Fresh and cryopreserved stem cell transplantation in myeloma patients: Does it make a difference on transplant outcomes?

Basit Öğe Kaydı
dc.contributor.authorErkurt, Mehmet Ali
dc.contributor.authorYilmaz, Seda
dc.contributor.authorNamdaroglu, Sinem
dc.contributor.authorDemircioglu, Sinan
dc.contributor.authorSarici, Ahmet
dc.contributor.authorCirik, Salih
dc.contributor.authorKoroglu, Mustafa
dc.date.accessioned2026-04-04T13:34:47Z
dc.date.available2026-04-04T13:34:47Z
dc.date.issued2025
dc.departmentİnönü Üniversitesi
dc.description.abstractObjective: The standard approach for multiple myeloma patients eligible for transplantation includes 4-6 cycles of induction therapy, followed by autologous stem cell transplantation (aHSCT). The aHSCT process starts with stem cell mobilization and collection, followed by high-dose chemotherapy and reinfusion of the harvested stem cells. These cells can be infused fresh within 24-48 h post-collection or cryopreserved for future use. Herein we analyzed the outcomes of aHSCT patients receiving infusions of fresh versus cryopreserved hematopoietic stem cells. Materials and methods: This multicenter retrospective study analyzed 88 adult patients diagnosed with multiple myeloma who underwent aHSCT (n = 43 for cryopreserved; n = 45 for fresh infused group). Results: A total of 88 patients were included in the study. 39.7 % of patients were female and 60.3 % of patients were male. No correlation was observed between pre-mobilization disease status, mobilization regimen, and disease risk status as defined by the R-ISS system (p = 0.1, p = 0.8). The median neutrophil engraftment time was 10 days in the fresh group and 12 days in the cryopreserved group (p < 0.01). In contrast, the median platelet engraftment time was 12 days in the fresh group and 11 days in the cryopreserved group (p < 0.01). Engraftment was achieved in all patients included in the study. Conclusion: The shorter neutrophil engraftment time in the fresh group and the shorter platelet engraftment time in the cryopreserved group, along with successful engraftment in all patients, suggest that both options are reasonable within the MM aHSCT protocol.
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.transci.2025.104184
dc.identifier.issn1473-0502
dc.identifier.issn1878-1683
dc.identifier.issue4
dc.identifier.orcid0000-0003-1277-5105
dc.identifier.orcid0000-0003-3312-8476
dc.identifier.orcid0000-0002-3285-417X
dc.identifier.pmid40570803
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-105008983804
dc.identifier.scopusqualityQ3
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.transci.2025.104184
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/11616/109401
dc.identifier.volume64
dc.identifier.wosWOS:001521768400003
dc.identifier.wosqualityQ4
dc.indekslendigikaynakWeb of Science
dc.indekslendigikaynakScopus
dc.indekslendigikaynakPubMed
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherPergamon-Elsevier Science Ltd
dc.relation.ispartofTransfusion and Apheresis Science
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanı
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/closedAccess
dc.snmzKA_WOS_20250329
dc.subjectMultiple myeloma
dc.subjectAutologous stem cell transplantation
dc.subjectFresh
dc.subjectCryopreserved
dc.subjectEngraftment time
dc.titleFresh and cryopreserved stem cell transplantation in myeloma patients: Does it make a difference on transplant outcomes?
dc.typeArticle

Dosyalar

Koleksiyon

WoS İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu
PubMed İndeksli Yayın Koleksiyonu
Scopus İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu