Selection of a mobilization regimen for multiple myeloma based on the response to induction therapy: granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) alone versus high-dose cyclophosphamide plus G-CSF. Issue 6 (2nd June 2016)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Jang, Ji Eun; Cheong, June-Won; Kim, Soo-Jeong; Cho, Hyunsoo; Suh, Cheolwon; Lee, Hyewon; Eom, Hyeon-Seok; Yhim, Ho-Young; Lee, Won-Sik; Min, Chang-Ki; Lee, Jae Hoon; Park, Joon Seong; Kim, Jin Seok
• Is Part Of: Leukemia & lymphoma. Volume 57:Issue 6(2016:Jun.)
• Page Start: 1389
• Page End: 1397
• Publication Date: 2016-06-02
• Subjects: Cyclophosphamide -- granulocyte-colony stimulating factor -- multiple myeloma -- stem cell mobilization; Leukemia -- Periodicals; Lymphomas -- Periodicals; 616.99419
• DOI: 10.3109/10428194.2015.1102240
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1042-8194

Abstract

Abstract: To evaluate the feasibility of selecting a mobilization regimen based on the response to induction therapy, we retrospectively analyzed 179 multiple myeloma patients who underwent stem cell mobilization. In comparison with patients who achieved at least a very good partial response (VGPR) to induction therapy and received granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) alone and patients who did not achieve a VGPR and received cyclophosphamide (CY) + G-CSF, treatment-related toxicity was greater and neutrophil engraftment was slower in the CY than the G-CSF group. The rate of requisite mobilization (≥ 2.0 × 10 6 /kg) was similar in both groups. Overall and progression-free survival was not different between patients in the G-CSF group and patients who achieved at least VGPR and received CY + G-CSF. In conclusion, response-adapted selection of a mobilization regimen is appropriate. G-CSF alone should be the preferred treatment for patients who achieved at least a VGPR to induction therapy.