Higher efficacy of oral etoposide for mobilization of peripheral blood stem cells in patients with multiple myeloma

Abstract

Abstract This study compares the efficacy, toxicity, hematopoietic recovery, and cost of stem-cell mobilization using intermediate-dose cyclophosphamide (IDCy) plus granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) compared with etoposide (VP-16) plus pegylated granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (PEG-rhG-CSF) in multiple myeloma (MM) patients. Two hundred forty-four consecutive patients undergoing mobilization with IDCy (3-3.5 g/m2) plus G-CSF (n = 155) were compared with patients receiving VP-16 plus PEG-rhG-CSF (n = 89), including oral etoposide (n = 65) and intravenous etoposide (n = 24). Compared with IDCy, VP-16 use was associated with significantly higher median peak peripheral blood CD34 + cell count (8.20 [range: 1.84-84] × 106/kg vs 4.58 [range: 0.1-27.9] × 106/kg, P = .000), and ideal CD34 + cell yield of more than 6 × 106/kg (56.8% vs 35.1%, P = .001), notably with a higher efficacy in oral VP-16 use compared with IDCy use (CD 34 + cell counts: median peak peripheral blood 5.87 vs 4.58 × 106/kg and ≥6 × 106/kg [48.4% vs 35.1%]). The median number of apheresis courses was reduced from two in the IDCy group to one in the VP-16 group (P = .000). IDCy use was associated with significantly more frequent episodes of neutropenia (70.2% vs 35.2%; P = .000), intravenous antibiotic use (13.2% vs 11.4%; P = .672), and hospitalization (P = .000). The recoveries of neutrophils and platelets after autologous stem-cell transplantation were significantly faster in the VP-16 group compared with the IDCy group (P = .000). Our data indicate robust stem-cell mobilization in MM patients with VP-16 delivered either orally or intravenously. When compared with intravenous VP-16, oral VP-16 mobilization was associated with significantly more convenient, lower average total costs, and especially decreased the risk of hospital visits and exposure.