Comparative efficacy of tandem autologous versus autologous followed by allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Table 1 Characteristics of biologically randomized studies in tandem autologous versus autologous-allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation for patients with multiple myeloma

Study	Publication type	Disease stage	Disease risk	Donor	Auto-allo regimen	Auto-auto regimen
Björkstrand, 2011	Full text	DSS stage: I - 44 (12%) II - 55 (16%) III - 253 (72%)	Various	HLA matched sibling donor	MEL 200 mg/m2 → 2 Gy TBI + FLU	MEL 200 mg/m² x 2 (or MEL 200 mg/m² → no transplant (a second auto-HCT was optional)
Bruno, 2007/ Giaccone, 2011	Full text	DSS stage: II - 48 (30%) III - 114 (70%)	Various	HLA matched sibling donor	MEL 200 mg/m2 → 2 Gy TBI	MEL 100, 140 or 200 mg/m2 → MEL100, 140 or 200 mg/m2
Knop, 2009	Abstract	DSS stage: II and III	Limited to 13q-	HLA matched sibling or unrelated donors	MEL 200 mg/m2 → FLU-MEL 140 mg/m2 ± ATG	MEL 200 mg/m2 x 2
Krishnan & Pasquini, 2011	Full text	DSS stage: I-II - 201 (32%) III - 424 (68%)	Various	HLA matched sibling donor	MEL 200 mg/m2 → 2 Gy TBI	MEL 200 mg/m2 x 2
Rosiñol, 2008	Full text	ISS stage: I - 42 (40%) II - 48 (46%) III - 14 (14%)	Various	HLA matched sibling donor	MEL 200 mg/m2 or MEL 140 mg/m2 + TBI → FLU-MEL	MEL 200 mg/m2 or MEL 140 mg/m2 + TBI → MEL 200 mg/m2 or CBV

Abbreviations: MEL: melphalan; FLU: fludarabine; CBV: cyclophosphamide, etoposide, BCNU; TBI: total body irradiation; DSS: Durie-Salmon Staging System; ISS: International staging system.

ISSN: 1756-8722