Project description:Busulfan combined with cyclophosphamide (BuCy) has long been considered a standard myeloablative conditioning regimen for allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT), including both nonmalignant conditions and myeloid diseases. Substituting fludarabine for cyclophosphamide (BuFlu) to reduce toxicity without an increase in relapse has been increasingly performed in children, but without comparison with BuCy. We retrospectively analyzed 1781 children transplanted from 2008 to 2014 to compare the effectiveness of BuCy with BuFlu. Nonmalignant and malignant disease populations were analyzed separately. Overall mortality was comparable for children with nonmalignant conditions who received BuFlu or BuCy (relative risk [RR], 1.14, P = .52). Lower incidences of sinusoidal obstruction syndrome (P = .04), hemorrhagic cystitis (P = .04), and chronic graft-versus-host disease (P = .02) were observed after BuFlu, but the influence of the conditioning regimen could not be assessed by multivariate analysis because of the low frequency of these complications. Children transplanted for malignancies were more likely to receive BuFlu if they had higher hematopoietic cell transplantation-comorbidity index scores (P < .001) or their donor was unrelated and HLA-mismatched (P = .004). Nevertheless, there were no differences in transplant toxicities and comparable transplant-related mortality (RR, 1.2; P = .46), relapse (RR, 1.2; P = .15), and treatment failure (RR, 1.2; P = .12). BuFlu was associated with higher overall mortality (RR, 1.4; P = .008) related to inferior postrelapse survival (P = .001). Our findings demonstrated that outcomes after BuFlu are similar to those for BuCy for children, but for unclear reasons, those receiving BuFlu for malignancy may be at risk for shorter postrelapse survival.
Project description:Allogeneic stem cell transplant can have high morbidity and mortality in patients with myelofibrosis (MF) and multiple myeloma (MM). This phase 2 study used a novel myeloablative regimen of split-dose busulfan, fludarabine, and then post-transplant cyclophosphamide. Four patients with MF and 2 with MM were enrolled. At 1 year, non-relapse mortality was 33.3%, and overall survival was 50%. Incidence of acute and chronic GVHD was 33.3% and 16.7%, respectively. Those surviving beyond 1 year (MF = 1, MM = 2) had durable remissions with a median follow-up of 42 months. This small study demonstrates relative safety & favorable key outcomes using this novel approach.
Project description:Large, multicenter studies comparing commonly used reduced-intensity conditioning (RIC) approaches in follicular lymphoma (FL) have not been performed. Using the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research database, we report the outcomes of the 2 most commonly used RIC approaches, fludarabine and busulfan (Flu/Bu) versus fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, and rituximab (FCR) in FL patients. We evaluated 200 FL patients undergoing allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (allo-HCT) who received RIC with either Flu/Bu (n = 98) or FCR (n = 102) during 2008 to 2014. All patients received peripheral blood grafts, and graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) prophylaxis was limited to calcineurin inhibitor-based approaches. Median follow-up of survivors in the Flu/Bu and FCR groups was 48 months and 46 months, respectively. On univariate analysis in the Flu/Bu and FCR groups, the 3-year rates of nonrelapse mortality (11% versus 11%, P = .94), relapse/progression (18% versus 15%, P = .54), progression-free survival (PFS) (71% versus 74%, P = .65), and overall survival (OS) (73% versus 81%, P = .18) were not significantly different. On multivariate analysis no difference was seen between the FCR and Flu/Bu cohorts in terms of grades II to IV (relative risk [RR], 1.06; 95% confidence interval [CI], .59 to 1.93; P = .84) or grades III to IV (RR, 1.18; 95% CI, .47 to 2.99; P = .72) acute GVHD, nonrelapse mortality (RR, .83; 95% CI, .38 to 1.82; P = .64), relapse/progression (RR, .99; 95% CI, .49 to 1.98; P = .97), PFS (RR, .92; 95% CI, .55 to 1.54; P = .76), or OS (RR, .70; 95% CI, .40 to 1.23; P = .21) risk. However, RIC with FCR was associated with a significantly reduced chronic GVHD risk (RR, .52; 95% CI, .36 to .77; P = .001). RIC with either Flu/Bu or FCR in patients with FL undergoing allo-HCT provides excellent 3-year OS, with acceptable rates of nonrelapse mortality. FCR-based conditioning was associated with a lower risk of chronic GVHD.
