A Real-World data of 100 Day outcomes of Multiple Myeloma patients undergoing Autologous Stem Cell Transplant using Non-Cryopreserved Stem Cells
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.63501/08meax47Keywords:
Multiple Myeloma, Autologus stem cell transplant, EngraftmentAbstract
Aims:
To evaluate the day 100 outcomes of ASCT using non-cryopreserved stem cells in MM patients.
Methods:
The study included seventy patients who underwent ASCT with non-cryopreserved stem cells for MM between January 2009 and September 2023 at Armed Forces Bone Marrow Transplant Centre, Rawalpindi Pakistan.Patients were followed up to day +100 post-transplant in terms of their platelets and neutrophil engraftment, transplant related mortality, its associated complications and duration of hospitalisation.
Results:
The median age of the patients at the time of transplant was 49.97(+-9.79) years. Male to female ratio was 3:1. The most common presenting symptom was backache (70%) while anaemia was the usual initial laboratory findings (73%). The Mobilization strategy in the majority of patients (70%) was Chemotherapy granulocyte colony stimulating factor, and most of the patients (55%) were in complete remission (CR) at the time of ASCT. The conditioning regimen used commonly (85%) was Melphalan 200 mg/m2. The median days for engraftment of neutrophils and platelets were 11(IQR 10.75-12) days and 16 (IQR 15-18) days, respectively. The median duration of hospitalisation after transplant was14 days (IQR: 13 to 16). Febrile neutropenia was documented in 80.3% patients. Overall and disease-free survival was 100% at day 100.
Conclusion:
Non-cryopreserved stem cells offer a cheaper, convenient and effective alternative for the cryopreserved stem cells. Non-cryopreserved stem cells were associated with rapid neutrophil and platelet engraftment and should be preferred stem cell source in resource limited centres.
Conflict of ineterest: The full manuscript including this abstract is already publised in "History of Medicine" journaland is submitted to this journal after invitation due to poster presentation at First international conference of Transplantation at Marriot Hotel Karachi.
References
1. Małecki, B., L. Gil, and D.J.A.H.P. Dytfeld, Role of transplantation in treatment of multiple myeloma in era of novel agents. 2021. 52(2): p. 77-84.
2. Du, J., J.J.C.D. Zhuang, and T. Medicine, Major advances in the treatment of multiple myeloma in American Society of Hematology annual meeting 2020. 2021. 7(04): p. 220-226. https://mednexus.org/doi/full/10.1016/j.cdtm.2021.08.003
3. Charliński, G. and A.J.B.P.T.O.N. Jurczyszyn, Multiple myeloma–2020 update on diagnosis and management. 2020. 5(5): p. 241-251.
4. Abdrabou, A.K., et al., Outcomes of autologous stem cell transplantation for multiple myeloma in Saudi Arabia. 2021. 41(4): p. 198-205. https://www.annsaudimed.net/doi/full/10.5144/0256-4947.2021.198
5. Rajkumar, S.V.J.A.j.o.h., Multiple myeloma: 2020 update on diagnosis, risk‐stratification and management. 2020. 95(5): p. 548-567. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/ajh.25117
6. Padala, S.A., et al., Epidemiology, staging, and management of multiple myeloma. 2021. 9(1): p. 3. https://www.mdpi.com/2076-3271/9/1/3
7. Al-Anazi, K.A., Z. Alshaibani, and P. Kalogianidis, An Update on Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation in Patients with Multiple Myeloma, in Recent Updates on Multiple Myeloma. 2023, IntechOpen. https://www.intechopen.com/chapters/85327
8. Naithani, R., et al., Hematopoietic stem cell transplantation using non-cryopreserved peripheral blood stem cells graft is effective in multiple myeloma and lymphoma. 2018. 53(9): p. 1198-1200. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41409-018-0174-9
9. Bekadja, M.A., Non-cryopreserved Peripheral Stem Cell Autograft for Multiple Myeloma and Lymphoma in Countries with Low Resources, in Handbook of Stem Cell Therapy. 2022, Springer. p. 1421-1443. https://link.springer.com/referenceworkentry/10.1007/978-981-19-2655-6_52
10. Jennane, S., et al., Non-cryopreserved peripheral blood stem cells autologous transplantation in multiple myeloma: Bicentric study. 2020. 27(3): p. 152-156. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1246782020300537
