The Introduction of Novel Agents Improves Outcomes of Young Patients with Myeloma (MM) Treated with Autologous Stem Cell Transplant (ASCT)
Authors: Saso Radovan , Boyd Kevin D , Mohammed Kabir , Wu Ping , Treleaven Jennifer , Davies Faith E. , Morgan Gareth J 
Published: October 2019

Abstract
Abstract 1348

Background:
There has been an improvement in the population based survival of patients with MM in the UK (Office of National Statistics), however, because of the way the data is collected it is uncertain what has happened to the outcome of younger patients. High dose melphalan with ASCT has formed an integral part of the treatment of younger patients with myeloma for more than 20 years. During this time the context within which this treatment has been delivered has changed. Peripheral blood stem cell harvesting has replaced bone marrow harvesting, and importantly, novel agents have become available at induction and at relapse. It is not known how these changes have affected patient outcome. We analysed the survival of patients undergoing ASCT for MM in a single referral centre over an 18 year period to assess the impact of these changes.

Patients:
1291 patients with myeloma were registered on the Royal Marsden Hospital Database in the period between 1981–2009, of which 875 patients underwent autologous transplantation. Bone marrow transplant (BMT) was performed in 191 patient, while 684 patients had peripheral blood stem cell transplant (SCT).

Prognostic Factors:
The following factors were found to be associated with improved overall survival (OS) in univariate analysis: Salmon Durie Stage A vs Stage B (p<0.004), ISS Stage I vs II vs III (p<0.001), response to chemotherapy CR vs PR vs Other (p<0.007), Platelets >130 vs <130 × 109/L (p<0.001), Hb >10 vs <10 g/dl (p<0.001), Calcium <10 vs >10mg/dl, Albumin >35 vs <35g/L (p<0.034), B-2M >3.5 vs <3.5 mg/l (p<0.001), IgG vs IgA vs BJ (p<0.038). Variables significant in multivariate testing were: Response to chemotherapy CR vs <CR (HR 1.4; 95% CI 1.0–2.0), Platelets >130 (HR 0.52; 95% CI 0.3–0.9), Calcium (HR1.7; 95% CI 1.2–2.5) and B2M (HR2.1; 95% CI 1.5–2.9). These variables were significantly associated with OS in the overall dataset, and in the subgroup of younger patients under the age of 60.

Response and Survival:
The overall response (OR) rate following induction chemotherapy was 84%, including 22% complete responses (CR). Following autologous SCT, CR rates improved to 42%, with an OR of 91%. Analysis of actuarial survival for the whole group of patients who had SCT showed that young patients had significantly longer survival (Median survival: <60yrs vs. >60yrs; 8.7yrs vs 6.2yrs, p<0.009). In order to assess the impact of the introduction of new therapeutic agents in, we defined groups of patients treated in five year periods: 1991–1996, 1997–2003, 2004–2009. 5 year OS was unchanged when comparing the first two cohorts. However, the cohort of patients treated from 2004–2009 were associated with significant improvement in 5 year survival rates, from 61% for the earlier quinquennia to 82% for those treated in 2004-9 (p<0.001). We also assessed the impact of the introduction of SCT compared to BMT. SCT entered routine use at this centre in 2002, and patient outcomes did not improve from 2002–2004. The improved survival after 2004 is therefore unlikely to be due to the introduction of SCT.

Summary:
We found that patient survival following ASCT did not change significantly during the period 1991–2004. However, since 2004 survival rates have improved significantly, and the group that benefitted most were patients under the age of 60. This time period corresponds to the incorporation of novel agents such as thalidomide, bortezomib and lenalidomide into induction and relapse regimens, and suggests that novel agents have significantly improved the outcome of younger patients with myeloma in the context of treatment with ASCT.

Disclosures:
Boyd: celgene: Honoraria. Davies:Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Ortho Biotech: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.