuropathy, and gastrointestinal disturbances, were more frequent in the PAD group, while leukopenia and rashes were more common in the RAD group. Compared with PAD, RAD improved patients’ quality of life more quickly and caused less occupational stress for doctors. However, only 31.6% of patients collected adequate CD34+ cells (≥2 × 10(6)/kg) in the RAD group, which was significantly lower than that in the PAD group (95.5%, p < 0.001). The number of CD34+ cells collected was significantly higher in patients within three courses of RAD than in patients with four or five to six courses (14.18 ± 13.57 vs. 2.07 ± 2.42 vs. 1.51 ± 1.81 × 10(6)/kg, p = 0.028). The median progression‐free survival and overall survival of the two groups were not reached by the end of follow‐up. CONCLUSION: Compared to PAD, RAD induction had comparable efficacy and a significantly better safety profile, improved quality of life for patients, and reduced occupational stress for doctors. However, RAD induction may need to be limited to four cycles to avoid irreversible damage to hematopoietic stem cells. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study was registered at www.chictr.org.cn (ChiCTR1900021558). John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2021-02-02 /pmc/articles/PMC7940229/ /pubmed/33527753 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cam4.3762 Text en © 2021 The Authors. Cancer Medicine published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Clinical Cancer Research Xu, Limei Liu, Junru Huang, Beihui Kuang, Lifen Gu, Jingli Chen, Meilan Zou, Waiyi Li, Juan Comparison of efficacy, safety, patients’ quality of life, and doctors’ occupational stress between lenalidomide‐based and bortezomib‐based induction in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma |
title | Comparison of efficacy, safety, patients’ quality of life, and doctors’ occupational stress between lenalidomide‐based and bortezomib‐based induction in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma |
title_full | Comparison of efficacy, safety, patients’ quality of life, and doctors’ occupational stress between lenalidomide‐based and bortezomib‐based induction in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma |
title_fullStr | Comparison of efficacy, safety, patients’ quality of life, and doctors’ occupational stress between lenalidomide‐based and bortezomib‐based induction in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of efficacy, safety, patients’ quality of life, and doctors’ occupational stress between lenalidomide‐based and bortezomib‐based induction in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma |
title_short | Comparison of efficacy, safety, patients’ quality of life, and doctors’ occupational stress between lenalidomide‐based and bortezomib‐based induction in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma |
title_sort | comparison of efficacy, safety, patients’ quality of life, and doctors’ occupational stress between lenalidomide‐based and bortezomib‐based induction in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma |
topic | Clinical Cancer Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7940229/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33527753 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cam4.3762 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT xulimei comparisonofefficacysafetypatientsqualityoflifeanddoctorsoccupationalstressbetweenlenalidomidebasedandbortezomibbasedinductioninpatientswithnewlydiagnosedmultiplemyeloma AT liujunru comparisonofefficacysafetypatientsqualityoflifeanddoctorsoccupationalstressbetweenlenalidomidebasedandbortezomibbasedinductioninpatientswithnewlydiagnosedmultiplemyeloma AT huangbeihui comparisonofefficacysafetypatientsqualityoflifeanddoctorsoccupationalstressbetweenlenalidomidebasedandbortezomibbasedinductioninpatientswithnewlydiagnosedmultiplemyeloma AT kuanglifen comparisonofefficacysafetypatientsqualityoflifeanddoctorsoccupationalstressbetweenlenalidomidebasedandbortezomibbasedinductioninpatientswithnewlydiagnosedmultiplemyeloma AT gujingli comparisonofefficacysafetypatientsqualityoflifeanddoctorsoccupationalstressbetweenlenalidomidebasedandbortezomibbasedinductioninpatientswithnewlydiagnosedmultiplemyeloma AT chenmeilan comparisonofefficacysafetypatientsqualityoflifeanddoctorsoccupationalstressbetweenlenalidomidebasedandbortezomibbasedinductioninpatientswithnewlydiagnosedmultiplemyeloma AT zouwaiyi comparisonofefficacysafetypatientsqualityoflifeanddoctorsoccupationalstressbetweenlenalidomidebasedandbortezomibbasedinductioninpatientswithnewlydiagnosedmultiplemyeloma AT lijuan comparisonofefficacysafetypatientsqualityoflifeanddoctorsoccupationalstressbetweenlenalidomidebasedandbortezomibbasedinductioninpatientswithnewlydiagnosedmultiplemyeloma |