Treosulfan plus fludarabine versus TEAM as conditioning treatment before autologous stem cell transplantation for B-cell Non-Hodgkin lymphoma

Bone Marrow Transplant. 2022 Jul;57(7):1164-1170. doi: 10.1038/s41409-022-01701-x. Epub 2022 May 10.

Abstract

Conditioning with treosulfan and fludarabine (Treo/Flu) has been proven to be feasible and efficient in several types of malignancies before allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (allo-HSCT). Given its favorable reduced toxicity profile, we introduced Treo/Flu as conditioning before autologous HSCT (auto-HSCT) in patients with B-cell Non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL). The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of Treo/Flu in comparison to TEAM. Fifty-seven patients with NHL received auto-HSCT after conditioning with either Treo/Flu (n = 22) or TEAM (n = 35). All patients achieved sustained engraftment. PFS, EFS and OS were not significant in both groups. Of note is that patients in the Treo/Flu group were less dependent on thrombocyte transfusions (p = 0.0082), significantly older (in median 11 years, p < 0.0001) and suffered less frequently from infectious complications (p = 0.0105), mucositis and stomatitis (p < 0.0001). This study is the first to present efficacy, feasibility, and safety of conditioning with Treo/Flu preceding auto-HSCT in patients with NHL. Since it demonstrated a lack of significant difference in comparison to TEAM conditioning it might be a valuable alternative especially in elderly patients with B-cell NHL and comorbidities. Further evaluation by prospective clinical trials is warranted.

MeSH terms

  • Aged
  • Busulfan / adverse effects
  • Busulfan / analogs & derivatives
  • Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation*
  • Humans
  • Lymphoma, Non-Hodgkin* / therapy
  • Retrospective Studies
  • Transplantation Conditioning / methods
  • Transplantation, Autologous
  • Vidarabine / adverse effects
  • Vidarabine / analogs & derivatives

Substances

  • treosulfan
  • Vidarabine
  • Busulfan
  • fludarabine