25
IRUS Total
Downloads
  Altmetric

Results from a multi-center, non-interventional registry study for multiple myeloma patients who received stem cell mobilization regimens with and without plerixafor

File Description SizeFormat 
s41409-019-0676-0.pdfPublished version881.19 kBAdobe PDFView/Open
Title: Results from a multi-center, non-interventional registry study for multiple myeloma patients who received stem cell mobilization regimens with and without plerixafor
Authors: Morris, C
Chabannon, C
Masszi, T
Russell, N
Nahi, H
Kobbe, G
Krejci, M
Auner, H
Pohlreich, D
Hayden, P
Basak, GW
Lenhoff, S
Schaap, N
Van Biezen, A
Knol, C
Iacobelli, S
Liu, Q
Celanovic, M
Garderet, L
Kröger, N
Item Type: Journal Article
Abstract: Plerixafor plus granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) enhances the mobilization of haematopoietic stem cells (HSCs) for collection and subsequent autologous haematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) in patients with multiple myeloma (MM).This international, multicenter, non-interventional registry study (NCT01362972), evaluated long-term outcomes for MM patients who received plerixafor versus other mobilization regimens. The comparisons were: G-CSF+plerixafor (G-CSF+P) versus G-CSF-; G-CSF+P versus G-CSF+chemotherapy (G-CSF+C); and G-CSF+P+C versus G-CSF+C. Propensity score matching was used to balance groups. Primary outcome measures were progression free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and cumulative incidence of relapse (CIR) after transplantation. After propensity matching, 77 versus 41 patients in the G-CSF+P versus G-CSF cohorts, 129 versus 129 in the G-CSF+P versus G-CSF+C cohort and 117 versus 117 in the G-CSF+P+C versus G-CSF+C cohort, were matched, respectively. Propensity score matching resulted in a smaller sample size and imbalances were not completely overcome. For both PFS and OS, the upper limits of the hazard ratio 95% confidence intervals exceeded pre-specified boundaries; non-inferiority was not demonstrated. CIR rates were higher in the plerixafor cohorts. G-CSF+P remains an option for the mobilization of HSCs in poor-mobilizers with MM with no substantial differences in PFS, OS and CIR in comparison with other regimens.
Issue Date: Feb-2020
Date of Acceptance: 15-Jul-2019
URI: http://hdl.handle.net/10044/1/71932
DOI: 10.1038/s41409-019-0676-0
ISSN: 1476-5365
Publisher: Springer Nature [academic journals on nature.com]
Start Page: 356
End Page: 366
Journal / Book Title: Bone Marrow Transplantation
Volume: 55
Copyright Statement: © The Author(s) 2019. This article is published with open access. This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons. org/licenses/by/4.0/
Keywords: Science & Technology
Life Sciences & Biomedicine
Biophysics
Oncology
Hematology
Immunology
Transplantation
COLONY-STIMULATING FACTOR
AMERICAN SOCIETY
POOR MOBILIZATION
RISK-FACTORS
BLOOD
TRANSPLANTATION
GUIDELINES
OUTCOMES
CHEMOTHERAPY
COLLECTION
1103 Clinical Sciences
1112 Oncology and Carcinogenesis
Immunology
Publication Status: Published
Online Publication Date: 2019-09-18
Appears in Collections:Department of Immunology and Inflammation