11. Piriyakhuntorn, P., et al., Outcomes of non-cryopreserved versus cryopreserved peripheral blood stem cells for autologous stem cell transplantation in multiple myeloma. Annals of Transplantation, 2020. 25: p. e927084-1. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7737409/
12. Pessoa, J.M., et al., Cryopreserved versus non-cryopreserved stem cell autografts in multiple myeloma a restrospective cohort study. 2022. 57(8): p. 1313-1318. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41409-022-01718-2
13. Uysal, A., et al., The effect of cryopreserved and noncryopreserved stem cells on the outcome of autologous stem-cell transplantation in multiple myeloma patients: A single-center experience. 2022. 47(3): p. 181-186. https://journals.lww.com/egjh/fulltext/2022/47030/the_effect_of_cryopreserved_and_noncryopreserved.4.aspx
14. Joseph, J., et al., Fresh versus cryopreserved peripheral stem cell for autologous transplantation in multiple myeloma: An analysis of short-term outcomes. Blood, 2020. 136: p. 9-10. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0006497118733181
15. Castellanos, L., et al., 241.5: Cryopreserved vs Non-cryopreserved Graft Before Autologous Stem Cell Transplantation in Patients With Multiple Myeloma. A Comparative Study. Transplantation, 2022. 106(9S): p. S127. https://journals.lww.com/transplantjournal/fulltext/2022/09001/241_5__Cryopreserved_vs_Non_cryopreserved_Graft.190.aspx
16. Al Saleh, A.S., et al., Differences in engraftment with day-1 compared with day-2 melphalan prior to stem cell infusion in myeloma patients receiving autologous stem cell transplant. 2020. 55(11): p. 2132-2137. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41409-020-0916-3
17. Kumar, L., et al., Multiple myeloma: impact of time to transplant on the outcome. 2022. 22(9): p. e826-e835. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S2152265022001355
18. Kumar, L., et al., Multiple Myeloma—Effect of Induction Therapy on Transplant Outcomes. 2021. 21(2): p. 80-90. e5. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S2152265020305085
19. Turunen, A., et al., CD34+ cell mobilization, blood graft composition, and posttransplant recovery in myeloma patients compared to non‐Hodgkinʼs lymphoma patients: results of the prospective multicenter GOA study. 2020. 60(7): p. 1519-1528. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/trf.15820
20. Lemieux, C., et al., Outcomes after delayed and second autologous stem cell transplant in patients with relapsed multiple myeloma. 2021. 56(11): p. 2664-2671. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41409-021-01371-1
21. Zheng-Lin, B., et al., Duration of Post-Autologous Hematopoietic Cell Transplant Anemia and Thrombocytopenia Are Associated with Prolonged Hospital Length-of-Stay for Multiple Myeloma Patients. 2020. 136: p. 5-6. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0006497118724245
22. Marini, J., et al., Effectiveness, safety, and cost implications of outpatient autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplant for multiple myeloma. Hematology/Oncology and Stem Cell Therapy, 2023. 16(4): p. 351-357. https://journals.lww.com/hosct/fulltext/2023/16040/effectiveness,_safety,_and_cost_implications_of.9.aspx
23. Voloshin, S., et al., The Comparison of Results of Autologous Transplantation Using Non-Cryopreserved and Cryopreserved Hematopoietic Stem Cells (HSC). Blood, 2020. 136: p. 5-6. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0006497118733144
24. Sarmiento, M., et al., Advantages of non-cryopreserved autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation against a cryopreserved strategy. Bone Marrow Transplantation, 2018. 53(8): p. 960-966. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41409-018-0117-5
25. Yadav, N., et al., Second stem cell transplantation for treatment of relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma after first autologous stem cell transplant: A 15-year retrospective institutional analysis. Indian Journal of Cancer, 2023. 60(3): p. 316-324. https://journals.lww.com/indianjcancer/_layouts/15/oaks.journals/downloadpdf.aspx?an=02223310-202360030-00005
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0), which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution, and reproduction in any medium or format, provided appropriate credit is given to the author(s) and the source. To view a copy of this license, visit: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0