Banner
    Stem Cell Boosting Treatments Can Reduce The Damaging Impact Of New Myeloma Drug On Patient Stem Cells
    By Jennifer Wong | February 4th 2013 04:13 PM | 5 comments | Print | E-mail | Track Comments

    Myeloma treatments require a heavy artillery of novel myeloma drugs to reduce the number of cancer cells (ex: Revlimid, Velcade, or Thalomid), followed by high-dose chemotherapy to wipe out the cancer. Because the latter can completely wipe out blood-forming stem cells (a side effect that can be life-threatening to the patient), clinicians quickly learned to collect patient stem cells right before high-dose chemotherapy, and then transplanting them back into patients after treatment. The feasibility of this approach depends on the effects of myeloma drugs on patient stem cells.

    In contrast to the previous report that Revlimid can negatively impact the success of patient stem cell collection, a 10-year retrospective study at the Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center showed that the negative impact of Revlimid can be corrected with stem cell boosting treatments. In the paper published in January 2013 issue of Bone Marrow Transplantation, the researchers reported that the Revlimid-based regimen had little impact on the success of patient stem cell collection; a conclusion based on the majority of myeloma patients who have received stem cell boosting treatments such as granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) combined with cyclophosphamide (Cytoxan)

    The study strongly suggests that stem cell boosting agents can overcome the negative influences of Revlimid on patient stem cell collection. However, whether Revlimid itself can affect the viability of patient stem cells is a question that still remains unanswered. 


    Reference:

    Pozotrigo M, et al. Bone Marrow Transplant. 2013 Jan 21.

    Comments

    Did you mean to say "melanoma" in the last sentence of paragraph 2?

    jenwong
    You're right...Thanks for pointing that out.
    What is the new drug(s) here, all the agents mentioned in the article are at least 5 years old, and thalidomide is over 50 years old.

    jenwong
    That's true- the drugs mentioned here can't really be discovered today- given this paper is based on a 10-year retrospective study. I suppose in the clinical setting; particularly in  a retrospective study- "new" is a relative concept.
    Great article, Jennifer. I think I've come across this before, though. I had a textbook in college written by Dr. Rongxiang in China. I remember seeing pictures. This works because it suffocates the deadly cells right by boosting the amount of healthy cells?