Leukemia research · 2021
BuCyE can safely replace BEAM as a conditioning regimen for autologous stem cell transplantation in the treatment of refractory and relapsed lymphomas.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Sapelli Jaqueline, Filho Jayr Schmidt, Matias Vieira Garles Miller, Moura Fernanda Lemos, Germano Janaina Naiara, de Lima Vladmir Cláudio Cordeiro
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: Hodgkin's (HL) and non-Hodgkin's (NHL) lymphomas have usually high cure rates. The standard of care for chemosensitive relapsed/refractory lymphoma patients is salvage chemotherapy followed by AHSCT. Due to carmustine and melphalan shortages, alternative pre-AHSCT conditioning regimens with similar tolerance and response were needed.
OBJECTIVES: To compare the efficacy and toxicity profile between relapsed/refractory HL and NHL lymphomas given BEAM or BuCyE.
METHODS: A retrospective analyses of 122 patients in a Brazilian center was made. OS and PFS were calculated by Kaplan-Meier and compared by log rank. Toxicity and engraftment data were also compared.
RESULTS: Most clinical characteristics were similar between groups, although a higher frequency of grade ≥ 2 mucositis (p = .01) was seen in the BuCyE group. No significant difference in OS or PFS were observed between the groups.
CONCLUSION: BEAM and BuCyE are well tolerated with similar toxicity profiles and survival outcomes. Therefore, BuCyE conditioning regimen can be considered an alternative to BEAM.
OBJECTIVES: To compare the efficacy and toxicity profile between relapsed/refractory HL and NHL lymphomas given BEAM or BuCyE.
METHODS: A retrospective analyses of 122 patients in a Brazilian center was made. OS and PFS were calculated by Kaplan-Meier and compared by log rank. Toxicity and engraftment data were also compared.
RESULTS: Most clinical characteristics were similar between groups, although a higher frequency of grade ≥ 2 mucositis (p = .01) was seen in the BuCyE group. No significant difference in OS or PFS were observed between the groups.
CONCLUSION: BEAM and BuCyE are well tolerated with similar toxicity profiles and survival outcomes. Therefore, BuCyE conditioning regimen can be considered an alternative to BEAM.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
AdolescentAdultAgedAntineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy ProtocolsBusulfanCarmustineCombined Modality TherapyCyclophosphamideCytarabineDrug Resistance, NeoplasmEtoposideFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHematopoietic Stem Cell TransplantationHodgkin DiseaseHumansLymphoma, Non-HodgkinMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalPrognosisRetrospective StudiesSalvage TherapySurvival RateTransplantation ConditioningTransplantation, AutologousYoung Adult