ArticleBone marrow transplantation2019
Comparable outcomes using propylene glycol-free melphalan for autologous stem cell transplantation in multiple myeloma.
Article in Bone marrow transplantation, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- [Efficacy and safety of oral melphalan as conditioning regimen for autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation in multiple myeloma].Zhonghua xue ye xue za zhi = Zhonghua xueyexue zazhi · 2026Article
- [Efficacy and safety of autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation pretreated with Melphalan hydrochloride for injection in the treatment of 125 cases of multiple myeloma].Zhonghua xue ye xue za zhi = Zhonghua xueyexue zazhi · 2023Article
- Population Pharmacokinetics of Melphalan in a Large Cohort of Autologous and Allogeneic Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation Recipients: Towards Individualized Dosing Regimens.Clinical pharmacokinetics · 2022Article
- Observational
- Pharmacokinetics and Efficacy of Generic Melphalan Is Comparable to Innovator Formulation in Patients With Multiple Myeloma Undergoing Autologous Stem Cell Transplantation.Clinical lymphoma, myeloma & leukemia · 2020Article
- Current status of autologous stem cell transplantation for multiple myeloma.Blood cancer journal · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) remains a mainstay in the treatment of multiple myeloma (MM). While the procedure is generally safe, toxicities associated with high-dose melphalan conditioning are common and significantly affect patient quality of life. Recently, a propylene glycol-free melphalan formulation (PG-free MEL; Evomela®) was approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration as an ASCT-conditioning regimen for MM. PG-free MEL is more soluble and stable than propylene glycol-solubilized melphalan (PG-solubilized MEL; Alkeran®). As such, there is speculation that it could decrease toxicities and increase the efficacy of ASCT. We compared the outcomes of patients conditioned with PG-free MEL (n = 216) to PG-solubilized MEL (n = 200) at our institution. The baseline characteristics were similar between the two groups. After Day +0, there were no differences in terms of hospitalizations, neutropenic fevers, intravenous granisetron requirement, World Health Organization grade ≥ 2 oral/esophageal mucositis, intravenous fluid requirement, or narcotic requirement. However, PG-free MEL patients had a higher incidence of diarrhea, which was mostly C. difficile-negative (82% vs. 71%, P = 0.015*). Day + 100 hematologic responses and progression-free survival after ASCT were comparable. In summary, we demonstrate that switching to PG-free MEL did not significantly reduce short-term complications of ASCT or improve outcomes in MM.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.