Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2007 Jul;92(7):928-35.
doi: 10.3324/haematol.11168.

Intermediate-dose melphalan compared with myeloablative treatment in multiple myeloma: long-term follow-up of the Dutch Cooperative Group HOVON 24 trial

Pieter Sonneveld  1 , Bronno van der Holt, Christine M Segeren, Edo Vellenga, Alexandra J Croockewit, Gregor E G Verhoe, Jan J Cornelissen, Martijn R Schaafsma, Marinus H J van Oers, Pierre W Wijermans, Petra H M Westveer, Henk M Lokhorst; Dutch-Belgian Hemato-Oncology Cooperative Group (HOVON)
Affiliations
Free article
Randomized Controlled Trial

Intermediate-dose melphalan compared with myeloablative treatment in multiple myeloma: long-term follow-up of the Dutch Cooperative Group HOVON 24 trial

Pieter Sonneveld et al. Haematologica. 2007 Jul.
Free article

Abstract

Background and objectives: The Dutch-Belgian HOVON group performed a randomized phase 3 trial to compare single non-myeloablative intensive treatment with double, intensive treatment in previously untreated patients with multiple myeloma (MM).

Design and methods: Three hundred and three patients with stage II/III MM were randomized after VAD induction chemotherapy to receive two cycles of non-myeloablative intermediate-dose melphalan (70 mg/m2) (single treatment) or the same regimen followed by cyclophosphamide 120 mg/kg iv plus total body irradiation (TBI) 9 Gy and autologous stem cell transplantation (double, intensive treatment). In both treatment arms interferon .IIa was given as maintenance until relapse/progression.

Results: A significantly higher proportion of patients achieved a complete remission (CR) on protocol treatment with double, intensive therapy (32 % vs 13 %, p<0.001). Double treatment produced better outcome in terms of event-free survival (median 22 vs 21 months, 28% vs 14% at 4 years and 15% vs 7% at 6 years after randomization; logrank p=0.013; univariate HR 0.74, 95% CI, 0.58-0.94), progression-free survival (median 27 vs 24 months, 33% vs 16% at 4 years, and 17% vs 9% at 6 years after randomization; logrank p=0.006; HR=0.71, 95% CI 0.56-0.91), but not overall survival (median 50 vs 55 months, 52% vs 56% at 4 years and 39% vs 36% at 6 years after randomization; logrank p=0.51; HR=1.10, 95% CI 0.83-1.46). The achievement of a CR had a favorable prognostic impact on event-free survival (HR=0.60 , 95% CI=0.44 -0.82 , p=0.001) and progression-free survival (HR=0.62 , 95% CI=0.45 -0.84, p=0.002).

Interpretation and conclusions: Double, intensive treatment resulted in a better CR rate, event-free survival and progression-free survival but not overall survival compared to single non-myeloablative treatment in previously untreated patients with multiple myeloma.

PubMed Disclaimer

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources