: Despite the widespread adoption of reduced-intensity conditioning (RIC) for myeloma, there are few data comparing outcomes with RIC with myeloablative conditioning (MAC). We report the outcomes of patients undergoing allogeneic transplantations for myeloma and reported to the EBMT. A minimum data set was available on 320 RIC and 196 MAC allografts performed between 1998 and 2002. The RIC patients were older (51 vs 45 years) with more progressive disease (28% vs 21%) and more had received a prior transplant (76% vs 11%). In addition, there was a longer time to transplantation and an increased use of peripheral blood and T-cell depletion. For RIC and MAC, respectively, the nonrelapse mortality (NRM) at 2 years was 24% and 37% (P = .002); overall survival, 38.1% and 50.8% (not significant [ns]); and progression-free survival (PFS), 18.9% and 34.5% (P = .001). On multivariate analysis, RIC was associated with a reduction in NRM (HR, 0.5), but this was offset by an increase in relapse risk (HR, 2.0), and the conditioning intensity did not impact on overall survival or retain significance for PFS. These data suggest that there is a continuing need to investigate dose intensity in the conditioning for myeloma allografts.

Crawley, C., Iacobelli, S., Björkstrand, B., Apperley, J.f., Niederwieser, D., Gahrton, G. (2007). Reduced-intensity conditioning for myeloma: lower nonrelapse mortality but higher relapse rates compared with myeloablative conditioning. BLOOD, 109(8), 3588-3594 [10.1182/blood-2006-07-036848].

Reduced-intensity conditioning for myeloma: lower nonrelapse mortality but higher relapse rates compared with myeloablative conditioning

Iacobelli, Simona;
2007-04-15

Abstract

: Despite the widespread adoption of reduced-intensity conditioning (RIC) for myeloma, there are few data comparing outcomes with RIC with myeloablative conditioning (MAC). We report the outcomes of patients undergoing allogeneic transplantations for myeloma and reported to the EBMT. A minimum data set was available on 320 RIC and 196 MAC allografts performed between 1998 and 2002. The RIC patients were older (51 vs 45 years) with more progressive disease (28% vs 21%) and more had received a prior transplant (76% vs 11%). In addition, there was a longer time to transplantation and an increased use of peripheral blood and T-cell depletion. For RIC and MAC, respectively, the nonrelapse mortality (NRM) at 2 years was 24% and 37% (P = .002); overall survival, 38.1% and 50.8% (not significant [ns]); and progression-free survival (PFS), 18.9% and 34.5% (P = .001). On multivariate analysis, RIC was associated with a reduction in NRM (HR, 0.5), but this was offset by an increase in relapse risk (HR, 2.0), and the conditioning intensity did not impact on overall survival or retain significance for PFS. These data suggest that there is a continuing need to investigate dose intensity in the conditioning for myeloma allografts.
15-apr-2007
Pubblicato
Rilevanza internazionale
Articolo
Esperti anonimi
Settore MED/01 - STATISTICA MEDICA
Settore MED/15 - MALATTIE DEL SANGUE
English
Crawley, C., Iacobelli, S., Björkstrand, B., Apperley, J.f., Niederwieser, D., Gahrton, G. (2007). Reduced-intensity conditioning for myeloma: lower nonrelapse mortality but higher relapse rates compared with myeloablative conditioning. BLOOD, 109(8), 3588-3594 [10.1182/blood-2006-07-036848].
Crawley, C; Iacobelli, S; Björkstrand, B; Apperley, Jf; Niederwieser, D; Gahrton, G
Articolo su rivista
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
Crawley_conditioningMM_blood_2007.pdf

solo utenti autorizzati

Tipologia: Versione Editoriale (PDF)
Licenza: Copyright dell'editore
Dimensione 239.89 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
239.89 kB Adobe PDF   Visualizza/Apri   Richiedi una copia

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/2108/312377
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 43
  • Scopus 157
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 138
social impact