梅尔法兰
医学
粘膜炎
多发性骨髓瘤
不利影响
中性粒细胞减少症
化疗
血小板输注
移植
外科
内科学
造血干细胞移植
肿瘤科
发热性中性粒细胞减少症
血小板
作者
Abdullah Khan,Filiz Yucebay,Qiuhong Zhao,Elvira Umyarova,Francesca Cottini,Naresh Bumma,Ashley Rosko,Don M. Benson,Nidhi Sharma,Yvonne A. Efebera,Srinivas Devarakonda
标识
DOI:10.1016/j.clml.2022.10.004
摘要
High-dose melphalan (HDM) with autologous hematopoietic cell transplantation (AHCT) after induction chemotherapy is considered standard of care in transplant-eligible patients with newly-diagnosed multiple myeloma (MM). Alkeran melphalan has propylene glycol as a solvent (PG-mel) while Evomela utilizes a propylene glyclol-free formulation (PGF-mel). We evaluated the differences in efficacy and safety of the 2 formulations as there are no prospective head-to-head trials.We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of all 259 consecutive MM patients who received PGF-mel as part of HDM-AHCT at The Ohio State University (OSU). The comparator group was the preceding 255 patients who received PG-mel.Baseline patient characteristics were similar between the 2 groups. Post-AHCT rates of relapse were comparable in the PG-mel and PGF-mel groups. Some adverse events were observed at a higher frequency in the PG-mel group compared to the PGF-mel group (grade ≥ 2 mucositis, febrile neutropenia, other infectious complications, and acute renal insufficiency). Time to neutrophil engraftment was slightly longer in the PG-mel group while time to platelet engraftment was longer in PGF-mel group. Red cell transfusion requirement was higher with the use of PG-mel but not platelet transfusion. Duration of hospitalization was slightly shorter with PGF-mel but readmission rates within 30 days of discharge were higher.Considering possible confounding factors could possibly account for observed differences in some adverse events, the comparable treatment responses, and difference in cost of the 2 formulation, The OSU reverted to PG-mel as the preferred formulation for HDM-AHCT in MM.
科研通智能强力驱动
Strongly Powered by AbleSci AI