GLORIA

GEOMAR Library Ocean Research Information Access

Your email was sent successfully. Check your inbox.

An error occurred while sending the email. Please try again.

Proceed reservation?

Export
Filter
  • Lesokhin, Alexander M.  (7)
  • 2010-2014  (7)
  • 1
    In: Blood, American Society of Hematology, Vol. 124, No. 21 ( 2014-12-06), p. 3459-3459
    Abstract: Background: The total therapy 3 protocol for multiple myeloma (MM) introduced the use of intensive induction with VDT-PACE, a combination of bortezomib, dexamethasone, thalidomide, cisplatin, adriamycin, cyclophosphamide, and etoposide for newly diagnosed MM patients. This regimen, which demonstrated rapid responses in the first-line setting, has also been used in relapsed disease, to rescue induction failures or for stem cell mobilization. We evaluated the efficacy and toxicity of using VDT-PACE in these clinical settings. Patients and Methods: We identified 84 patients through pharmacy profile review who received at least one cycle of VDT-PACE for the treatment of MM between 1/2007 and 8/2013 at our institution. Patients were grouped into a stem cell collection cohort (C) if stem cell pheresis was performed following VDT-PACE. Remaining patients were analyzed in the relapsed cohort (RR). The primary objective of this study was to determine the overall response rate with combination VDT-PACE. Secondary Objectives include progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), stem cell collection in patients that underwent chemomobilization, and the extent of toxicity. Results: In the RR group, 45 patients received VDT-PACE after a median of 4 prior therapies (range 1-8) including autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) in 79%. The median time between diagnosis and first cycle of VDT-PACE treatment was 35.4 months (range 1.3-163.4). 47% of patients had adverse cytogenetics defined as presence of complex karyotype or FISH with del 17p, t4;14, or t14;16. Patients received a median of 2 cycles of VDT-PACE (range 1-4) with a response rate after all cycles of 51% (2% CR, 22% VGPR, 27% PR). Additional therapy was administered in 82% within 6 months (18% allogeneic SCT, 35% ASCT, 29% chemotherapy regimens). 18% of patients died without additional therapy (13% from disease progression, 5% from toxicity), all within 5 months of their last VDT-PACE cycle. PFS and OS for the RR group was 8.8 months (95% CI 4.6, 13.1) and 10.3 months (95% CI 8.8, 17.4), respectively. Patients that received subsequent lines of therapy following VDT-PACE achieved a median PFS and OS of 9.5 months (95% CI 5.6, 13.3) and 9.5 months (95% CI 7.5, 32.1), respectively, measured from the time of next therapy. In the C group, 39 patients received a median of 2 prior regimens (range 1-4) before starting VDT-PACE and 31% of patients had adverse cytogenetics. Reasons for using VDT-PACE for mobilization included residual or progressive disease (64%), provider discretion (33%), and failure of a prior attempt at collection (3%). The median time between diagnosis and first cycle of VDT-PACE treatment was 7 months (range 2.3-122.7). Patients received a median of 2 cycles (range 1-4) of VDT-PACE. The median number of cells collected was 12.3x106CD34 cells/kg (range 0.21-43.74) and the median number of collection session required was 2 (range 1-6), with 21% of patients requiring plexirafor. Two patients (5%) from this group failed collection. The response rate after all cycles of VDT-PACE was 59% (3% CR, 13% VGPR, 44% PR). 35 out of the 39 patients went to transplant following VDT-PACE (34 ASCT, 1 allogeneic SCT). Of the 4 patients who did not receive transplant, 2 were for toxicity attributed to VDT-PACE, 1 for failure to mobilize, and 1 for personal reasons. The post-transplant response rate was 91% (17% CR, 34% VGPR, 40% PR) with 1 patient (3%) experiencing disease progression immediately after transplant. Median PFS and OS for the C group patients was 34.5 months (95% CI 20.2, n.r.) and 64.8 months (95% CI 26.0, n.r.), respectively. Reported toxicities following treatment included infection (20%), fatigue (19%), nausea (17%), renal complications (6%), thrombosis (4%), and edema (4%), which were seen in 67% and 62% of the RR and C groups, respectively. Hospital readmission for management of side effects occurred in 30% of patients. Conclusions: VDT-PACE is an effective therapy for RR patients and for stem cell mobilization in patients with residual or progressive disease following initial therapy. Importantly, it is also associated with significant morbidity and requires careful monitoring. VDT-PACE does not appear to adversely affect stem cell collection or SCT outcomes. At our institution, this regimen is commonly used for stem cell collection in patients with unfavorable outcomes following initial therapy. Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 0006-4971 , 1528-0020
    RVK:
    RVK:
    Language: English
    Publisher: American Society of Hematology
    Publication Date: 2014
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 1468538-3
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 80069-7
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 2
