1 / 17

Reduced intensity or reduced toxicity conditioning regimens?

Reduced-toxicity conditioning with Busulfan and Fludarabine and allogeneic stem cell transplant: chimerism evaluation and global outcome of 26 consecutive patients Alessandra Algarotti Ematologia, Ospedali Riuniti, Bergamo Senigallia, 24 Ottobre 2008.

jefffox
Download Presentation

Reduced intensity or reduced toxicity conditioning regimens?

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Reduced-toxicity conditioning with Busulfan and Fludarabine and allogeneic stem cell transplant: chimerism evaluation and global outcome of 26 consecutive patients Alessandra Algarotti Ematologia, Ospedali Riuniti, Bergamo Senigallia, 24 Ottobre 2008

  2. Reduced intensity or reduced toxicity conditioning regimens? • RIC regimens have been used to offer an allogeneic transplant to otherwise inelegible patients • RIC regimens are often associated with an increased proportion of disease relapse • We investigated a reduced toxicity conditioning regimen with Busulfan and Fludarabine and we evaluated the outcome and the toxicity

  3. Comparative outcome of nonmyeloablative and myeloablative allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation for patients older than 50 years of age • Alyea EA: et al.: Blood, 2005, Vol. 105, 1810-1814 Conditioning regimens “Nonmyeloablative” Fludarabine (30 mg/m2/d for 4 days) Busulfan (0.8 mg/kg/d iv for 4 days) on days -6, -5, -4, and -3. Myeloablative Cyclophosphamide (1800 mg/m2 for 2 days) andfTBI; 1400 cGy in 7 fractionsover 4 days) Busulfan (16 mg/kg po dividedover 4 days) and Cyclophosphamide a

  4. Once Daily i.v. Busulfan and Fludarabine (i.v. Bu-Flu) Compares Favorably with i.v. Busulfan and Cyclophosphamide (i.v. BuCy2) as Pretransplant Conditioning Therapy in AML/MDS Overall survival Event Free Survival Andersson BS et al.: Biology of Blood and Marrow Transplantation 14:672-684 (2008)

  5. Clinical findings Patients 26 Sex, M/F 15/11 Age,median (range) 53 (23-66) Diagnosis (n) AML 12 ALL 1 MDS 1 MM 7 HD 3 NHL 2 Disease status at transplant CR 9 (5 AML, 1 ALL, 2 NHL, 1 HD) GPR 7 (MM) PR 1 (HD) active disease 9 (7 AML, 1 MDS, 1 HD)

  6. Transplantation Sibling/MUD 14/12 BM/PB 3/23 TNC x 10^8/Kg median (range) 9.16 (0.84-372.25) CD34 x 10^6/Kg median (range) 4.4 (1.4-11.8) CD3 x 10^6/Kg median (range) 202 (13-1206) Engraftment day, median (range) N > 500/mmc 16 (13-21) PLT > 20.000/mmc 14 (11-39)

  7. BM BM Chimerism

  8. PB Chimerism (CD 15, CD 3) P

  9. Immunologic Reconstitution - CD3 p < 0.0001 Days from transplant

  10. Immunologic Reconstitution - CD 4 p < 0.0001 Days from transplant

  11. GVHD Acute GVHD 14/26 (54%) grade I 4 (15%) grade II-IV 10 (38%) Chronic GVHD 12/23 (52) mild 7 (30) extensive 5 (22)

  12. Main transplantation outcomes Alive at last follow up 18 Alive in CR 15 Alive with active disease 3 Relapse/progression 4/6 Mortality NRM/RRM 1/7

  13. Overall and Event Free Survival OS = 60% EFS = 55%

  14. TRM and Risk to Relapse RRD = 40% TRM = 4% Competing risk analysis

  15. Conclusion • In our hands the FLU-Bu regimen confirms its remarkable tolerability and a significant antineoplastic activity • Despite a low Fludarabine dosage, the chimerism full donor was obtained in most patients at 100 days after transplant • Randomized clinical trials are needed to confirm these preliminary results

  16. Studio AIFA per la ricerca indipendente 2006

More Related