We report the long-term results of a randomized trial (GITMO, AML-R2), comparing 1:1 the combination of busulfan and cyclophosphamide (BuCy2, n = 125) and the combination of busulfan and fludarabine (BuFlu, n = 127) as conditioning regimen in acute myeloid leukemia patients (median age 51 years, range 40-65) undergoing allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. With a median follow-up of 6 years, significantly better non-relapse mortality (NRM) was confirmed in BuFlu recipients, which is sustained up to 4 years after transplant (10% vs. 20%, p = 0.0388). This difference was higher in patients older than 51 years (11% in BuFlu vs. 27% in BuCy2, p = 0.0262). The cumulative incidence of relapse, which was the first cause of death in the entire study population, did not differ between the two randomized arms. Similarly, the leukemia-free survival (LFS) and overall survival (OS) were not different in the two cohorts, even when stratifying patients per median age. Graft-and relapse-free survival (GRFS) in BuFlu arm vs. the BuCy2 arm was 25% vs. 20% at 4 years and 20% vs. 17% at 10 years. Hence, the benefit gained by NRM reduction is not offsets by an increased relapse. Leukemia relapse remains a major concern, urging the development of new therapeutic approaches.

Busulfan-fludarabine versus busulfan-cyclophosphamide for allogeneic transplant in acute myeloid leukemia: long term analysis of GITMO AML-R2 trial

Russo, Domenico
Membro del Collaboration Group
;
2024-01-01

Abstract

We report the long-term results of a randomized trial (GITMO, AML-R2), comparing 1:1 the combination of busulfan and cyclophosphamide (BuCy2, n = 125) and the combination of busulfan and fludarabine (BuFlu, n = 127) as conditioning regimen in acute myeloid leukemia patients (median age 51 years, range 40-65) undergoing allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. With a median follow-up of 6 years, significantly better non-relapse mortality (NRM) was confirmed in BuFlu recipients, which is sustained up to 4 years after transplant (10% vs. 20%, p = 0.0388). This difference was higher in patients older than 51 years (11% in BuFlu vs. 27% in BuCy2, p = 0.0262). The cumulative incidence of relapse, which was the first cause of death in the entire study population, did not differ between the two randomized arms. Similarly, the leukemia-free survival (LFS) and overall survival (OS) were not different in the two cohorts, even when stratifying patients per median age. Graft-and relapse-free survival (GRFS) in BuFlu arm vs. the BuCy2 arm was 25% vs. 20% at 4 years and 20% vs. 17% at 10 years. Hence, the benefit gained by NRM reduction is not offsets by an increased relapse. Leukemia relapse remains a major concern, urging the development of new therapeutic approaches.
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11379/615946
 Attenzione

Attenzione! I dati visualizzati non sono stati sottoposti a validazione da parte dell'ateneo

Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus ND
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 0
social impact