Feasibility of Second Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation Using Reduced-Intensity Conditioning with Fludarabine and Melphalan after a Failed Autologous Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation

Allogeneic stem-cell transplantation for multiple myeloma: a systematic review and meta-analysis from 2007 to 2017

Background

Despite recent advances, multiple myeloma (MM) remains incurable. However, the appearance of allogeneic stem cell transplantation (allo-SCT) through graft-versus-myeloma effect provides a potential way to cure MM to some degree. This systematic review aimed to evaluate the outcome of patients receiving allo-SCT and identified a series of prognostic factors that may affect the outcome of allo-SCT.

Patients/methods

We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library from 2007.01.01 to 2017.05.03 using the keywords ‘allogeneic’ and ‘myeloma’.

Results

A total of 61 clinical trials involving 8698 adult patients were included. The pooled estimates (95% CI) for overall survival (OS) at 1, 2, 3 and 5 years were 70 (95% CI 56–84%), 62 (95% CI 53–71%), 52 (95% CI 44–61%), and 46 (95% CI 40–52%), respectively; for progression-free survival were 51 (95% CI 38–64%), 40 (95% CI 32–48%), 34 (95% CI 27–41%), and 27 (95% CI 23–31%), respectively; and for treatment-related mortality (TRM) were 18 (95% CI 14–21%), 21 (95% CI 17–25%), 20 (95% CI 13–26%), and 27 (95% CI 21–33%), respectively. Additionally, the pooled 100-day TRM was 12 (95% CI 5–18%). The incidences of grades II–IV acute graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) and chronic GVHD were 34 (95% CI 30–37%) and 51 (95% CI 46–56%), respectively. The incidences of relapse rate (RR) and death rate were 50 (95% CI 45–55%) and 51 (95% CI 45–57%), respectively. Importantly, disease progression was the most major cause of death (48%), followed by TRM (44%). The results failed to show an apparent benefit of allo-SCT for standard risk patients, compared with tandem auto-SCT. In contrast, all 14 trials in our study showed that patients with high cytogenetic risk after allo-SCT had similar OS and PFS compared to those with standard risk, suggesting that allo-SCT may overcome the adverse prognosis of high cytogenetic risk.

Conclusion

Due to the lack of consistent survival benefit, allo-SCT should not be considered as a standard of care for newly diagnosed and relapsed standard-risk MM patients. However, for patients with high-risk MM who have a poor long-term prognosis, allo-SCT may be a strong consideration in their initial course of therapy or in first relapse after chemotherapy, when the risk of disease progression may outweigh the transplant-related risks. A large number of prospective randomized controlled trials were needed to prove the benefits of these therapeutic options.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12935-018-0553-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Salvage bortezomib-dexamethasone and high-dose melphalan (HDM) and autologous stem cell support (ASCT) in myeloma patients at first relapse after HDM with ASCT. A phase-2 trial

Until recently, only retrospective studies had been published on salvage high-dose melphalan (HDM) with autologous stem cell ‘transplantation' (ASCT). In a prospective, nonrandomized phase-2 study, we treated 53 bortezomib-naïve patients with bortezomib–dexamethasone as induction and bortezomib included in the conditioning regimen along with the HDM. Median progression-free survival (PFS), time to next treatment (TNT) and overall survival (OS) after start of reinduction therapy were 21.6, 22.8 and 46.6 months, respectively. For 49 patients who completed salvage bortezomib–HDM(II) with ASCT, there was no significant difference of PFS and TNT after HDM (II) compared with after the initial HDM(I), and thus patients were their own controls (PFS (I: 20.1 vs II: 19.3 months (P=0.8)) or TNT (I: 24.4 vs II: 20.7 months (P=0.8)). No significant differences in the response rates after salvage ASCT compared with the initial ASCT. Bortezomib–HDM conditioning combo was feasible, and toxicity was as expected for patients treated with bortezomib and ASCT. In conclusion, in bortezomib-naïve patients treated at first relapse with salvage ASCT including bortezomib, PSF and TNT did not differ significantly from initial ASCT and median OS was almost 5.5 years with acceptable toxicity. A recent prospective randomized study confirms salvage ASCT to be an effective treatment.

Second autologous stem cell transplantation as salvage therapy for multiple myeloma: impact on progression-free and overall survival

The role of a second autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) as salvage therapy is unclear, particularly with the availability of novel agents to treat progressive multiple myeloma (MM). We retrospectively reviewed all MM patients who received a second ASCT as salvage therapy at our center from March 1992 to December 2009. Eighty-one MM patients received a second ASCT for relapsed MM. The median time to relapse after first transplant was 39 months (9.83-100). All patients received reinduction therapy before the second ASCT. The high-dose regimen given before the second ASCT consisted of melphalan (MEL) alone in the majority. Complete response, very good partial response, and partial response were seen in 7.7%, 39.7%, and 50%, respectively, at day 100 post-ASCT; the median time to relapse after the second ASCT was 19 months. Early deaths occurred in 2.6%. Median progression-free survival (PFS) based on the time to myeloma relapse after first ASCT was 9.83 months (relapse ≤ 24 months) and 17.3 months (relapse ≥ 24 months) (P < .05). Median overall survival (OS) was 28.47 months (relapse ≤ 24 months) and 71.3 months (relapse >24 months) (P = .006). Second ASCT is a feasible and safe option for salvage therapy in MM. The best outcome was observed in patients whose time to progression was >24 months after first ASCT, as these patients had a subsequent PFS lasting over 1 year and an OS of almost 6 years.