International Journal of Hematology

, Volume 90, Issue 5, pp 635–642 | Cite as

Phase I/II study of tandem high-dose chemotherapy with autologous peripheral blood stem cell transplantation for advanced multiple myeloma

  • Kazutaka Sunami
  • Katsuji Shinagawa
  • Morio Sawamura
  • Akira Sakai
  • Yoshio Saburi
  • Yutaka Imamura
  • Ishikazu Mizuno
  • Shigehisa Tamaki
  • Tomohiko Kamimura
  • Hiroyuki Tsuda
  • Hisashi Gondo
  • Norihiko Hino
  • Chihiro Shimazaki
  • Akira Miyata
  • Fumihito Tajima
  • Yoshinobu Takemoto
  • Akiyoshi Miwa
  • Takaaki Chou
  • Mine Harada
Original Article

Abstract

The efficacy and safety of high-dose chemotherapy with tandem autologous peripheral blood stem cell transplantation (auto-PBSCT) were evaluated in a multicenter clinical study of patients with advanced multiple myeloma. Eligible patients (n = 40) were consecutively enrolled in the phase I/II study and received 2–4 cycles of vincristine–adriamycin–dexamethasone regimen. The responding patients underwent PBSC harvesting following high-dose cyclophosphamide and filgrastim administration. The first auto-PBSCT (n = 32) following high-dose melphalan (200 mg/m2) was performed within 2 months of PBSC harvesting; the second auto-PBSCT (n = 28) was scheduled 3–6 months later. Treatment-related mortality was 2.5% (n = 1) throughout the protocol. Grade 4 nonhematologic toxicity occurred in 12.5 and 14.3% of the first and second auto-PBSCT patients, respectively. All but one patient (who died) achieved hematopoietic recovery. For the 28 patients completing the second auto-PBSCT, the results were favorable with a response rate of 65% (complete response rate = 27.5%, n = 11); the five-year progression-free survival and overall survival were 20.3 and 66.5%, respectively. In conclusion, high-dose chemotherapy with tandem auto-PBSCT is feasible and safe with a favorable response rate in treating advanced multiple myeloma in Japan.

Keywords

Myeloma Auto-PBSCT Tandem 

Notes

Acknowledgment

We thank Kazuyo Yoshida for the outstanding secretarial support.

