Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Evaluating the adverse effects of melphalan formulations.
Xiang, Elaine; Ni, Jian; Glotzbecker, Brett; Laubach, Jacob; Soiffer, Robert; McDonnell, Anne M.
Affiliation
  • Xiang E; 1 Department of Pharmacy, Dana Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA, USA.
  • Ni J; 2 Department of Pharmacy, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
  • Glotzbecker B; 3 Department of Medical Oncology, Dana Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA, USA.
  • Laubach J; 3 Department of Medical Oncology, Dana Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA, USA.
  • Soiffer R; 3 Department of Medical Oncology, Dana Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA, USA.
  • McDonnell AM; 2 Department of Pharmacy, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
J Oncol Pharm Pract ; 25(7): 1631-1637, 2019 Oct.
Article in En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30336728
INTRODUCTION: For multiple myeloma patients who respond to primary therapy, autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT) is considered standard of care with high-dose melphalan for transplant candidates. There are now two different melphalan formulations available, including a propylene glycol containing (PG-MEL) product and a propylene glycol-free (PG-free MEL) product. Although considered bioequivalent, there remains limited literature directly evaluating the adverse events between the two agents. We seek to assess the tolerability and severity of side effects between the two formulations in a real-life practice setting. METHODS: A retrospective, descriptive analysis was conducted of multiple myeloma patients who received autologous stem cell conditioning with either melphalan formulation when dosed at 100 mg/m2/dose for two consecutive doses. The primary outcome was the assessment of tolerability and severity of side effects. Tolerability was split into four major categories including hematologic toxicity, gastrointestinal toxicity, renal toxicity, and highest recorded mucositis grade. RESULTS: There were a total of 78 patients who received a melphalan preparation during the study. The median time to myeloablation and neutrophil engraftment was five and seven days post-HSCT, respectively, for all patients. Patients who received PG-free MEL were less likely to develop mucositis, with 22 (56%) reported highest grade 0, defined by World Health Organization oral toxicity scale, compared to those who received PG-MEL (33%), p = 0.04. CONCLUSION: There were minimal differences in tolerability or side effects observed between PG-free MEL and PG-MEL. These data may assist in better understanding the anticipated adverse effects of a high-dose melphalan conditioning therapy.
Subject(s)
Key words

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Antineoplastic Agents, Alkylating / Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions / Melphalan Type of study: Diagnostic_studies / Etiology_studies / Incidence_studies / Observational_studies / Risk_factors_studies Limits: Adult / Aged / Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged Language: En Journal: J Oncol Pharm Pract Journal subject: FARMACIA Year: 2019 Document type: Article Affiliation country: United States Country of publication: United kingdom

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Antineoplastic Agents, Alkylating / Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions / Melphalan Type of study: Diagnostic_studies / Etiology_studies / Incidence_studies / Observational_studies / Risk_factors_studies Limits: Adult / Aged / Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged Language: En Journal: J Oncol Pharm Pract Journal subject: FARMACIA Year: 2019 Document type: Article Affiliation country: United States Country of publication: United kingdom