A comparative effectiveness study of lipegfilgrastim in multiple myeloma patients after high dose melphalan and autologous stem cell transplant
- PMID: 31853703
- DOI: 10.1007/s00277-019-03901-w
A comparative effectiveness study of lipegfilgrastim in multiple myeloma patients after high dose melphalan and autologous stem cell transplant
Abstract
G-CSF administration after high-dose chemotherapy and autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) has been shown to expedite neutrophil recovery. Several studies comparing filgrastim and pegfilgrastim in the post-ASCT setting concluded that the two are at least equally effective. Lipegfilgrastim (LIP) is a new long-acting, once-per-cycle G-CSF. This multicentric, prospective study aimed to describe the use of LIP in multiple myeloma patients receiving high-dose melphalan and autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) and compare LIP with historic controls of patients who received short-acting agent (filgrastim [FIL]). Overall, 125 patients with a median age of 60 years received G-CSF after ASCT (80 patients LIP on day 1 post-ASCT and 45 patients FIL on day 5 post-ASCT). The median duration of grade 4 neutropenia (absolute neutrophil count [ANC] < 0.5 × 10 [9]/L) was 5 days in both LIP and FIL groups, whereas the median number of days to reach ANC ≥ 0.5 × 10 [9]/L was 10% lower in the LIP than in the FIL group (10 vs 11 days), respectively. Male sex was significantly associated with a faster ANC ≥ 0.5 × 10 [9] L response (p = 0.015). The incidence of FN was significantly lower in the LIP than in the FIL group (29% vs 49%, respectively, p = 0.024). The days to discharge after ASCT infusion were greater in patients with FN (p < 0.001). The study indicates that LIP had a shorter time to ANC recovery and is more effective than FIL for the prevention of FN in the ASCT setting.
Keywords: Autologous stem cell transplant; Filgrastim; G-CSF; High dose melphalan; Lipegfilgrastim; Multiple myeloma.
References
-
- Goldschmidt H, Ashcroft J, Szabo Z, Garderet L (2019) Navigating the treatment landscape in multiple myeloma: which combinations to use and when? Ann Hematol 98:1–18. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00277-018-3546-8 - DOI - PubMed
-
- Martin T, Huff CA (2019) Multiple myeloma: current advances and future directions. Clin Lymphoma Myeloma Leuk 19:255–263 - PubMed
-
- Palumbo A, Cavallo F, Gay F, Di Raimondo F, Ben Yehuda D, Petrucci MT et al (2014) Autologous transplantation and maintenance therapy in multiple myeloma. N Engl J Med 371:895–905 - PubMed
-
- Gay F, Oliva S, Petrucci MT, Conticello C, Catalano L, Corradini P, Siniscalchi A, Magarotto V, Pour L, Carella A, Malfitano A, Petrò D, Evangelista A, Spada S, Pescosta N, Omedè P, Campbell P, Liberati AM, Offidani M, Ria R, Pulini S, Patriarca F, Hajek R, Spencer A, Boccadoro M, Palumbo A (2015) Chemotherapy plus lenalidomide versus autologous transplantation, followed by lenalidomide plus prednisone versus lenalidomide maintenance, in patients with multiple myeloma: a randomised, multicentre, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol 16:1617–1629 - PubMed
-
- Cavo M, Palumbo A, Zweegmanet S, Dimopoulos MA, Hajek R, Pantani L et al (2016) Upfront autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) versus novel agent-based therapy for multiple myeloma (MM): a randomized phase 3 study of the European Myeloma Network (EMN02/HO95 MM trial). J Clin Oncol 34(15_suppl):8000–8000. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2016.34.15_suppl.8000 - DOI
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical
Miscellaneous
