Tandem autologous non-myeloablative allogeneic transplantation in patients with multiple myeloma relapsing after a first high dose therapy

The unequal housing and neighborhood outcomes of displaced movers

Involuntary housing displacement is a stress-inducing life event that can cause and exacerbate both psychological and material hardship. Forced moves may invoke a disattainment process, whereby displaced movers move into lower quality housing and neighborhoods, placing them in a precarious housing position. Employing propensity score analyses, this study uses data from the recent mover module of the American Housing Survey to match recent movers whose moves were voluntary to recent movers whose moves were forced. Results show that moves caused by displacement compared to voluntary moves generally lead to worse housing and neighborhood outcomes. However, these results are dependent on the type of displacement experienced. Movers forced to leave their homes due to eviction move into worse housing and neighborhoods while forced moves caused by private action and foreclosure do not. Meanwhile, forced moves caused by natural hazards or government action result in worse housing, but not neighborhoods.

Allogeneic Transplantation in Multiple Myeloma-Does It Still Have a Place?

Novel drugs have improved survival for patients with multiple myeloma in recent years. However, the disease is still fatal. Allogeneic stem cell transplantation (Allo) has proven to cure some patients with the disease, but its role is controversial due to relatively high transplant-related toxicity and mortality (nonrelapse mortality, NRM). Using nonmyeloablative reduced-intensity conditioning (RIC), both toxicity and NRM can be reduced, and RICAllo is, therefore, an option for subgroups of patients. Upfront tandem autologous/RICAllo (Auto/RICAllo) was shown to be superior to single Auto or tandem Auto/Auto in both progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in two prospective studies with long-term follow-up, while three similarly designed studies did not detect a difference. A recent update of pooled patient data from four of these studies showed significantly superior PFS and OS with Auto/RICAllo. Importantly, none of these studies showed inferior results with Auto/RICAllo in patients less than 70 years of age. Auto/RICAllo appears to overcome some poor risk cytogenetic markers. Encouraging results have also been seen in treatment of relapsed patients. Combining Allo with new proteasome inhibitors and immunomodulatory drugs may further improve results. Other encouraging new cell therapies such as with CAR T-cells, NK- and CAR NK-cells may well have a place in combination with RICAllo. Such studies are warranted.

Allogeneic Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation for Myeloma: Time for an Obituary or Not Just Yet!

The management of myeloma has evolved dramatically in the last two decades. High dose melphalan and autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) marked the beginning of this journey. This was followed by an explosion of novel agents which were approved for management of myeloma. Allogeneic HSCT which was deemed as the only curative option was largely abhorred due to high transplant-related mortality (TRM) until the advent of reduced intensity conditioning (RIC). An approach of tandem autologous and RIC-allogeneic transplantations has showed the best promise for cure for this condition, particularly for those with high-risk cytogenetics. Yet, allogeneic HSCT seems to have fallen out of favor due to the projected high TRM and late relapses, even though the alternatives do not offer a cure, but merely prolong survival. Offering an allogeneic HSCT as a final resort in unlikely to yield gratifying results. At the same time, allogeneic HSCT needs to evolve in a disease-specific manner to address the relevant concerns regarding TRM and relapse. With the introduction of effective GVHD prophylaxis in the form of post-transplantation cyclophosphamide, transplantation from a haploidentical family donor has become a reality. The challenge lies in segregating graft-vs-myeloma effect from a graft-versus-host effect. We discuss the pro-survival and anti-apoptotic pathways via CD28-CD86 interactions which confer survival advantages to myeloma cells and the possibility of disruption of this pathway in the context of haploidentical transplantation through the use of CTLA4Ig without incurring T cell alloreactivity.

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.

From transplant to novel cellular therapies in multiple myeloma: European Myeloma Network guidelines and future perspectives

Survival of myeloma patients has greatly improved with the use of autologous stem cell transplantation and novel agents, such as proteasome inhibitors, immunomodulatory drugs and monoclonal antibodies. Compared to bortezomib- and lenalidomide-based regimens alone, the addition of high-dose melphalan followed by autologous transplantation significantly improves progression-free survival, although an overall survival benefit was not observed in all trials. Moreover, follow up of recent trials is still too short to show any difference in survival. In the light of these findings, novel agent-based induction followed by autologous transplantation is considered the standard upfront treatment for eligible patients (level of evidence: 1A). Post-transplant consolidation and maintenance treatment can further improve patient outcome (1A). The availability of several novel agents has led to the development of multiple combination regimens such as salvage treatment options. In this context, the role of salvage autologous transplantation and allotransplant has not been extensively evaluated. In the case of prolonged remission after upfront autologous transplantation, another autologous transplantation at relapse can be considered (2B). Patients who experience early relapse and/or have high-risk features have a poor prognosis and may be considered as candidates for clinical trials that, in young and fit patients, may also include an allograft in combination with novel agents (2B). Ongoing studies are evaluating the role of novel cellular therapies, such as inclusion of antibody-based triplets and quadruplets, and chimeric antigen receptor-T cells. Despite encouraging preliminary results, longer follow up and larger patient numbers are needed before the clinical use of these novel therapies can be widely recommended.

In search of the optimal platform for Post-Allogeneic SCT immunotherapy in relapsed multiple myeloma: a systematic review

Allogeneic stem cell transplantation (allo-SCT) has the potential to induce sustained remissions in patients with multiple myeloma (MM). Currently, allo-SCT is primarily performed in high-risk MM patients, most often in the setting of early relapse after first-line therapy with autologous SCT. However, the implementation of allo-SCT for MM is jeopardized by high treatment-related mortality (TRM) rates as well as high relapse rates. In this systematic review, we aimed to identify a safe allo-SCT strategy that has optimal 1-year results regarding mortality, relapse and severe GvHD, creating opportunities for post-transplantation strategies to maintain remissions in the high-risk group of relapsed MM patients. Eleven studies were included. Median PFS ranged from 5.2 to 36.8 months and OS was 13.0 to 63.0 months. The relapse related mortality at 1 year varied between 0 and 50% and TRM between 8 and 40%. Lowest GvHD incidences were reported for conditioning regimens with T-cell depletion using ATG or graft CD34+ selection. Similar strategies could lay the foundation for a post-transplant immune platform, this should be further evaluated in prospective clinical trials.

Allogeneic Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation in Multiple Myeloma: Focus on Longitudinal Assessment of Donor Chimerism, Extramedullary Disease, and High-Risk Cytogenetic Features

Although generally not applied as first-line treatment of multiple myeloma, allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (allo-SCT) can still be chosen as ultimate escalation approach in high-risk patients, preferentially within the framework of clinical trials. In this study, we investigated whether decreasing donor chimerism (DC) is predictive for relapse. In addition, we comprehensively determined the impact of several other disease- and treatment-related factors on outcome. One hundred fifty-five multiple myeloma patients whose DC status was followed serially by the short tandem repeat-based techniques at a single lab were included in this retrospective study. Outcome variables were studied in univariate and multivariable analyses. Available were 2.324 DC samples (median, 12 per patient). Loss of full DC was associated with shorter progression-free survival (PFS) (HR, 1.7; 95% CI, 1.1 to 2.6) but did not impact overall survival. Two-thirds of patients with International Myeloma Working Group-defined relapses still displayed a full DC in peripheral blood or bone marrow. Extramedullary manifestations were observed in 33% of patients, accounting for the discrepancy between DC analysis and the actual disease status. In multivariable analysis, the 2 most relevant variables for an unfavorable PFS were progressive disease before allo-SCT (HR, 3.0; 95% CI, 1.5 to 5.9) and allo-SCT at least the second relapse (HR, 2.8; 95% CI, 1.5 to 4.9), whereas for overall survival progressive disease or partial response before allo-SCT had the strongest negative effects (HR, 4.2; 95% CI, 1.9 to 9, and HR, 2.0; 95% CI, 1.0 to 3.8, respectively). Adverse cytogenetics such as del17p, t(4,14) or amp(1q21) were not associated with shorter survival after allo-SCT. Extensive DC sampling beyond robust engraftment does not appear to provide additional information helpful for disease management in most patients and is challenged by a significant incidence of extramedullary disease. In our series, allo-SCT overcame unfavorable cytogenetics.

When to recommend allogeneic transplant in multiple myeloma

Utilization of allogeneic transplant in the management of multiple myeloma has been actively pursued for nearly 30 years. In this paper, the existing data for use of transplant is reviewed as primary therapy, as salvage and for genetic high-risk disease. The relative merits of using a matched-unrelated donor vs. an HLA-matched donor and what impact the introduction of the novel agents has on the decision to transplant will be covered.

Estimating the treatment effect from non-randomized studies: The example of reduced intensity conditioning allogeneic stem cell transplantation in hematological diseases

Background

In some clinical situations, for which RCT are rare or impossible, the majority of the evidence comes from observational studies, but standard estimations could be biased because they ignore covariates that confound treatment decisions and outcomes.

Methods

Three observational studies were conducted to assess the benefit of Allo-SCT in hematological malignancies of multiple myeloma, follicular lymphoma and Hodgkin’s disease. Two statistical analyses were performed: the propensity score (PS) matching approach and the inverse probability weighting (IPW) approach.

Results

Based on PS-matched samples, a survival benefit in MM patients treated by Allo-SCT, as compared to similar non-allo treated patients, was observed with an HR of death at 0.35 (95%CI: 0.14-0.88). Similar results were observed in HD, 0.23 (0.07-0.80) but not in FL, 1.28 (0.43-3.77). Estimated benefits of Allo-SCT for the original population using IPW were erased in HR for death at 0.72 (0.37-1.39) for MM patients, 0.60 (0.19-1.89) for HD patients, and 2.02 (0.88-4.66) for FL patients.