    In: Blood, American Society of Hematology, Vol. 124, No. 21 ( 2014-12-06), p. 848-848
    Abstract: Background: Cyclophosphamide plus G-CSF (C+G-CSF) is the most widely used stem cell (SC) mobilization regimen in multiple myeloma (MM) patients. Plerixafor plus G-CSF (P+G-CSF) has demonstrated superior SC mobilization efficacy when compared to G-CSF alone in phase II and III studies and has been shown to rescue patients who fail mobilization with G-CSF with or without cyclophosphamide. Despite the proven efficacy of P+G-CSF in upfront SC mobilization, its use for this indication has been limited, mostly due to concerns of high cost of the drug. Investigators have proposed "on demand" use of plerixafor in patients identified to have inadequate SC mobilization with G-CSF with or without cyclophosphamide, with the assumption that such an approach promotes cost containment by limiting plerixafor use. However, a comprehensive comparison of the cost effectiveness of SC mobilization using C+G-CSF versus P+G-CSF has not been performed. The goal of this retrospective study was to conduct a cost analysis between these two approaches. Methods: Using the pharmacy database, we identified all MM patients treated at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center between 11/2008 and 6/2012 who received C+G-CSF or P+G-CSF for upfront SC mobilization. Patients collecting 〈 5 x 106 CD34+ cells/kg were considered mobilization failures and had a second attempt at SC mobilization using an alternative approach. For salvage mobilization, patients received P+G-CSF after failing C+G-CSF-based mobilization or were re-mobilized with C+G-CSF along with plerixafor after failing upfront P+G-CSF mobilization. Mobilization costs included in the analysis were those associated with upfront mobilization, those associated with salvage mobilization in patients failing an initial mobilization, and those associated with complications directly related to the mobilization procedures. Cost calculations included the following: cost of cyclophosphamide 3000 mg/m2, plerixafor 0.24 mg/kg, and G-CSF 10 mcg/kg and their administration prior to and during pheresis sessions; pheresis sessions; laboratory tests on pheresis days; re-hospitalization occurring within 15 days of either mobilization approach and considered directly related to the mobilization procedure. All costs were calculated using the institution’s ratio of cost to charges, and were normalized and adjusted based on institutional charges and costs for 2012. Results: A total of 223 patients undergoing upfront mobilization were identified, with 111 patients receiving C+G-CSF, and 112 patients receiving P+G-CSF. Thirteen patients (12%) were re-hospitalized due to C+G-CSF-related complications, with an average hospital stay of 6.5 days. No patients in the P+G-CSF arm were hospitalized. Nineteen patients (17%) in the C+G-CSF group failed first mobilization and received P+G-CSF as salvage regimen, with four (3.6%) failing salvage collection and ultimately deemed collection failures. Seven patients (6.2%) in the P+G-CSF group failed upfront mobilization and received C+G-CSF along with plerixafor as salvage regimen, with two (1.8%) subsequently failing salvage mobilization. The average number of pheresis sessions performed was 3.29 and 2.42 in the C+G-CSF and P+G-CSF upfront groups, respectively (p=0.373). In total, the average cost of stem cell collection per patient was 1.3 times greater in the C+G-CSF group than in the P+GCSF upfront group (p=0.017). When the costs associated with salvage pheresis are discounted for the 19 patients in the C+G-CSF upfront group who failed first SC mobilization, assuming that these patients could have been salvaged by plerixafor-on-demand, the cost per patient in the C+G-CSF group remains 1.26 times greater (p=0.019) than that of the P+G-CSF group. Conclusion: The use of P+G-CSF upfront for SC mobilization is more cost effective than the more widely used approach employing C+G-CSF. This difference is likely due to several factors including: 1) higher rate of hospitalization in the C+G-CSF group due to expected complications such as febrile neutropenia and catheter-related infections; 2) higher rate of mobilization failure leading to increased need for salvage mobilization in the C+G-CSF group; 3) reduced G-CSF use in the upfront P+G-CSF group. Overall, this single institution study provides additional rationale for the standard use of P+G-CSF as upfront mobilization regimen in MM patients. Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 0006-4971 , 1528-0020
    RVK:
    RVK:
    Language: English
    Publisher: American Society of Hematology
    Publication Date: 2014
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 1468538-3
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 80069-7
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 3
    In: Biology of Blood and Marrow Transplantation, Elsevier BV, Vol. 20, No. 2 ( 2014-02), p. S60-S62
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 1083-8791
    Language: English
    Publisher: Elsevier BV
    Publication Date: 2014
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 3056525-X
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 2057605-5
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 4
    In: Blood, American Society of Hematology, Vol. 124, No. 21 ( 2014-12-06), p. 3856-3856
    Abstract: Background: G-CSF with or without cyclophosphamide has been commonly used in multiple myeloma (MM) for stem cell (SC) collection prior to autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT). Several risk factors including age, prolonged exposure to lenalidomide, and low platelet count are associated with suboptimal stem cell harvest. Plerixafor selectively and reversibly binds to the chemokine receptor CXCR4 and blocks its interaction with stromal cell-derived factor-1α. This drug was approved by the FDA for stem cell mobilization in MM, based on phase III studies demonstrating the superiority of plerixafor and G-CSF over G-CSF alone in achieving a predetermined target yield of 6 × 106CD34+ cells/kg collected in 〈 2 phereses; however, this outcome is not clinically relevant. The purpose of this retrospective study is to examine the SC mobilization efficiency associated with plerixafor using a more clinically relevant outcome, and to identify risk factors associated with poor SC mobilization, including the potential impact of prior exposure to lenalidomide-containing regimens. Patients and methods: This retrospective study examined MM patients mobilized with plerixafor and G-CSF upfront as part of initial therapy at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center between 4/1/2009 and 8/1/2013. Baseline characteristics examined included age, race, gender, platelet count, WBC count, and marrow plasmacytosis prior to mobilization. Treatment characteristics examined included type of induction regimen (distinguishing regimens containing lenalidomide only, bortezomib only, or both), number of cycles received, time between last chemotherapy and SC mobilization, time between start of treatment and SC collection, and prior radiation. The primary endpoint was the rate of SC collection success, defined as the ability to collect at least 5 x 106CD34+ cells/kg during the first set of phereses, which would be sufficient for two ASCT. The secondary endpoint was SC collection efficiency, measured by the number of CD34+ cells yielded per pheresis performed during the first set of stem cell collection. Linear regression was used to examine the univariate effect of baseline and treatment variables on SC collection efficiency. Variables significant at the 0.05 level were entered into a multivariable model. Results: A total of 138 MM patients were mobilized with plerixafor and G-CSF before proceeding to stem cell collection. The rate of SC collection success was 92.8%. Due to this high success rate, we could not identify independent risk factors associated with poor SC mobilization. When considering SC efficiency as outcome, the average efficiency for the entire cohort was 7.25 x 10^6 CD34+ cells/kg/pheresis. Increased age (p=0.005), shorter time between treatment start and SC collection (p=0.05), higher number of cycles received during induction treatment (p=0.042), lower platelet count (p=0.009) and lower WBC prior to G-CSF (p=0.01), and exposure to lenalidomide only (p=0.011) were all identified as risk factors by univariate analysis. Only lower WBC prior to GCSF (p=0.009) maintained statistical significance after multivariate analysis. Conclusions: This retrospective study shows that plerixafor is a highly effective agent for SC mobilization and collection in MM patients, with only few patients failing to achieve the target collection regardless of baseline or treatment characteristics including prior lenalidomide exposure. However, we identified WBC prior to G-CSF administration as a predictor of SC collection efficiency. These results provide strong support to the upfront use of plerixafor and G-CSF for SC mobilization in MM patients. A cost analysis is currently in progress comparing this SC collection modality with other conventional means currently being employed in patients with MM. Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 0006-4971 , 1528-0020
    RVK:
    RVK:
    Language: English
    Publisher: American Society of Hematology
    Publication Date: 2014
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 1468538-3
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 80069-7
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 5
    In: Blood, American Society of Hematology, Vol. 124, No. 21 ( 2014-12-06), p. 3991-3991
