Introduction
Multiple myeloma remains an incurable systemic malignancy with
a median survival not exceeding 3 years [1] .Modifications of standard
therapy with melphalan and prednisone have not improved patients'
prognosis [2]. As a result, dose intensification studies have been
undertaken to determine whether such approach would be associated
with enhanced tumor cell kill with increased response rates as well
as extended remissions and survival [3-11]. Results Melphalan Dose-Response
Relationship Evaluation of increasing doses of intravenously applied
melphalan resulted in increased response rates (>=75% tumor cytoreduction)
as well as extension of relapse-free and overall survival durations
(Table 1). Beyond 140 mg/m©÷ melphalan, autologous hemopoietic stem
cells were required, which also
Table 1. Melphalan dose escalation in
refractory myeloma
permitted the administration of total body irradiation. Thus, without
increasing the treatment-associated mortality, antitumor effect
seem to be markedly enhanced as a result of dose escalation of melphalan
and especially upon addition of total body irradiation, which could
be afforded by virtue of autologous marrow grafting.
Choice of Cytoreductive Therapy
When comparing maximally tolerated doses (MTD) of cyclophosphamide
and melphalan without autografts and also hemopoietic stem cell
supported cyclophosphamide with added BCNU and etoposide (CBV),
melphalan at subtransplant doses appeared more effective than cyclophosphamide
at MTD and comparable in efficacy to the CBV regimen with blood
stem cell support (Table 2) .The virtual lack of extramedullary
toxicity with melphalan up to 100 mg/m² justified further dose
escalation and addition of total body irradiation ( see above) .
In VAD-responsive myeloma we had the opportunity of comparing TBI
regimens that included either melphalan or thiotepa. Relapse-free
and overall survival durations were superior when melphalan rather
than thiotepa was employed (Table 3). These results support the
notion that melphalan is one of the most active cytotoxic agents
for the therapy of myelomatosis.
Table 2. Efficacy of different
alkylating agents in refractory myeloma
Table 3. Melphalan or thiotepa with TBI in responsive
myeloma
Fig. 1 a, b. Melphalan -TBI in sensitive versus
resistant myeloma.
a Relapse-free survival.
b Overall survival.
Timing of Autotransplantation
Among 55 patients receivingTBI-containing regimens with either
melphalan or thiotepa, the worst outcome was noted among patients
with VAD-resistant relapse [9]. When considering the major difference
in activity between melphalan and thiotepa ( see above) , further
analysis was performed on the subset of patients receiving melphalan
and TBI. Those treated while still responsive to standard doses
of therapy had superior relapse-free and overall survival times
compared to patients with resistant myeloma (Fig. 1).
Future Directions
Based on relatively comparable results obtained with melphalan
at 200 mg/m² [8] and melphalan at 140 mg/m² with added
TBI at 850 cGy among patients with responsive myeloma [9], the double
transplant program was developed employing two cycles of melphalan
at 200 mg/m² 3-6 months apart using hemopoietic stem cells
collected prior to the first intensive therapy [121. Preliminary
data indicate that this approach is feasible in principle without
early mortality among almost 50 patients who have completed one
cycle of treatment. Few relapses were seen between 3 and 6 months
after the first transplant. Approximately 20 patients have received
a second transplantation, and hematologic reconstitution was not
significantly delayed provided that quantity and quality of hemopoietic
stem cells were adequate. There was no evidence of cumulative extramedullary
toxicity. Compared with the preceding TBI-containing regimens, extramedullary
toxicity, especially stomatitis,was reduced and early mortality
decreased. This was perhaps in part related to the concurrent use
of autologous blood stem cells and GM-CSF [13]. The follow-up time
is still too short to permit comparisons of the double transplant
approach with the preceding melphalan-TBI program. As a result of
eliminating treatment-associated mortality, early survival data
are superior with the recent program that does not utilize TBI [14].
Conclusions
Autologous hemopoietic stem cells permit administration of marrowablative
doses of therapy even to elderly patients with multiple myeloma
without excessive toxicity. Higher frequencies of complete remission
have been obtained even in advanced and refractory disease which
had not been obtained with standard doses of treatment applied to
newly diagnosed patients. Melphalan appears to be the single most
active agent among a variety of drugs tested and suitable for repeated
application without undue toxicity. Compared with historical data,
autotransplant-supported intensive therapy seems to extend survival
in refractory myeloma by at least one year and, using cautious estimates,
by 3 years when applied for response consolidation. The availability
of hemopoietic growth factors such as GM-CSF permits speedy collection
of blood stem cells following high dose cyclophosphamide priming,
and their joint use with autologous hone marrow and GM-CSF also
post-transplantation has shortened the duration of bone marrow aplasia
to a few days and hence reduced the risk of fatal infection during
agranulocytosis markedly.
Acknowledgement.
Supported in part by CA37161-01 from the National Institutes of
Health, Bethesda, Maryland.
References
1. Barlogie B, Epstein ], Selvanayagam P, Alexanian R (1989) Review
article: plasma cell myeloma -new biological insights and advances
in therapy. Blood 73:865-879
2. Boccadoro M, Marmont F, Tribalto M ct al. (1991) Multiple mycloma:
alternating combination chemotherapy (VMCP/VBAP) is not superior
to melphalan and prednisone (MP) even in high risk patients. ] Clin
Oncol 9:444-448
3. Mc Elwain TJ, Powles RL (1983) High-dose intravenous melphalan
for plasma-cell leukaemia and myeloma. Lancet 1 :822-823
4. Barlogie B, Hall R, Zander A, Dicke K, Alexanian R (1986) High
dose melphalan with autologous marrow transplantation for multiple
myeloma. Blood 67: 1298-1301
5. Barlogie B, Alexanian R, Dicke K, Zagars G, Spitzer G, Jagannath
S, Horowitz L (1987) High dose chemoradiotherapy and autologous
bone marrow transplantation for resistant multiple mycloma. Blood
70:869-872
6. Reiffers J, Marit G, Boiron JM (1989) Autologous blood stem ccll
transplantation in high-risk multiple myeloma. Br ] Haematol 72:296-297
7. Fermand JP, Levy Y, Geroto J et al. ( 1989) Treatment of aggressive
multiple myeloma by high-dose chemotherapy and total body irradiation
followed by blood stem cells autologous graft. Blood 73:20-23
8. Gore ME, Selby PJ, Viner C et al. (1989) Intensive treatment
of multiple myeloma and criteria for complete remission. Lancet
1I:879-882
9. Jagannath S, Barlogie B, Dicke KA et aI. (1990) Autologous bone
marrow transplantation in multiple mycloma: identification of prognostic
factors. Blood 76:1860-1866
10. Harousscau JL, Milpied N, Laporte ]P ct al. (1992) Double intensive
therapy in high risk multiple mycloma. Blood 79:2827-2833
11. Anderson K, Barut B, Ritz] et al. (1991) Monoclonal antibody-purged
autologous bone marrow transplantation therapy for multiple myeloma.
Blood 77:712- 720
12. Jagannath S, Vesole D, Glenn L, Growley J and Barlogie B (1992)
Low-Risk Intensive Therapy for multiple mycloma with combined autologous
Bonc Marrow and Blood stem cell support. Blood 80: 1666-1672.
13. Gianni AM, Siena S, Bregni M et al. (1989) Granulocyte-macrophage
colony stimulating factor to harvest circulating haemopoictic stem
cells for autotransplantation. Lancet II 8663:580-584
14. Jagannath S, Vesole D, Barlogie B (1991) High dose therapy,
autologous stem cells and hematopoietic growth factors for the management
of multiple myeloma. In: Armitage JO, Antman KH (eds) High-dose
cancer therapy. Williams and Wilkins, Baltimore, MD. pp. 638-650
|