Tandem Autologous Stem Cell Transplantation Does Not Benefit High-Risk Myeloma Patients in the Maintenance Era: Real-World Results from The Canadian Myeloma Research Group Database
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
In patients with multiple myeloma (MM), the presence of high-risk cytogenetic abnormalities is associated with worse disease control and survival. Autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) does benefit these patients. Tandem transplantation has been explored as a means to deepen responses and further improve survival however, its role remains controversial. This is particularly true in the era of novel agent induction and post-transplant maintenance therapy. The aim of this study was to use the Canadian Myeloma Research Group database and examine a large cohort of real-world patients comparing the outcomes of tandem versus single ASCT specifically in high-risk patients receiving novel agent-based induction and post-transplant maintenance. The data for this study was derived retrospectively from a comprehensive national-level database of Canadian patients with MM. High-risk cytogenetics was defined as presence of del17p, t(4;14), or t(14;16). Those receiving allogeneic transplant were excluded. Tandem transplantation was defined as a second ASCT performed consecutively without interim relapse or progression after first ASCT. Those with relapse or progressive disease within 3 months of completing a first transplant were excluded. We compared response depth, progression-free, and overall survival (OS) based on single or tandem transplantation procedures. The impact of covariates of interest was also assessed. A total of 381 patients with high-risk cytogenetics were identified. A total of 242 received single and 139 patients received tandem transplants. All received post-transplant maintenance. The most common induction regimen for these patients was cyclophosphamide, bortezomib, and steroids (CyBorD, 87%). Forty-one patients (10.8%) required reinduction prior to first ASCT. The best overall responses at any time were 98.3% (90.5% ≥ very good partial response [VGPR]) and 98.6% (89.9% ≥ VGPR) in the single and tandem ASCT groups, respectively. Survival outcomes were similar with the median progression-free survival for single or tandem ASCT of 35.2 and 35.3 months (P = .88) and the median OS were 92.6 and 88.9 months, respectively (P = .72). No statistically significant differences were seen based on type of cytogenetic abnormality or type of maintenance. This was confirmed on multivariate analysis. In the real-world setting, tandem ASCT does not improve outcomes for MM patients with high-risk cytogenetics. This may be driven by the use of effective pre- and post-ASCT therapies. The development of more potent induction and consolidation along with current nearly ubiquitous continuous maintenance therapies until disease progression does not support the use of a second high-dose procedure.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,003 | 0,020 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,009 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,003 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,004 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».