Project description:BackgroundA preparatory regimen consisting of thiotepa-busulfan-fludarabine (TBF) has been associated with reduced relapse in patients with haematological malignancies after haploidentical and cord blood transplants; however, few data exist regarding TBF conditioning in sibling (MSD) and unrelated donor (URD) transplants for AML.ResultsAmong patients receiving a myeloablative (MAC) regimen, TBF-MAC was associated with significantly lower relapse (HR 0.47, p = 0.005) however higher non-relapse mortality (NRM, HR 2.69, p < 10-4) as compared to BF. This led to similar leukemia-free (LFS) and overall survival (OS) between the two regimens (LFS: p = 0.6; OS: p = 0.27). When we selected TBF-MAC patients receiving busulfan 9.6 mg/kg, NRM resulted still higher but no more significantly different as compared to BF-MAC with busulfan 12.8 mg/kg (HR 1.53, p = 0.12); despite the lower busulfan dose, relapse remained inferior with TBF-MAC (HR 0.45, p = 0.01), however no difference in survival could be demonstrated (LFS: p = 0.31; OS: 0.82). Among patients receiving a reduced-intensity (RIC) regimen, similar outcome was observed with TBF-RIC and BF-RIC (LFS: p = 0.77; OS: p = 0.88).ConclusionsTBF-MAC as conditioning regimen for transplant from MSD and URD in AML patients in first remission provided stronger anti-leukemic activity but higher NRM as compared to BF-MAC, thus leading to similar survival. TBF-MAC with busulfan 9.6 mg/kg was associated with low relapse and acceptable NRM, however again with no survival benefit. TBF-RIC and BF-RIC resulted in comparable outcome.MethodsWe conducted a registry-based study comparing outcomes of patients with AML in first remission undergoing transplant from MSD or URD prepared with either TBF (n = 212) or BF (n = 2698) conditioning.
Project description:Busulfan and cyclophosphamide (BuCy) is a frequently used myeloablative conditioning regimen for allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (allo-HCT). Theoretical considerations and pharmacological data indicate that application of busulfan prior to subsequent cyclophosphamide (BuCy) may trigger liver toxicity. Reversing the order of application to cyclophosphamide-busulfan (CyBu) might be preferable, a hypothesis supported by animal data and retrospective studies. We performed a prospective randomized trial to determine impact of order of application of Bu and Cy before allo-HCT in 70 patients with hematological malignancy, 33 patients received BuCy and 37 CyBu for conditioning. In the short term, there were minimal differences in liver toxicity favoring CyBu over BuCy, significant only for alanine amino transferase at day 30 (p = 0.03). With longer follow-up at 4 years, non-relapse mortality (6% versus 27%, p = 0.05) was lower and survival (63% versus 43%, p = 0.06) was higher with CyBu compared to BuCy. Other outcomes, such as engraftment (p = 0.21), acute and chronic graft-versus-host disease (p = 0.40; 0.36), and relapse (p = 0.79), were similar in both groups. We prospectively show evidence that the order of application of Cy and Bu in myeloablative conditioning in allo-HCT patients has impact on outcome.
Project description:Allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) offers a possible cure for patients with relapsed and refractory non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) through potentially beneficial graft versus lymphoma effects. However, allogeneic HCT is associated with high nonrelapse mortality (NRM). Fludarabine with reduced-intensity busulfan (Flu/Bu2) and myeloablative busulfan (Flu/Bu4) are commonly used in conditioning regimens for allogeneic HCT; however, data on their use in patients with NHL is limited. We investigated the effect of busulfan dose on outcomes by comparing Flu/Bu2 and Flu/Bu4 in patients with NHL who underwent allogeneic HCT. Our study included 415 adult patients with NHL who received Flu/Bu2 (315 patients) or Flu/Bu4 (100 patients) between January 2008 and December 2019. All patients were enrolled in the Transplant Registry Unified Management Program 2 of the Japanese Data Center for Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation. The primary endpoint was the 5-year overall survival (OS). To minimize potential confounding factors that may influence outcomes, we performed propensity score matching. The 5-year OS was 50.6% (95% confidence interval (CI), 39.4%-60.8%) and 32.2% (95% CI, 22.4-42.4%) in the Flu/Bu2 and Flu/Bu4 groups, respectively (p = 0.006). The hazard ratio comparing the two groups was 2.13 (95% CI, 1.30-3.50; p = 0.003). Both groups had a similar 5-year cumulative incidence of relapse (38.2% vs 41.3%; p = 0.581), and the Flu/Bu4 group had a higher cumulative incidence of 5-year NRM (15.7% vs 31.9%; p = 0.043). In this study, Flu/Bu4 was associated with worse OS compared with Flu/Bu2 because of high NRM in patients with NHL.
Project description:BackgroundAllogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (allo-HCT) using a mismatched unrelated donor (MMUD) and cord blood transplantation (CBT) are valid alternatives for patients without a fully human leukocyte antigen (HLA)-matched donor. Here, we compared the allo-HCT outcomes of CBT versus single-allele-mismatched MMUD allo-HCT with post-transplant cyclophosphamide (PTCy) in acute myeloid leukemia.MethodsPatients who underwent a first CBT without PTCy (N = 902) or allo-HCT from a (HLA 9/10) MMUD with PTCy (N = 280) were included in the study. A multivariate regression analysis was performed for the whole population. A matched-pair analysis was carried out by propensity score-based 1:1 matching of patients (177 pairs) with known cytogenetic risk.ResultsThe incidence of grade II-IV and grade III-IV acute graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) at 6 months was 36% versus 32% (p = 0.07) and 15% versus 11% (p = 0.16) for CBT and MMUD cohorts, respectively. CBT was associated with a higher incidence of graft failure (11% vs. 4%, p < 0.01) and higher 2-year non-relapse mortality (NRM) (30% vs. 16%, p < 0.01) compared to MMUD. In the multivariate analysis, CBT was associated with a higher risk of, NRM (HR = 2.09, 95% CI 1.46-2.99, p < 0.0001), and relapse (HR = 1.35, 95% CI 1-1.83, p = 0.05), which resulted in worse leukemia-free survival (LFS) (HR = 1.68, 95% CI 1.34-2.12, p < 0.0001), overall survival (OS) (HR = 1.7, 95% CI 1.33-2.17, p < 0.0001), and GVHD-free, relapse-free survival (GRFS) (HR = 1.49, 95% CI 1.21-1.83, p < 0.0001) compared to MMUD. The risk of grade II-IV acute GVHD (p = 0.052) and chronic GVHD (p = 0.69) did not differ significantly between the cohorts. These results were confirmed in a matched-pair analysis.ConclusionsCBT was associated with lower LFS, OS, and GRFS due to higher NRM, compared to MMUD allo-HCT with PTCy. In the absence of a fully matched donor, 9/10 MMUD with PTCy may be preferred over CBT.
