232
Matched Pair Comparison of Busulfan/Cyclophosphamide/Etoposide (BuCyE) to Carmustine/Etoposide/Cytarabine/Melphalan (BEAM) Conditioning Regimen Prior to Autologous Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation (autoHCT) for Lymphoma
AutoHCT is the standard therapy for patients with lymphoma who relapse after initial therapy because it improves progression free (PFS) and overall survival (OS). BEAM is the most frequently utilized regimen but other regimens such as those incorporating intravenous Bu are now being investigated. This study compares outcomes from BuCyE in patients enrolled in a phase II multicenter clinical trial from 2010 to 2012, to recipients of BEAM registered with the Center for International Blood and Transplant Center (CIBMTR) from 2008 to 2011. After an interim analysis the clinical trial protocol was amended to enroll patients 65 y and younger due to excess transplant related mortality (TRM) with BuCyE in older patients. 184 recipients of BuCyE with lymphoma in complete or partial response (PR) were matched to a maximum of 4:1 with 729 controls based on age, performance status, disease status prior to transplant and lymphoma histology. 177 cases had 4 matched controls and 97% of controls had an age difference from controls of 5 years or less. Median age is 50 years, 76% with performance status greater than 90%, 35% with Hodgkin lymphoma (HL), 34% diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), 16% mantle cell, 12% follicular and 3% other Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma (NHL) histologies; 43% were in PR and median follow up was 22 months in both cohorts. Two-year cumulative incidences of TRM were 3.3% (95% Confidence Interval [CI] 1.4-6.6%) and 3.9% (95% CI, 2.4-5.7%), for BuCyE and BEAM, respectively. Corresponding two-year probabilities of OS were 76% (95% CI, 68-82%) and 78% (95% CI, 74-82%). Multivariate analysis demonstrated a significant interaction between disease and conditioning regimen in evaluation of disease progression (PRG) and treatment failure (1-PFS) outcomes (Table). Analyses by histology demonstrated that among patients with DLBCL and other NHL histologies, there were no differences in outcomes between conditioning groups. Among patients with HL, the two-year cumulative incidence of PRG were 66% (95% CI, 53-77%) and 38% (95% CI, 31-45%) and two-year PFS were 33% (95% CI, 21-46%) and 59% (95% CI, 52-66%) for BuCyE and BEAM, respectively with no difference in TRM or OS. BuCyE were associated with comparable outcomes after an autoHCT with BEAM conditioning among patients younger than 65 years with NHL. In a subset of patients with HL, BuCyE was associated with higher PRG and shorter PFS compared to BEAM conditioning.
Outcome | Disease | N (BuCyE/BEAM) | BuCyE vs. BEAMa HR (95% CI) | p-value |
Treatment failure b, c | DLBCL | 62/ 244 | 0.94 (0.57 1.57) | 0.82 |
| Other NHL | 57/222 | 1.00 (0.62 1.63) | 0.99 |
| HL | 64/253 | 2.08 (1.44 3.02) | <.001 |
PRG b | DLBCL | 62/244 | 0.95 (0.55 1.63) | 0.85 |
| Other NHL | 57/222 | 0.95 (0.59 1.54) | 0.84 |
| HL | 64/253 | 2.19 (1.50 3.20) | <.001 |
a BEAM is the reference b Adjusted for disease status at transplant c Inverse of progression free survival.