Dataset Information

Impact of Reduced-Intensity Conditioning Regimens on Outcomes in Diffuse Large B Cell Lymphoma Undergoing Allogeneic Transplantation.

ABSTRACT: Reduced-intensity conditioning (RIC) regimens are frequently used for allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (allo-HCT) in patients with diffuse large B cell lymphoma (DLBCL). However, the RIC regimen with the best risk/benefit profile for allo-HCT in DLBCL is not known. This is particularly important because patients with DLBCL undergoing allo-HCT in the future would be enriched for those whose lymphoma has failed chimeric antigen receptor T cell (CAR-T) therapy or other novel immunotherapies, with potentially more advanced disease and suboptimal performance scores. Using the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research (CIBMTR) database, we report the outcomes of the 3 most commonly used allo-HCT RIC regimens in patients with DLBCL. Our analysis included a total of 562 adult DLBCL patients in the CIBMTR registry undergoing allo-HCT using matched related or unrelated donors, between 2008 and 2016. Patients received 1 of 3 RIC regimens: fludarabine/i.v. busulfan ~6.4 mg/kg (Flu/Bu), fludarabine/melphalan 140 mg/m² (Flu/Mel140), or BCNU/etoposide/cytarabine/melphalan (BEAM). Accordingly, the study group was divided into 3 groups: Flu/Bu (n = 151), Flu/Mel140 (n = 296), and BEAM (n = 115). Relative to Flu/Bu, the Flu/Mel140 (hazard ratio [HR], 2.33; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.42 to 3.82; P = .001) and BEAM (HR, 2.54; 95% CI, 1.34 to 4.80; P = .004) regimens were associated with a risk of higher nonrelapse mortality (NRM). Although the risk of relapse with Flu/Mel140 was lower than that with Flu/Bu (HR, .70; 95% CI, .52 to .95; P = .02), this did not translate to improved progression-free survival (HR, 1.04) or overall survival (HR, 1.30). There was a significantly higher risk of grade III-IV acute graft-versus-host disease with BEAM compared with Flu/Bu (HR, 2.19; 95% CI, 1.10 to 4.35; P = .03). In the chemosensitive subset, multivariate analysis showed a significantly higher mortality risk with Flu/Mel140 (HR, 1.48; 95% CI, 1.07 to 2.04; P = .02) relative to Flu/Bu conditioning. In the largest analysis comparing the impact of various RIC regimens on the survival of DLBCL patients undergoing allo-HCT, our results suggest that Flu/Bu is a better RIC choice in less fit or heavily pretreated patients due to lowest NRM risk.

SUBMITTER: Epperla N

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7972998 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceReduced-intensity conditioning and nonmyeloablative conditioning (RIC-NMAC) regimens are frequently used in allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplant (HCT) for non-Hodgkin lymphoma. However, the optimal RIC-NMAC regimen in allogeneic HCT for non-Hodgkin lymphoma is not known.ObjectiveTo investigate whether RIC-NMAC regimens at a higher end of the intensity spectrum are associated with increased nonrelapse mortality and lower overall survival compared with RIC-NMAC regimens at the lower end of the intensity spectrum in patients with non-Hodgkin lymphoma undergoing allogeneic HCT.Design, setting, and participantsThis cohort study used data from 1823 adult patients with non-Hodgkin lymphoma in the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research registry. Included patients underwent allogeneic HCT using matched related or unrelated donors between January 2008 and December 2016. Statistical analysis was performed from June 1, 2019, to February 10, 2020.InterventionsPatients received 1 of 4 RIC-NMAC regimens: fludarabine-intravenous busulfan (Flu-Bu), approximately 6.4 mg/kg (n = 458); fludarabine-melphalan (Flu-Mel140), 140 mg/m2 (n = 885); fludarabine-cyclophosphamide (Flu-Cy) (n = 391); or Flu-Cy with 2 Gy total body irradiation (Flu-Cy-2GyTBI) (n = 89).Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was overall survival. Secondary outcomes were nonrelapse mortality, incidence of relapse, progression-free survival, and the incidence of acute and chronic graft-vs-host disease (GVHD).ResultsOf 1823 patients, 1186 (65%) were male, with a mean (SD) age of 54.8 (9.9) years. The 4-year adjusted OS was 58% in the Flu-Bu cohort, 67% in the Flu-Cy-2GyTBI cohort, 49% in the Flu-Mel140 cohort, and 63% in the Flu-Cy cohort (P < .001). After adjustment for age, Karnofsky performance score, HCT comorbidity index, NHL subtype, remission status at HCT, and the use of antithymocyte globulin or alemtuzumab, the regression analysis showed a significantly higher mortality risk associated with Flu-Mel140 compared with Flu-Bu (hazard ratio [HR], 1.34; 95% CI, 1.13-1.59; P < .001). Compared with the Flu-Cy cohort, the Flu-Mel140 cohort had a higher risk of chronic GVHD (HR, 1.38; 95% CI, 1.15-1.65; P < .001). The Flu-Mel140 regimen was associated with a higher nonrelapse mortality risk (HR, 1.78; 95% CI, 1.37-2.31; P < .001) compared with the Flu-Bu regimen.Conclusions and relevanceThe findings suggest that use of the more intense RIC-NMAC regimen, Flu-Mel140, may have a negative association with overall survival and may be associated with higher nonrelapse mortality. The Flu-Bu and Flu-Cy regimens with or without 2GyTBI regimens appeared to provide comparable overall survival.

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.

Dataset Information

Impact of Reduced-Intensity Conditioning Regimens on Outcomes in Diffuse Large B Cell Lymphoma Undergoing Allogeneic Transplantation.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets