A randomized phase II study of stem cell mobilization with cyclophosphamide+G-CSF or G-CSF alone after lenalidomide-based induction in multiple myeloma.

The most common means of mobilizing autologous stem cells is G-CSF alone or combined with cyclophosphamide (CY) to obtain sufficient CD34+ cells for one to two transplants. There are few prospective, randomized studies investigating mobilization regimens in multiple myeloma (MM), especially after lenalidomide-based induction. We designed this prospective, randomized study to compare low-dose CY 2 g/m2 +G-CSF (arm A) and G-CSF alone (arm B) after lenalidomide-based up-front induction in MM. Of the 80 initially randomized patients, 69 patients were evaluable, 34 and 35 patients in arms A and B, respectively. The primary end point was the proportion of patients achieving a yield of ⩾3 × 10(6)/kg CD34+ cells with 1-2 aphereses, which was achieved in 94% and 77% in arms A and B, respectively (P=0.084). The median number of aphereses needed to reach the yield of ⩾3 × 10(6)/kg was lower in arm A than in arm B (1 vs. 2, P=0.035). Two patients needed plerixafor in arm A and five patients in arm B (P=0.428). Although CY-based mobilization was more effective, G-CSF alone was successful in a great majority of patients to reach the defined collection target after three cycles of lenalidomide-based induction.

Autologous stem cell transplantation versus novel drugs or conventional chemotherapy for patients with relapsed multiple myeloma after previous ASCT.

High-dose therapy (HDT) followed by autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) is the most common first-line treatment for patients with multiple myeloma (MM) under 65 years of age. A second ASCT at first relapse is frequently used but is challenged by the use of novel drugs. We retrospectively studied the outcome of second-line treatment in MM patients from the Nordic countries with relapse after first-line HDT and ASCT. Patients that underwent a second ASCT (n=111) were compared with patients re-treated with conventional cytotoxic drugs only (n=91) or with regimens including novel drugs (proteasome inhibitors and/or immunomodulatory drugs) (n=362) without a second ASCT. For patients receiving a second ASCT median overall survival was 4.0 years compared with 3.3 years (P<0.001) for the group treated with novel drugs and 2.5 years (P<0.001) for those receiving conventional cytotoxic drugs only. A second ASCT also resulted in a significantly longer second time to progression and a significantly longer time to next treatment. We conclude that, irrespective of the addition of novel drugs, MM patients in first relapse after ASCT still appear to benefit from a second ASCT. A second ASCT should be considered for all physically fit patients.