Dataset Information
Gemcitabine-based conditioning compared to BEAM/BEAC conditioning prior to autologous stem cell transplantation for non-Hodgkin lymphoma: No difference in outcomes.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Background
High-dose chemotherapy followed by autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) remains an effective treatment for non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL). The limited availability of carmustine has prompted the exploration of novel alternative conditioning regimens. This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety profile of GBM/GBC (gemcitabine, busulfan, and melphalan or cyclophosphamide) conditioning compared with the standard BEAM/BEAC regimens (carmustine, etoposide, cytarabine, and melphalan or cyclophosphamide) for ASCT in patients with NHL.Methods
A retrospective analysis was conducted on 231 NHL patients, who underwent ASCT from October 2010 to October 2021 at the Institute of Hematology & Blood Disease Hospital, including both first-line and salvage settings. This resulted in the inclusion of 112 patients in the GBM/GBC arm and 92 in the BEAM/BEAC arm. Propensity score matching was employed to validate the results.Results
Disease subtype distribution was similar between the GBM/GBC and BEAM/BEAC groups, with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma being the most common (58.9% vs. 58.7%), followed by PTCL (17.0% vs. 18.5%) and MCL (14.3% vs. 14.1%). At 3 months post-ASCT, complete response (CR) rates were comparable (GBM/GBC 93.5% vs. BEAM/BEAC 91.1%; p = 0.607). The 4-year progression-free survival (78.4% vs. 82.3%; p = 0.455) and 4-year overall survival (88.1% vs. 87.7%; p = 0.575) were also similar. Both groups exhibited low non-relapse mortality at 4 years (GBM/GBC 1.8% vs. BEAM/BEAC 3.5%; p = 0.790) with no transplant-related mortalities reported. The GBM/GBC cohort demonstrated a higher incidence of grade 3/4 oral mucositis and hepatic toxicity, whereas the BEAM/BEAC group had more frequent cases of bacteremia or sepsis (13 cases vs. 5 in GBM/GBC).Conclusions
The GBM/GBC regimen is effective and well-tolerated, offering outcomes that are highly comparable to those in NHL patients conditioned with BEAM/BEAC, as demonstrated in a prognostically matched cohort.
SUBMITTER: Liu H
PROVIDER: S-EPMC10831922 | biostudies-literature | 2024 Jan
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Gemcitabine-based conditioning compared to BEAM/BEAC conditioning prior to autologous stem cell transplantation for non-Hodgkin lymphoma: No difference in outcomes.
Cancer medicine 20240101 2
<h4>Background</h4>High-dose chemotherapy followed by autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) remains an effective treatment for non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL). The limited availability of carmustine has prompted the exploration of novel alternative conditioning regimens. This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety profile of GBM/GBC (gemcitabine, busulfan, and melphalan or cyclophosphamide) conditioning compared with the standard BEAM/BEAC regimens (carmustine, etoposide, cytarabine, an ...[more]