Clinical lymphoma, myeloma & leukemia · 2025
Melphalan 140 mg/m2 is Safe and Effective for Frail and Older Multiple Myeloma Patients With Comparable Rates of Minimal Residual Disease Negativity.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Kort Jeries, Naleid Nikolas, Oley Frank, Ignatz-Hoover James, Margevicius Seunghee, Fu Pingfu, Malek Ehsan, Cooper Brenda
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Despite therapeutic advances, multiple myeloma (MM) remains challenging to treat effectively. High-dose melphalan (Mel200) with autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) is the standard treatment for transplant-eligible patients. Reduced-dose melphalan (Mel140) is an alternative for older or frail patients, yet its efficacy data remain unclear.
METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed 233 MM patients undergoing first ASCT between 2014 and 2022, comparing outcomes between Mel140 (n = 82) and Mel200 (n = 151). We assessed patient demographics, disease characteristics, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). In an exploratory subset analysis achievement of MRD from bone marrow samples after ASCT was compared between the 2 groups.
RESULTS: As expected, patients who received Mel 140 were significantly older with a higher KPS. Median follow-up was 47.7 months. Both groups had similar rates of readmissions and infections within the first 100 days after transplant despite Mel140 group being older with more comorbidities. No significant difference in PFS or OS was observed between Mel140 and Mel200 groups (P > .05). MRD negativity rates at sensitivity levels of 10-5 and 10-6 were comparable (64% vs. 60%, P = .7). Patients achieving sustained MRD negativity demonstrated improved PFS regardless of melphalan dose.
CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest equivalent efficacy and safety profiles between Mel140 and Mel200, supporting Mel140 as a viable option for older or frail MM patients. In a subset analysis equivalent rates of MRD were achieved between the groups and remained a highly significant predictor of PFS, highlighting its relevance regardless of dosing strategies.
METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed 233 MM patients undergoing first ASCT between 2014 and 2022, comparing outcomes between Mel140 (n = 82) and Mel200 (n = 151). We assessed patient demographics, disease characteristics, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). In an exploratory subset analysis achievement of MRD from bone marrow samples after ASCT was compared between the 2 groups.
RESULTS: As expected, patients who received Mel 140 were significantly older with a higher KPS. Median follow-up was 47.7 months. Both groups had similar rates of readmissions and infections within the first 100 days after transplant despite Mel140 group being older with more comorbidities. No significant difference in PFS or OS was observed between Mel140 and Mel200 groups (P > .05). MRD negativity rates at sensitivity levels of 10-5 and 10-6 were comparable (64% vs. 60%, P = .7). Patients achieving sustained MRD negativity demonstrated improved PFS regardless of melphalan dose.
CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest equivalent efficacy and safety profiles between Mel140 and Mel200, supporting Mel140 as a viable option for older or frail MM patients. In a subset analysis equivalent rates of MRD were achieved between the groups and remained a highly significant predictor of PFS, highlighting its relevance regardless of dosing strategies.