The association of mobilising regimen on immune reconstitution and survival in myeloma patients treated with bortezomib, cyclophosphamide and dexamethasone induction followed by a melphalan autograft

Matthew J. Rees, Peter Mollee, Jun Yen Ng, Alex Murton, Jose Filipe Gonsalves, Ashish Panigrahi, Hayley Beer, Joanna Loh, Philip Nguyen, Sam Hunt, Hayden Jina, Rebecca Wayte, Gaurav Sutrave, Jocelyn Tan, Chathuri Abeyakoon, Ashlyn Chee, Bradley Augustson, Akash Kalro, Cindy Lee, Shivam AgrawalLeonid Churilov, Chong Chyn Chua, Andrew Boon Ming Lim, Daniela Zantomio, Andrew Grigg

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

6 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

G-CSF only mobilisation has been shown to enhance immune reconstitution early post-transplant, but its impact on survival remains uncertain. We undertook a retrospective review of 12 transplant centres to examine overall survival (OS) and time to next treatment (TTNT) following melphalan autograft according to mobilisation method (G-CSF only vs. G-CSF and cyclophosphamide [CY]) in myeloma patients uniformly treated with bortezomib, cyclophosphamide and dexamethasone induction. Six centres had a policy to use G-CSF alone and six to use G-CSF + CY. Patients failing G-CSF only mobilisation were excluded. 601 patients were included: 328: G-CSF + CY, 273: G-CSF only. Mobilisation arms were comparable in terms of age, Revised International Staging System (R-ISS) groups and post-transplant maintenance therapy. G-CSF + CY mobilisation generated higher median CD34 + yields (8.6 vs. 5.5 × 106/kg, p < 0.001). G-CSF only mobilisation was associated with a significantly higher lymphocyte count at day 15 post-infusion (p < 0.001). G-CSF only mobilisation was associated with significantly improved OS (aHR = 0.60, 95%CI 0.39–0.92, p = 0.018) and TTNT (aHR = 0.77, 95%CI 0.60–0.97, p = 0.027), when adjusting for R-ISS, disease-response pre-transplant, age and post-transplant maintenance therapy. This survival benefit may reflect selection bias in excluding patients with unsuccessful G-CSF only mobilisation or may be due to enhanced autograft immune cell content and improved early immune reconstitution.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)2152-2159
Number of pages8
JournalBone Marrow Transplantation
Volume56
Issue number9
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Sept 2021

Cite this