    Abstract: Background: The aggressive approach to first-line treatment of multiple myeloma (MM) incorporating autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) remains widely prevalent, although it is not without controversy in the current era of novel effective agents. Some trials and meta-analysis comparing ASCT to non-myeloabaltive standard therapy or delayed ASCT have failed to show an overall survival (OS) difference between the two arms [Fermand et al. Blood 92:3131-3136 (1998); Koreth et al. BBMT 13:183-196 (2007); Kumar, et al. Cancer 118(6):1585-92 (2012)]. On the other hand, analysis of transplant-eligible patients receiving lenalidomide and dexamethasone induction on the E4A03 trial and then either undergoing ASCT or continuing lenalidomide and dexamethasone showed that ASCT conferred improved OS (Blood 2010;116:38a). This controversy lead us to design a phase II clinical trial comparing continuous lenalidomide and dexamethasone (Ld) versus ASCT followed by lenalidomide maintenance, in patients responding to four cycles of Ld. Methods: Patients with newly diagnosed symptomatic MM as defined by IMWG criteria were enrolled. Patients deemed to be in urgent need of aggressive therapy (e. g. symptomatic bone disease, acute renal failure, hyperviscosity syndrome, etc) were not eligible. Patients received induction with lenalidomide (L) 25 mg PO daily on days 1-21, and dexamethasone (d) 40 mg PO daily on days 1,8,15, and 22 of a 28-day cycle with standard prophylaxis. Patients with POD during induction or SD after four cycles of Ld were taken off study. All other patients had stem cells harvested after four cycles of Ld and were randomized to either the continuous (Ld) arm (L at the last tolerated dose during induction, continued indefinitely until progression or toxicity; and d at 20mg weekly for one year) or the ASCT arm (using melphalan conditioning followed by L maintenance started three months post-ASCT at 10mg daily, escalated to 15 mg daily six months post-ASCT and continued indefinitely until progression or toxicity). Results: Fifty seven patients have been registered to the trial. Two patients did not initiate therapy, one because of a concurrent diagnosis of amyloidosis and the other due to aggressive disease mandating alternative therapy according to the treating physician. At this time, four patients are still receiving induction therapy and are not available for response assessments. Among the 51 remaining patients, the response to initial induction therapy includes 12% CR (n=6), 2% uCR (n=1), 4% nCR (n=2), 14% VGPR (n=7), 51% PR (n=26), 6% SD (n= 3), 4% POD (n=2), and 8 % inevaluable (n = 4 who did not receive at least two cycles of Ld). Thirteen patients were removed from the trial prior to randomization due to POD (n=2), SD after four cycles (n=3), toxicity (n=4), physician discretion (n=2), and withdrawal of consent (n=2). Among these 13 patients, one was lost to follow-up, two continued lenalidomide therapy off protocol (one patient refused ASCT, and one patient had inadequate stem cell collection), and 10 proceeded to alternative induction. All 12 patients achieved a response [25 % CR (n=3), 42 % VGPR (n=5), and 33 % PR (n=4)]; 10 patients proceeded to ASCT without event. Thirty-eight patients were randomized, 20 to Ld and 18 to ASCT. Improvement of response by at least one level occurred in 45% and 65% of patients on the Ld and ASCT arms, respectively. The median follow-up for all surviving patients from time of randomization is 38.3 months. The 1- and 3-year PFS in the Ld arm were 100% and 66%, respectively. The 1- and 3-year PFS in the ASCT arm were 89% and 68%, respectively. The 2- and 3-year OS in the Ld arm were 100% and 92%, respectively. The 2- and 3-year OS in the ASCT arm were 100% and 85%, respectively. Considering the entire population of 51 patients, with a median follow-up of 38 months, the median PFS has not been reached. Conclusions: This interim analysis, with relatively short follow-up, suggests that in transplant-eligible patients responsive to Ld during induction, continuous Ld results in similar PFS and OS compared to patients who undergo ASCT followed by L maintenance. Furthermore, this overall approach based on response-adapted treatment results in 100% of patients reaching at least PR at completion of first-line therapy. The trial remains ongoing. Figure 1 Figure 1. Figure 2 Figure 2. Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 0006-4971 , 1528-0020
    RVK:
    RVK:
    Language: English
    Publisher: American Society of Hematology
    Publication Date: 2014
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 1468538-3
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 80069-7
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 6
    In: Blood, American Society of Hematology, Vol. 124, No. 6 ( 2014-08-07), p. 899-906
    Abstract: Carfilzomib 56 mg/m2 provided a high overall response rate with a remarkable duration of response in patients with R/RMM. Nonhematologic grade 3/4 AEs likely related to carfilzomib treatment included hypertension and heart failure.
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 0006-4971 , 1528-0020
    RVK:
    RVK:
    Language: English
    Publisher: American Society of Hematology
    Publication Date: 2014
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 1468538-3
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 80069-7
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 7
    In: Biology of Blood and Marrow Transplantation, Elsevier BV, Vol. 20, No. 2 ( 2014-02), p. S38-
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 1083-8791
    Language: English
    Publisher: Elsevier BV
    Publication Date: 2014
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 3056525-X
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 2057605-5
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
Close ⊗
This website uses cookies and the analysis tool Matomo. More information can be found here...