Reduced-intensity conditioning for myeloma: lower nonrelapse mortality but higher relapse rates compared with myeloablative conditioning

• Published in: Blood 2007-04, Vol.109 (8), p.3588-3594
• Main Authors: Crawley, Charles, Iacobelli, Simona, Björkstrand, Bo, Apperley, Jane F., Niederwieser, Dietger, Gahrton, Gösta
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Adult; Aged; Disease-Free Survival; Female; Humans; Lymphocyte Depletion; Male; Medicin och hälsovetenskap; Middle Aged; Multiple Myeloma - mortality; Multiple Myeloma - therapy; Peripheral Blood Stem Cell Transplantation; Recurrence; Retrospective Studies; Risk Factors; Survival Rate; Transplantation Conditioning; Transplantation, Homologous
• ISSN: 0006-4971; 1528-0020
• DOI: 10.1182/blood-2006-07-036848

Despite the widespread adoption of reduced-intensity conditioning (RIC) for myeloma, there are few data comparing outcomes with RIC with myeloablative conditioning (MAC). We report the outcomes of patients undergoing allogeneic transplantations for myeloma and reported to the EBMT. A minimum data set was available on 320 RIC and 196 MAC allografts performed between 1998 and 2002. The RIC patients were older (51 vs 45 years) with more progressive disease (28% vs 21%) and more had received a prior transplant (76% vs 11%). In addition, there was a longer time to transplantation and an increased use of peripheral blood and T-cell depletion. For RIC and MAC, respectively, the nonrelapse mortality (NRM) at 2 years was 24% and 37% (P = .002); overall survival, 38.1% and 50.8% (not significant [ns]); and progression-free survival (PFS), 18.9% and 34.5% (P = .001). On multivariate analysis, RIC was associated with a reduction in NRM (HR, 0.5), but this was offset by an increase in relapse risk (HR, 2.0), and the conditioning intensity did not impact on overall survival or retain significance for PFS. These data suggest that there is a continuing need to investigate dose intensity in the conditioning for myeloma allografts.