ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Multiple myeloma (MM) represents the second most common hematologic malignancy (15%). Induction with bortezomib, cyclophosphamide, and dexamthasone VCd (d: low dose dexamthasone) regimen is widely used due to its high effectiveness, low toxicity and good tolerability, particularly with renal impairment. Real-world data on the use of VCD in clinical practice is lacking. OBJECTIVES: Evaluate the real-world experience of the VCD regimen. DESIGN: Retrospective. SETTING: Tumor registry database of tertiary cancer care center. PATIENTS AND METHODS: newly diagnosed MM patients who received VCD induction and underwent autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) from July 2007 to July 2020. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: response evaluation, progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). SAMPLE SIZE: 87 patients. RESULTS: Of 102 patients who started induction with VCd, 87 patients experienced a partial response or more overall response rate of 85%). The median age of these 87 patients at diagnosis was 52 years, of which 29.9% presented with renal impairment and 60.3% of patients had stage 2 by the Revised International Staging System (R-ISS). Patients with a standard cytogenetic risk achieved a better response compared to those with a poor cytogenetic risk (P=.044). The post-induction response rates were 6.9% stringent complete remission (sCR), 35% complete remission (CR); 41.4% very good partial response (VGPR), and 16.1% partial response (PR), respectively; the response rates became greater for sCR and CR post-transplantation at day 100 with 16.1% sCR, 35.6% CR, 32.2% VGPR and 16.1% PR, respectively. The median PFS was 49 months and 5 years OS was 84%. PFS was better in patients who achieved sCR vs PR (83 vs 35 months, P=.037). High LDH, high-risk cytogenetic and stage 3 R-ISS showed a worse median PFS and OS. CONCLUSIONS: VCD induction in newly diagnosed MM is highly effective, convenient, tolerable and affordable regimen, especially in low and middle-income countries with limited resources, also with favorable outcomes and survival. while those who did not respond successfully shifted to VRD or VTD. LIMITATIONS: The usual limitations of a retrospective analysis using registry-level data, no data on quality of life.