新诊断的多发性骨髓瘤患者三氧化二砷- vtd与VRD耐受性的优势:一项前瞻性,开放标签研究

IF 3.2 3区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
International Journal of Medical Sciences Pub Date : 2025-04-28 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.7150/ijms.110231
Xinyu Zuo, Apeng Yang, Pingping Chen, Yanhui Xie, Zhiyong Zeng, Jiexian Ma
{"title":"新诊断的多发性骨髓瘤患者三氧化二砷- vtd与VRD耐受性的优势:一项前瞻性,开放标签研究","authors":"Xinyu Zuo, Apeng Yang, Pingping Chen, Yanhui Xie, Zhiyong Zeng, Jiexian Ma","doi":"10.7150/ijms.110231","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Multiple myeloma is the second most common hematologic malignancy in older patients. The standard front-line VRD regimen (bortezomib/lenalidomide/dexamethasone) achieves high efficacy but is associated with significant toxicity, leading to infections, bone marrow suppression, and treatment discontinuation in approximately 20% of patients. Alternative regimens with reduced toxicity are needed for this demographic. Prior studies suggest adding arsenic trioxide to bortezomib/dexamethasone (BD) enhances remission depth with acceptable safety, while bortezomib/thalidomide/dexamethasone (VTD) offers reduced toxicity, but lower efficacy compared to VRD. This study evaluates the efficacy, safety, and cost-effectiveness of an arsenic trioxide-VTD regimen (AVTD) versus VRD in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) patients. Among 116 participants, AVTD demonstrated comparable efficacy to VRD but significantly reduced infection rates (14.0% vs. 40.7%, P < 0.001) and severe bone marrow suppression (0% vs. 11.9%, P = 0.013). Subgroup analysis of patients >60 years yielded consistent results. Additionally, AVTD was associated with lower treatment costs. In conclusion, the AVTD regimen offers a safer, more cost-effective alternative to VRD for NDMM, particularly in older adult patients, without compromising treatment efficacy.</p>","PeriodicalId":14031,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Medical Sciences","volume":"22 10","pages":"2373-2381"},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12080582/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Advantage of Tolerability following Arsenic Trioxide-VTD vs VRD in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma patients: a prospective, open-label study.\",\"authors\":\"Xinyu Zuo, Apeng Yang, Pingping Chen, Yanhui Xie, Zhiyong Zeng, Jiexian Ma\",\"doi\":\"10.7150/ijms.110231\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Multiple myeloma is the second most common hematologic malignancy in older patients. The standard front-line VRD regimen (bortezomib/lenalidomide/dexamethasone) achieves high efficacy but is associated with significant toxicity, leading to infections, bone marrow suppression, and treatment discontinuation in approximately 20% of patients. Alternative regimens with reduced toxicity are needed for this demographic. Prior studies suggest adding arsenic trioxide to bortezomib/dexamethasone (BD) enhances remission depth with acceptable safety, while bortezomib/thalidomide/dexamethasone (VTD) offers reduced toxicity, but lower efficacy compared to VRD. This study evaluates the efficacy, safety, and cost-effectiveness of an arsenic trioxide-VTD regimen (AVTD) versus VRD in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) patients. Among 116 participants, AVTD demonstrated comparable efficacy to VRD but significantly reduced infection rates (14.0% vs. 40.7%, P < 0.001) and severe bone marrow suppression (0% vs. 11.9%, P = 0.013). Subgroup analysis of patients >60 years yielded consistent results. Additionally, AVTD was associated with lower treatment costs. In conclusion, the AVTD regimen offers a safer, more cost-effective alternative to VRD for NDMM, particularly in older adult patients, without compromising treatment efficacy.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":14031,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Medical Sciences\",\"volume\":\"22 10\",\"pages\":\"2373-2381\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12080582/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Medical Sciences\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.7150/ijms.110231\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Medical Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7150/ijms.110231","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

多发性骨髓瘤是老年患者中第二常见的血液恶性肿瘤。标准的一线VRD方案(硼替佐米/来那度胺/地塞米松)达到了很高的疗效,但与显著的毒性相关,导致大约20%的患者感染、骨髓抑制和停药。这一人群需要毒性较低的替代方案。先前的研究表明,在硼替佐米/沙利度胺/地塞米松(BD)中添加三氧化二砷可增强缓解深度,安全性可接受,而硼替佐米/沙利度胺/地塞米松(VTD)的毒性较低,但与VRD相比疗效较低。本研究评估了三氧化二砷- vtd方案(AVTD)与VRD方案在新诊断的多发性骨髓瘤(NDMM)患者中的疗效、安全性和成本效益。在116名参与者中,AVTD显示出与VRD相当的疗效,但显著降低了感染率(14.0%对40.7%,P < 0.001)和严重的骨髓抑制(0%对11.9%,P = 0.013)。0 ~ 60岁患者的亚组分析结果一致。此外,AVTD与较低的治疗费用有关。总之,AVTD方案为NDMM提供了一种更安全、更具成本效益的替代方案,特别是在老年成人患者中,且不影响治疗效果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Advantage of Tolerability following Arsenic Trioxide-VTD vs VRD in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma patients: a prospective, open-label study.

Multiple myeloma is the second most common hematologic malignancy in older patients. The standard front-line VRD regimen (bortezomib/lenalidomide/dexamethasone) achieves high efficacy but is associated with significant toxicity, leading to infections, bone marrow suppression, and treatment discontinuation in approximately 20% of patients. Alternative regimens with reduced toxicity are needed for this demographic. Prior studies suggest adding arsenic trioxide to bortezomib/dexamethasone (BD) enhances remission depth with acceptable safety, while bortezomib/thalidomide/dexamethasone (VTD) offers reduced toxicity, but lower efficacy compared to VRD. This study evaluates the efficacy, safety, and cost-effectiveness of an arsenic trioxide-VTD regimen (AVTD) versus VRD in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) patients. Among 116 participants, AVTD demonstrated comparable efficacy to VRD but significantly reduced infection rates (14.0% vs. 40.7%, P < 0.001) and severe bone marrow suppression (0% vs. 11.9%, P = 0.013). Subgroup analysis of patients >60 years yielded consistent results. Additionally, AVTD was associated with lower treatment costs. In conclusion, the AVTD regimen offers a safer, more cost-effective alternative to VRD for NDMM, particularly in older adult patients, without compromising treatment efficacy.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
International Journal of Medical Sciences
International Journal of Medical Sciences MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL-
CiteScore
7.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
185
审稿时长
2.7 months
期刊介绍: Original research papers, reviews, and short research communications in any medical related area can be submitted to the Journal on the understanding that the work has not been published previously in whole or part and is not under consideration for publication elsewhere. Manuscripts in basic science and clinical medicine are both considered. There is no restriction on the length of research papers and reviews, although authors are encouraged to be concise. Short research communication is limited to be under 2500 words.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信