Graft vs. Host Disease and Graft vs. Myeloma Effect after Non-myeloablative Allogeneic Transplantation

• Published in: Leukemia & lymphoma Vol. 45; no. 9; pp. 1725 - 1729
• Main Authors: Pérez-Simón, JA, Caballero, D, Mateos, MV, San Miguel, JF
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States Informa UK Ltd 01.09.2004; Taylor & Francis
• Subjects: allogeneic transplantation; Graft vs Host Disease - immunology; graft vs. myeloma; Humans; multiple myeloma; Multiple Myeloma - drug therapy; Multiple Myeloma - immunology; Multiple Myeloma - surgery; non-myeloablative; reduced intensity; Time Factors; Transplantation, Homologous - immunology
• ISSN: 1042-8194; 1029-2403
• DOI: 10.1080/10428190410001667686

For many years progress in event free and overall survival in patients diagnosed with multiple myeloma have been modest, however recently newer therapeutic options have become available and, for a small but increasing subset of patients, an "operational cure" can be offered. Although autologous transplantation is associated with a prolongation in event free and overall survival as compared to conventional chemotherapy, there is no plateau in the survival curves. By contrast, the use of allogeneic hematopoietic stem cells provides a tumor-free stem cell source and graft-vs.-myeloma activity leading to a higher frequency of long term survivors in molecular remission. Unfortunately, allogeneic transplantation has been associated with high transplant-related mortality (TRM). Non-myeloablative or reduced intensity conditioning (RIC) regimens, designed to be immunosuppressive rather than myeloablative, in an effort to reduce the toxicity and TRM associated with high dose chemotherapy, but maintaining the GVM effect, have been developed showing up to 90% overall response rate and low TRM. Interestingly, in a significant proportion of patients disease response is preceded by GVHD, suggesting a clear relationship between GVHD and graft vs. myeloma effect. Nevertheless these patients are at risk of developing life threatening complications and, on the contrary, some patients who reach disease control after GVHD and respond to GVHD therapy may finally relapse. Thus, efforts to separate GVM and GVHD are still required in order to improve the outcome of myeloma patients receiving allogeneic transplantation.