Comparable outcomes for TBI-based versus treosulfan based conditioning prior to allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation in AML and MDS patients

7Citations
Citations of this article
17Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (allo-HCT) is a standard treatment for patients with AML and MDS. The combination of fractionated total body irradiation(8GyTBI/Flu) with fludarabine is an established conditioning regimen, but fludarabine/treosulfan(Flu/Treo) constitutes an alternative in older/comorbid patients. We conducted a retrospective analysis of 215 AML(in CR) and 96 MDS patients undergoing their first allo-HCT between 2011 and 2022, identifying 53 matched Flu/Treo and 8GyTBI/Flu patients through propensity score matching. Median follow-up of survivors was 3.3 years and 4.1 years. For the Flu/Treo group, 1-year non-relapse mortality (2% vs. 10%, p = 0.03) was lower, while 1-year relapse incidence (16% vs. 13%, p = 0.81) was similar. Three-year outcomes, including relapse-free survival and graft-versus-host disease incidence, were comparable (OS: 81% vs. 74%, p = 0.70; RFS: 78% vs. 66%, p = 0.28; chronic GvHD: 34% vs. 36%, p = 0.97; acute GvHD (100 days): 11% vs. 23%, p = 0.11). Multivariable analysis, considering age, ECOG, HCT-CI, and MRD status, revealed no associations with main outcomes. Dose-reduced conditioning with Flu/Treo or 8GyTBI/Flu demonstrated favorable and comparable survival rates exceeding 70% at 3 years with 1-year NRM rates below 10% and low relapse rates in the matched cohort. These data underline the need for further evaluation of TBI and Treo-based conditionings in prospective trials.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Berning, P., Kolloch, L., Reicherts, C., Call, S., Marx, J., Floeth, M., … Stelljes, M. (2024). Comparable outcomes for TBI-based versus treosulfan based conditioning prior to allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation in AML and MDS patients. Bone Marrow Transplantation, 59(8), 1097–1106. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41409-024-02295-2

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free