References

  1. 1.
    Alexanian R. Treatment of multiple myeloma. Combination chemotherapy with different melphalan dose regimens. JAMA. 1969;208:1680–5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    The Myeloma Trialists’ Collaborative Group. Combination chemotherapy versus melphalan plus prednisone as treatment for multiple myeloma: an overview of 6, 633 patients form 27 randomized trials. J Clin Oncol. 1998;16:3832–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    McElwain TJ, Powles RL. High-dose intravenous melphalan for plasma-cell leukaemia and myeloma. Lancet. 1983;2:822–4.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Barlogie B, Alexanian R, Dicke KA, et al. High-dose chemoradiotherapy and autologous bone marrow transplantation for resistant multiple myeloma. Blood. 1987;70:869–72.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Attal M, Harousseau JL, Stoppa AM, et al. A prospective, randomized trial of autologous bone marrow transplantation and chemotherapy in multiple myeloma. N Engl J Med. 1996;335:91–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Harousseau JL, Attal M, Divine M, et al. Comparison of autologous bone marrow transplantation and peripheral blood stem cell transplantation after first remission induction treatment in multiple myeloma. Bone Marrow Transplant. 1995;15:963–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Duncan N, Hewetson M, Powles R, et al. An economic evaluation of peripheral blood stem cell transplantation as an alternative to autologous bone marrow transplantation in multiple myeloma. Bone Marrow Transplant. 1996;18:1175–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Fermand JP, Ravaud P, Chevret S, et al. High-dose therapy and autologous peripheral stem cell transplantation in multiple myeloma: up-front or rescue treatment? Results of a multicenter sequential randomized clinical trial. Blood. 1998;92:3131–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Harousseau JL, Milpied N, Laporte JP, et al. Double-intensive therapy in high-risk multiple myeloma. Blood. 1992;79:2827–33.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Barlogie B, Jagannath S, Vesole DH, et al. Superiority of tandem autologous transplantation over standard therapy for previously untreated multiple myeloma. Blood. 1997;89:789–93.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Durie BG, Salmon SE. A clinical staging system for multiple myeloma. Correlation of measured myeloma cell mass with presenting clinical features, response to treatment, and survival. Cancer. 1975;36:842–4.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Gondo H, Harada M, Miyamoto T, et al. Autologous peripheral blood stem cell transplantation for acute myelogenous leukemia. Bone Marrow Transplant. 1997;20:821–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Blade J, Samson D, Reece D, et al. Criteria for evaluating disease response and progression in patients with multiple myeloma treated by high-dose therapy and haemopoietic stem cell transplantation. Myeloma Subcommittee of EBMT. European Group for Blood and Marrow Transplant. Br J Haematol. 1998;102:1115–23.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Child JA, Morgan GJ, Davies FE, et al. High-dose chemotherapy with hematopoietic stem-cell rescue for multiple myeloma. N Engl J Med. 2003;348:1875–83.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Murakami H, Fujii H, Inaba T, et al. High-dose chemotherapy and autologous peripheral blood stem cell transplantation in high-risk multiple myeloma. Eur J Haematol. 2004;73:169–73.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Barlogie B, Jagannath S, Desikan KR, et al. Total therapy with tandem transplants for newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. Blood. 1999;93:55–65.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Lahuerta JJ, Grande C, Martinez-Lopez J, et al. Tandem transplants with different high-dose regimens improve the complete remission rates in multiple myeloma. Results of a Grupo Espanol de Sindromes Linfoproliferativos/Trasplante Autologo de Medula Osea phase II trial. Br J Haematol. 2003;120:296–303.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Galli M, Nicolucci A, Valentini M, et al. Feasibility and outcome of tandem stem cell autotransplants in multiple myeloma. Haematologica. 2005;90:1643–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Eom KS, Min CK, Lee S, et al. Efficacy of up-front treatment with a double stem cell transplantation in multiple myeloma. Jpn J Clin Oncol. 2006;36:432–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Prince HM, Imrie K, Sutherland DR, et al. Peripheral blood progenitor cell collections in multiple myeloma: predictors and management of inadequate collections. Br J Haematol. 1996;93:142–5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Moreau P, Facon T, Attal M, et al. Comparison of 200 mg/m2 melphalan and 8 Gy total body irradiation plus 140 mg/m2 as conditioning regimens for peripheral blood stem cell transplantation in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. Final analysis of the IFM 95-02 randomized trial. Blood. 