Project description:Cyclophosphamide (Cy) in combination with busulfan (Bu) or total body irradiation (TBI) is the most commonly used myeloablative conditioning regimen in patients with chronic myeloid leukemia (CML). We used data from the Center for International Bone Marrow Transplantation Research to compare outcomes in adults who underwent hematopoietic cell transplantation for CML in first chronic phase after myeloablative conditioning with Cy in combination with TBI, oral Bu, or intravenous (i.v.) Bu. Four hundred thirty-eight adults received human leukocyte antigen (HLA)-matched sibling grafts and 235 received well-matched grafts from unrelated donors (URD) from 2000 through 2006. Important differences existed between the groups in distribution of donor relation, exposure to tyrosine kinase inhibitors, and year of transplantation. In multivariate analysis, relapse occurred less frequently among patients receiving i.v. Bu compared with TBI (relative risk [RR], .36; P = .022) or oral Bu (RR, .39; P = .028), but nonrelapse mortality and survival were similar. A significant interaction was detected between donor relation and the main effect in leukemia-free survival (LFS). Among recipients of HLA-identical sibling grafts, but not URD grafts, LFS was better in patients receiving i.v. Bu (RR, .53; P = .025) or oral Bu (RR, .64; P = .017) compared with TBI. In CML in first chronic phase, Cy in combination with i.v. Bu was associated with less relapse than TBI or oral Bu. LFS was better after i.v. or oral Bu compared with TBI.
Project description:Post-transplant cyclophosphamide (PTCy) has emerged as a promising graft-versus-host disease (GvHD) prophylaxis in allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (allo-HSCT). However, no studies have reported the efficacy of a GvHD prophylaxis based on PTCy with sirolimus (Sir-PTCy) in patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML). In this retrospective study, we analyze the use of sirolimus in combination with PTCy, with or without mycophenolate mofetil (MMF), on 242 consecutive adult patients with AML undergoing a myeloablative first allo-HSCT from different donor types, in three European centers between January 2017 and December 2020. Seventy-seven (32%) patients received allo-HSCT from HLA-matched sibling donor, 101 (42%) from HLA-matched and mismatched unrelated donor, and 64 (26%) from haploidentical donor. Except for neutrophil and platelet engraftment, which was slower in the haploidentical cohort, no significant differences were observed in major transplant outcomes according to donor type in univariate and multivariate analysis. GvHD prophylaxis with Sir-PTCy, with or without MMF, is safe and effective in patients with AML undergoing myeloablative allo-HSCT, resulting in low rates of transplant-related mortality, relapse/progression, and acute and chronic GvHD in all donor settings.
Project description:We conducted a registry analysis including adult acute myeloid leukemia (AML) patients in remission who had received thiotepa, busulfan, and fludarabine (TBF) or treosulfan-based (Treo) conditioning for haplo-hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT) with posttransplant cyclophosphamide (PTCy) between 2010 and 2020. A total of 1123 patients met the inclusion criteria (968 received TBF and 155 received Treo). A 1:1 matched-pair analysis was performed on 142 TBF and 142 Treo patients. In the Treo group, 68% of patients received treosulfan at a dose ≥36 g/m2 and 54% of patients received a second alkylator (thiotepa or melphalan). We observed a trend toward increased incidence of grade II-IV acute (a) graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) at 180 days in the TBF group compared with Treo (29% versus 20%; P = 0.08), while incidence of grade III-IV aGVHD was not statistically different. Similarly, the incidence of chronic (c) GVHD was not statistically different in the 2 groups. Incidence of nonrelapse mortality at 2 years was 19% in TBF and 14% in Treo (P = 0.4). Relapse incidence at 2 years was not statistically different in the 2 groups (16% and 18% in TBF and Treo, respectively; P = 0.9). Leukemia-free survival, overall survival, and GVHD-free, relapse-free survival was 65% versus 68% (P = 0.6), 73% versus 76% (P = 0.5), and 54% versus 53% (P = 0.8) in TBF versus Treo, respectively. In conclusion, we did not find a significant difference between the 2 conditioning in the present study; Treo and TBF represent 2 valid alternative regimens for haplo-HSCT with PTCy for AML in remission.