Maura Faraci1, Carmine Tinelli2, Edoardo Lanino3, Stefano Giardino3, Massimiliano Leoni3, Marta Ferretti4, Elio Castagnola5, Monica Broglia6, Annalisa De Silvestri2, Daniela Di Martino3, Antonella Bartoli6. 1. Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplant Unit, Department of Hematology-Oncology, Istituto G. Gaslini, Largo G. Gaslini, 5, 16147, Genoa, Italy. maurafaraci@gaslini.org. 2. Epidemiology Service, Fondazione IRCCS Policlinico San Matteo, Pavia, Italy. 3. Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplant Unit, Department of Hematology-Oncology, Istituto G. Gaslini, Largo G. Gaslini, 5, 16147, Genoa, Italy. 4. Pediatric Department, Istituto G. Gaslini, Genoa, Italy. 5. Infectious Diseases Unit, Istituto G. Gaslini, Genoa, Italy. 6. Clinical and Experimental Pharmacokinetic Unit, Fondazione IRCCS Policlinico San Matteo, Pavia, Italy.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The aim of this report is to describe the experience in the management of busulphan-based conditioning regimen administered before hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) in children. METHODS: We report the values of the first dose AUC (area under the concentration-time curve, normal target between 3600 and 4800 ng·h/mL) in children treated with oral and intravenous busulphan, and we analyze the impact of some clinical variables in this cohort of patients. RESULTS: 82 children treated with busulphan before HSCT were eligible for the study: 57 received oral busulphan with a mean AUC of 3586 ng·h/mL, while 25 received intravenous busulphan with a mean AUC of 4158 ng·h/mL. Dose adjustment was based on first dose AUC. The dose was increased in 36 children (43.9%) and decreased in 26 patients (31.7%). Age at HSCT (P = 0.015), cumulative dose of busulphan as mg/m2 (P < 0.001), busulphan dose prescribed as mg/Kg (P = 0.001), intravenous busulphan administration (P < 0.001), type of stem source cells (P = 0.016), and type of HSCT (P = 0.03) were associated with AUC levels. No statistically significant differences were found between transplant-related toxicity, acute and chronic graft versus host disease, engraftment, and AUC levels. CONCLUSIONS: We concluded that older age at HSCT, intravenous administration of busulphan, cumulative, and prescribed dose of busulphan are associated with higher AUC levels. The absence of significant correlations between toxic events, graft failure, and AUC suggests the efficacy of busulphan concentrations monitoring in our patients.
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The aim of this report is to describe the experience in the management of busulphan-based conditioning regimen administered before hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) in children. METHODS: We report the values of the first dose AUC (area under the concentration-time curve, normal target between 3600 and 4800 ng·h/mL) in children treated with oral and intravenous busulphan, and we analyze the impact of some clinical variables in this cohort of patients. RESULTS: 82 children treated with busulphan before HSCT were eligible for the study: 57 received oral busulphan with a mean AUC of 3586 ng·h/mL, while 25 received intravenous busulphan with a mean AUC of 4158 ng·h/mL. Dose adjustment was based on first dose AUC. The dose was increased in 36 children (43.9%) and decreased in 26 patients (31.7%). Age at HSCT (P = 0.015), cumulative dose of busulphan as mg/m2 (P < 0.001), busulphan dose prescribed as mg/Kg (P = 0.001), intravenous busulphan administration (P < 0.001), type of stem source cells (P = 0.016), and type of HSCT (P = 0.03) were associated with AUC levels. No statistically significant differences were found between transplant-related toxicity, acute and chronic graft versus host disease, engraftment, and AUC levels. CONCLUSIONS: We concluded that older age at HSCT, intravenous administration of busulphan, cumulative, and prescribed dose of busulphan are associated with higher AUC levels. The absence of significant correlations between toxic events, graft failure, and AUC suggests the efficacy of busulphan concentrations monitoring in our patients.
Authors: Imke H Bartelink; Arief Lalmohamed; Elisabeth M L van Reij; Christopher C Dvorak; Rada M Savic; Juliette Zwaveling; Robbert G M Bredius; Antoine C G Egberts; Marc Bierings; Morris Kletzel; Peter J Shaw; Christa E Nath; George Hempel; Marc Ansari; Maja Krajinovic; Yves Théorêt; Michel Duval; Ron J Keizer; Henrique Bittencourt; Moustapha Hassan; Tayfun Güngör; Robert F Wynn; Paul Veys; Geoff D E Cuvelier; Sarah Marktel; Robert Chiesa; Morton J Cowan; Mary A Slatter; Melisa K Stricherz; Cathryn Jennissen; Janel R Long-Boyle; Jaap Jan Boelens Journal: Lancet Haematol Date: 2016-10-13 Impact factor: 18.959
Authors: H T Tran; T Madden; D Petropoulos; L L Worth; E A Felix; H A Sprigg-Saenz; M Choroszy; M Danielson; D Przepiorka; K W Chan Journal: Bone Marrow Transplant Date: 2000-09 Impact factor: 5.483
Authors: M Philippe; S Goutelle; J Guitton; X Fonrose; C Bergeron; P Girard; Y Bertrand; N Bleyzac Journal: Bone Marrow Transplant Date: 2015-09-21 Impact factor: 5.483
Authors: Jeannine S McCune; Meagan J Bemer; Jeffrey S Barrett; K Scott Baker; Alan S Gamis; Nicholas H G Holford Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2013-11-11 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Andre M Willasch; Hermann Kreyenberg; Nona Shayegi; Eva Rettinger; Vida Meyer; Marion Zabel; Peter Lang; Bernhard Kremens; Roland Meisel; Brigitte Strahm; Claudia Rossig; Bernd Gruhn; Thomas Klingebiel; Charlotte M Niemeyer; Peter Bader Journal: Biol Blood Marrow Transplant Date: 2014-07-31 Impact factor: 5.742
Authors: M Ansari; J-F Lauzon-Joset; M-F Vachon; M Duval; Y Théoret; M A Champagne; M Krajinovic Journal: Bone Marrow Transplant Date: 2009-07-06 Impact factor: 5.483