Premium
Maintenance therapy with interferon‐α (IFN‐α) versus IFN‐α plus chemotherapy in multiple myeloma (MM)
Author(s) -
Zervas K.,
Pouli A.,
Perifanis V.,
Papanastasiou K.,
Chatziyianni M.,
Mitsouli C.,
Maniatis A.
Publication year - 1996
Publication title -
european journal of haematology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.904
H-Index - 84
eISSN - 1600-0609
pISSN - 0902-4441
DOI - 10.1111/j.1600-0609.1996.tb01352.x
Subject(s) - maintenance therapy , melphalan , medicine , chemotherapy , randomization , regimen , multiple myeloma , randomized controlled trial , prednisone , interferon alfa , alpha interferon , gastroenterology , surgery , induction chemotherapy , chemotherapy regimen , oncology , interferon , immunology
Results of studies using IFN‐α treatment for maintaining remission and prolonging survival in multiple myeloma (MM) are in conflict and trials seeking optimum use for this biological response modifier are continuing. Between 1989 and 1993 a prospective randomized multicentre trial was undertaken to evaluate the role of the combination of IFN‐α with chemotherapy (CT) in maintenance treatment of MM. For remission induction, in patients 65 yr or younger, we used VAD (group A) and for the remaining Melphalan and Prednisone (MP) (group B). For maintenance, patients were randomized to receive IFN‐α 3times10 6 i.u. s.c. t.i.w. (group I) or alternating monthly cycles of IFN‐α and CT. The CT cycles were also alternated (VAD, MP, CP) in an effort to prevent the development of multidrug resistance. Median survival of the two maintenance groups from randomization (36 months for group I and 31 months for group II, p=0.3) as well as response duration (13 months in group I and 15 months in group II, p=0.95) were similar. Toxicities were more pronounced both with VAD induction and in the combination maintenance arm. The addition of chemotherapy to the IFN maintenance regimen in MM did not have an advantage over IFN alone.