The Impact of Renal Impairment in Multiple Myeloma Patients Undergoing Autologous Stem Cell Transplantation With Melphalan Conditioning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: There are no standard renal dose adjustments for melphalan conditioning for autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) in multiple myeloma (MM) patients. The objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of melphalan dosing and chronic kidney disease (CKD) on transplant-related outcomes, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). Methods: A retrospective chart review was performed, and MM patients who underwent ASCT between February 2016 and September 2021 were included. Melphalan 200 mg/m 2 (Mel200) or 140 mg/m 2 (Mel140) was administered. The cohort was divided based on renal function: creatinine clearance (CrCl) ≥ 60 mL/min (no-CKD) and CrCl < 60 mL/min (CKD). Outcomes measured include PFS, OS, treatment-related mortality (TRM), incidence of adverse events, hospitalization duration, and hospital readmission within 30 days. Statistical analysis included Chi-square test, t -test, and Kaplan-Meier method. Logistic regression model was used to account for melphalan dose adjustment. Results: A total of 124 patients were included (n = 108 no-CKD, and n = 16 CKD). Median age was 62 years, majority (62%) were male, and 97% had at least a partial response at time of ASCT. Of the 124 patients, nine (7%) received Mel140. Five of these patients had CKD (CrCl range: 26 - 58 mL/min), with one on hemodialysis. Median time to neutrophil engraftment was 13.6 vs. 14.9 days and median time to platelet engraftment was 18.3 vs. 18.5 days in the CKD group vs. no-CKD group, respectively (P = 0.03 and P = 0.8). When adjusting for melphalan dose reduction, the median time to neutrophil engraftment was not statistically significant (P = 0.11). At a median follow-up of 28.7 months, the median PFS for the CKD vs. no-CKD group was 60 vs. 46 months (P = 0.3). One-year OS was 93.8% in the CKD group vs. 97% in the no-CKD group. There was a higher incidence of grade 3 or 4 mucositis in the CKD group vs. no-CKD group (P = 0.013). Conclusions: There is no significant difference in engraftment, PFS, or OS for MM patients with CKD vs. no-CKD receiving melphalan conditioning for ASCT. Severe mucositis was significantly more common in the CKD group, including when accounting for melphalan dose reduction. J Hematol. 2023;12(5):201-207 doi: https://doi.org/10.14740/jh1148
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".