3.8 Article

Serum C-reactive protein at diagnosis and response to therapy is the most powerful factor predicting outcome of multiple myeloma treated with thalidomide/anthracycline-based therapy

Journal

CLINICAL LYMPHOMA & MYELOMA
Volume 8, Issue 5, Pages 294-299

Publisher

CIG MEDIA GROUP, LP
DOI: 10.3816/CLM.2008.n.041

Keywords

beta(2)-microglobulin; gene expression profiling; pegylated liposomal doxorubicin; predictive factors

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Few studies have focused on factors affecting outcome in patients with multiple myeloma (MM) treated with thalidomide-based therapy. We investigated factors affecting response, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) in patients with MM treated with the thalidomide, dexamethasone, and pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (ThaDD) regimen with the aim to select patients benefiting more from this therapy. Patients and Methods: Sixty-six patients with MM were treated first line with the ThaDD regimen. We analyzed demographics and disease-related characteristics to search for factors affecting response (>= very good partial remission [VGPR] vs. < VGPR], PFS, and OS. Results: Overall, 45 patients (68%) showed response >= VGPR; median TTP and OS were 23.5 months and 35.5 months, respectively. Multivariate analysis selected only serum C-reactive protein (sCRP) as a predictive factor for response (P < .0001). By multivariate analysis, normal sCRP level (P = .001) and response to treatment >= VGPR (P = .007) were found to be associated with longer PFS. The factors that remained significantly associated with a longer OS when assessed by multivariate analysis were normal sCRP level (P = .005) and response to therapy VGPR (P = .019). Conclusion: Serum C-reactive protein before therapy and response after therapy are the only factors useful in identifying patients benefiting from anthracycline/thalidomide-based therapy.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available