Conclusion

Differences in estimated benefits rely on whether the underlying population to which they apply is an ideal randomized experimental population (PS) or the original population (IPW). These useful methods should be employed when assessing the effects of innovative treatment in non-randomized experiments.

Evaluation of the propensity score methods for estimating marginal odds ratios in case of small sample size

BACKGROUND

Propensity score (PS) methods are increasingly used, even when sample sizes are small or treatments are seldom used. However, the relative performance of the two mainly recommended PS methods, namely PS-matching or inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW), have not been studied in the context of small sample sizes.

METHODS

We conducted a series of Monte Carlo simulations to evaluate the influence of sample size, prevalence of treatment exposure, and strength of the association between the variables and the outcome and/or the treatment exposure, on the performance of these two methods.

RESULTS

Decreasing the sample size from 1,000 to 40 subjects did not substantially alter the Type I error rate, and led to relative biases below 10%. The IPTW method performed better than the PS-matching down to 60 subjects. When N was set at 40, the PS matching estimators were either similarly or even less biased than the IPTW estimators. Including variables unrelated to the exposure but related to the outcome in the PS model decreased the bias and the variance as compared to models omitting such variables. Excluding the true confounder from the PS model resulted, whatever the method used, in a significantly biased estimation of treatment effect. These results were illustrated in a real dataset.

CONCLUSION

Even in case of small study samples or low prevalence of treatment, PS-matching and IPTW can yield correct estimations of treatment effect unless the true confounders and the variables related only to the outcome are not included in the PS model.

Younger donor's age and upfront tandem are two independent prognostic factors for survival in multiple myeloma patients treated by tandem autologous-allogeneic stem cell transplantation: a retrospective study from the Société Française de Greffe de Moelle et de Thérapie Cellulaire (SFGM-TC)

BACKGROUND

How tandem autologous-allogeneic stem cell transplantation should be integrated in the treatment of multiple myeloma remains controversial. We examined the long-term outcome of patients with multiple myeloma managed with tandem autologous-allogeneic stem cell transplantation and present a prognostic factor analysis based on the experience of the Société Française de Greffe de Moelle et de Thérapie Cellulaire (SFGM-TC).

DESIGN AND METHODS

This French, retrospective, registry-based study included 146 patients who had undergone tandem autologous-allogeneic transplantation for multiple myeloma at 20 SFGM-TC centers between 1998 and 2010. The patients included in the study had fully completed the two steps of a planned tandem autologous-allogeneic transplantation. No treatment had to be administered between the autologous and allogeneic parts of the tandem procedure.

RESULTS

Seventy-seven patients (53%) underwent tandem autologous-allogeneic transplantation as part of upfront treatment, i.e. after a single line of treatment not including autologous transplantation. The median follow-up from the allogeneic transplant was 47.5 months (range, 1.2-132 months). At 4 years, the overall survival and event-free survival rates were 48% (95% CI 39-57 %) and 27% (95% CI 19-36), respectively. Eighteen patients (12%) experienced grade III-IV acute graft-versus-host disease and 43 patients (30%) had chronic graft-versus-host disease. The transplant-related mortality rate at 1 year was 15% (95% CI 10-22). Patients receiving tandem transplantation as upfront treatment had significantly improved event-free survival (36% versus 11%; P=0.005) and overall survival (56% versus 34%; P=0.02). Donor's age ≤ 50 years was associated with improved event-free survival (35% versus 16%; P=0.005) and overall survival (54% versus 41%; P=0.02). In the multivariable analysis, upfront tandem transplantation, donor's age ≤ 50 years and full chimerism were independent prognostic factors for better outcome.

CONCLUSIONS

We confirmed the feasibility of tandem autologour-allogeneic transplantation in heavily treated patients with multiple myeloma. We identified younger donor's age and upfront tandem transplantation as two independent prognostic factors for survival which could be further explored in prospective studies.

Treatment strategies in relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma: a focus on drug sequencing and 'retreatment' approaches in the era of novel agents

Treatment of multiple myeloma has evolved over the last decade, most notably with the introduction of highly effective novel agents. It is now possible to aim for deep disease responses in a greater number of patients in an attempt to prolong remission duration and survival. Initially introduced in the relapsed setting, the novel agents, namely thalidomide, bortezomib and lenalidomide, are now being increasingly incorporated into upfront treatment strategies, raising questions about the feasibility of 'retreatment' with such agents. Also, in a disease that is characterized by multiple relapses, the 'sequencing' of the different effective options is an important question. In the frontline setting, the first remission is likely to be the period during which patients will enjoy the best quality of life. Thus, the goal should be to achieve a first remission that is the longest possible by using the most effective treatment upfront. At relapse, the challenge is to select the optimal treatment for each patient while balancing efficacy and toxicity. The decision will depend on both disease- and patient-related factors. This review aimed to assess the available research data addressing 'retreatment' approaches, drug 'sequencing' and the long-term impact of upfront therapy with novel drugs.