Literature DB >> 25034142

Tolerability and efficacy of busulfan and fludarabine as allogeneic pretransplant conditioning therapy in acute myeloid leukemia: comparison with busulfan and cyclophosphamide regimen.

Roberta Fedele1, Giuseppe Messina1, Tiziana Martinello1, Giuseppe Alberto Gallo1, Antonella Pontari1, Tiziana Moscato1, Giuseppe Console1, Antonia Dattola1, Domenica Princi1, Maria Cuzzola1, Caterina Alati2, Francesca Ronco2, Stefano Molica3, Giuseppe Irrera1, Massimo Martino4.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to compare safety and efficacy of the association of busulfan with cyclophosphamide (BuCy2) versus busulfan and fludarabine (BuFlu) as a conditioning regimen in allogeneic hematopoietic progenitor cell transplantation (allo-HPCT) in patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML). PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 65 consecutive patients who received an allo-HPCT from Human Leucocyte Antigen-matched sibling donors were analyzed. The conditioning was BuCy2 in 48 patients and BuFlu in 17 patients.
RESULTS: There were no significant differences between the 2 cohorts in hematological engraftment, incidence of extrahematological toxicities, and acute graft versus host disease (GVHD). The incidence of chronic GVHD was 34% in the BuCy2 group versus 57% in the BuFlu group (P = .03). Transplant-related mortality was 17% (8 patients) in the BuCy2 group versus 0 in the BuFlu arm. Disease-related mortality was similar in the whole study population; in high-risk AML patients it was 11% in the BuCy2 group and 19% in the BuFlu group (P = .015). The probability of disease-free and event-free survival at 2 years was, respectively, 70% and 60% in the BuCy2 group and 59% and 58% in the BuFlu group (P = .06 and P = not significant [ns]). The probability of overall survival at 2 years was 71% in the BuCy2 group and 63% in the BuFlu group (P = ns), and in the high-risk group it was 83% and 67% in the BuCy2 and BuFlu group, respectively (P = ns).
CONCLUSION: BuFlu is well tolerated and is less toxic than BuCy2 and our results did not suggest that in high-risk AML, BuCy2 should be the favorite regimen in terms of efficacy.
Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Allogeneic transplantation; Busulfan; Conditioning regimen; Cyclophosphamide; Fludarabine

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25034142     DOI: 10.1016/j.clml.2014.04.006

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Lymphoma Myeloma Leuk        ISSN: 2152-2669


  3 in total

1.  Comparison of pediatric allogeneic transplant outcomes using myeloablative busulfan with cyclophosphamide or fludarabine.

Authors:  Andrew C Harris; Jaap J Boelens; Kwang Woo Ahn; Mingwei Fei; Allistair Abraham; Andrew Artz; Christopher Dvorak; Haydar Frangoul; Cesar Freytes; Robert Peter Gale; Sanghee Hong; Hillard M Lazarus; Alison Loren; Shin Mineishi; Taiga Nishihori; Tracey O'Brien; Kirsten Williams; Marcelo C Pasquini; John E Levine
Journal:  Blood Adv       Date:  2018-06-12

2.  Busulfan plus fludarabine compared with busulfan plus cyclophosphamide as a conditioning regimen prior to hematopoietic stem cell transplantation in patients with hematologic neoplasms: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Xiao-Ru Lei; Hong-Li Chen; Fang-Xia Wang; Ju Bai; Ai-Li He
Journal:  Int J Clin Exp Med       Date:  2015-08-15

3.  Clinical Trial Simulation To Optimize Trial Design for Fludarabine Dosing Strategies in Allogeneic Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation.

Authors:  Jurgen B Langenhorst; Thomas P C Dorlo; Charlotte van Kesteren; Erik M van Maarseveen; Stefan Nierkens; Moniek A de Witte; Jaap Jan Boelens; Alwin D R Huitema
Journal:  CPT Pharmacometrics Syst Pharmacol       Date:  2020-04-21
  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.