2002;99:731–5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Desikan KR, Tricot G, Dhodapkar M, et al. Melphalan plus total body irradiation (MEL-TBI) or cyclophosphamide (MEL-CY) as a conditioning regimen with second autotransplant in responding patients with myeloma is inferior compared to historical controls receiving tandem transplants with melphalan alone. Bone Marrow Transplant. 2000;25:483–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Lahuerta JJ, Grande C, Blade J, et al. Myeloablative treatments for multiple myeloma: update of comparative study of different regimens used in patients from the Spanish Registry for Transplantation in Multiple Myeloma. Leuk Lymph. 2002;43:67–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Attal M, Harousseau JL, Facon T, et al. Single versus double autologous stem cell transplantation for multiple myeloma. N Engl J Med. 2003;349:2495–502.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Cavo M, Tosi P, Zamagni E, et al. Prospective, randomized study of single compared with double autologous stem-cell transplantation for multiple myeloma: Bologna 96 clinical study. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25:2434–41.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Sonneveld P, van der Holt B, Segeren CM, et al. Intermediate-dose melphalan compared with myeloablative treatment in multiple myeloma: long-term follow-up of the Dutch Cooperative Group HOVON 24 trial. Hematologica. 2007;92:928–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Barlogie B, Tricot G, Anaissie E, et al. Thalidomide and hematopoietic-cell transplantation for multiple myeloma. N Engl J Med. 2006;354:1021–30.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Cavo M, Zamagni E, Tosi P, et al. Superiority of thalidomide and dexamethasone over vincristine–doxorubicin–dexamethasone (VAD) as primary therapy in preparation for autologous transplantation for multiple myeloma. Blood. 2005;106:35–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Pineda-Roman M, Zangari M, Haessler J, et al. Sustained complete remissions in multiple myeloma linked to bortezomib in total therapy 3: comparison with total therapy 2. Br J Haematol. 2008;140:625–34.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Harousseau JL, Mathiot C, Attal M, et al. VELCADE/dexamethasone (Vel/D) versus VAD as induction treatment prior to autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (MM): update results of the IFM 2005/1 trial. Blood. 2007;110:139a. (abstract).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Japanese Society of Hematology 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kazutaka Sunami
    • 1
  • Katsuji Shinagawa
    • 2
  • Morio Sawamura
    • 3
  • Akira Sakai
    • 4
  • Yoshio Saburi
    • 5
  • Yutaka Imamura
    • 6
  • Ishikazu Mizuno
    • 7
  • Shigehisa Tamaki
    • 8
  • Tomohiko Kamimura
    • 9
  • Hiroyuki Tsuda
    • 10
  • Hisashi Gondo
    • 11
  • Norihiko Hino
    • 12
  • Chihiro Shimazaki
    • 13
  • Akira Miyata
    • 14
  • Fumihito Tajima
    • 15
  • Yoshinobu Takemoto
    • 16
  • Akiyoshi Miwa
    • 17
  • Takaaki Chou
    • 18
  • Mine Harada
    • 19
  1. 1.Division of Hematology, Department of Internal MedicineNational Hospital Organization Okayama Medical CenterOkayamaJapan
  2. 2.Division of Hematology/OncologyOkayama University Medical SchoolOkayamaJapan
  3. 3.Department of Internal MedicineNishigunma National HospitalShibukawaJapan
  4. 4.Department of Hematology/Oncology, Institute for Rad. Biology and MedicineHiroshima UniversityHiroshimaJapan
  5. 5.Department of HematologyOita Prefectural HospitalOitaJapan
  6. 6.Division of HematologySt. Mary’s HospitalKurumeJapan
  7. 7.Hematology Division, Department of MedicineHyogo Cancer CenterAkashiJapan
  8. 8.Department of Internal MedicineYamada Red Cross HospitalIseJapan
  9. 9.Department of HematologyHarasanshin HospitalFukuokaJapan
  10. 10.Division of Hematology/OncologyKumamoto City HospitalKumamotoJapan
  11. 11.Department of HematologyHamanomachi HospitalFukuokaJapan
  12. 12.Department of Internal MedicineKure Kyosai HospitalKureJapan
  13. 13.Division of Hematology and Oncology, Department of MedicineKyoto Prefectural University of MedicineKyotoJapan
  14. 14.Department of Internal MedicineChugoku Central Hospital of the Mutual Aid Association of Public School TeachersFukuyamaJapan
  15. 15.Division of Blood TransfusionTottori University HospitalYonagoJapan
  16. 16.Medical Corporation Kouryokai CPC ClinicKagoshimaJapan
  17. 17.Department of HematologyInternational Medical Center of JapanTokyoJapan
  18. 18.Department of Internal MedicineNiigata Cancer Center HospitalNiigataJapan
  19. 19.Department of Medicine and Biosystemic ScienceKyushu University Graduate School of Medical ScienceFukuokaJapan

Personalised recommendations