Busulfan or melphalan: is there a better conditioning regimen for allogeneneic transplantation?

References

• Bacigalupo A, Ballen K, Rizzo D, et al. Defining the intensity of conditioning regimens: working definitions. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2009;15(12):1628–1633.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scott BL, Pasquini MC, Logan BR, et al. Myeloablative Versus reduced-intensity hematopoietic cell transplantation for acute myeloid leukemia and myelodysplastic syndromes. J Clin Oncol. 2017;35(11):1154–1161.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• DiMaggio E, Zhou J-M, Caddell R, et al. Reduced intensity fludarabine/melphalan confers similar survival to busulfan/fludarabine myeloablative regimens for patients with acute myeloid leukemia and myelodysplasia. Leuk Lymphoma. 2020;61(7):1678–1687.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kawamura K, Kako S, Mizuta S, et al. Comparison of conditioning with fludarabine/busulfan and fludarabine/melphalan in allogeneic transplantation recipients 50 years or older. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2017;23(12):2079–2087.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eapen M, Brazauskas R, Hemmer M, et al. Hematopoietic cell transplant for acute myeloid leukemia and myelodysplastic syndrome: conditioning regimen intensity. Blood Adv. 2018;2(16):2095–2103.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baron F, Ruggeri A, Beohou E, et al. RIC versus MAC UCBT in adults with AML: A report from Eurocord, the ALWP and the CTIWP of the EBMT. Oncotarget. 2016;7(28):43027–43038.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Damlaj M, Alkhateeb HB, Hefazi M, et al. Fludarabine-busulfan reduced-intensity conditioning in comparison with fludarabine-melphalan is associated with increased relapse risk in spite of pharmacokinetic dosing. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2016;22(8):1431–1439.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kekre N, Marquez-Malaver FJ, Cabrero M, et al. Fludarabine/busulfan versus fludarabine/melphalan conditioning in patients undergoing reduced-intensity conditioning hematopoietic stem cell transplantation for lymphoma. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2016;22(10):1808–1815.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shimoni A, Hardan I, Shem-Tov N, et al. Comparison between two fludarabine-based reduced-intensity conditioning regimens before allogeneic hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation: fludarabine/melphalan is associated with higher incidence of acute graft-versus-host disease and non-relapse mortality and lower incidence of relapse than fludarabine/busulfan. Leukemia. 2007;21(10):2109–2116.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jain T, Alahdab F, Firwana B, et al. Choosing a reduced-intensity conditioning regimen for allogeneic stem cell transplantation, fludarabine/busulfan versus fludarabine melphalan: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2019;25(4):728–733.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dhere V, Edelman S, Waller EK, et al. Myeloablative busulfan/cytoxan conditioning versus reduced-intensity fludarabine/melphalan conditioning for allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant in patients with acute myelogenous leukemia. Leuk Lymphoma. 2018;59(4):837–843.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baron F, Labopin M, Peniket A, et al. Reduced-intensity conditioning with fludarabine and busulfan versus fludarabine and melphalan for patients with acute myeloid leukemia: a report from the Acute Leukemia Working Party of the European Group for Blood and Marrow Transplantation. Cancer. 2015;121(7):1048–1055.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ciurea SO, Kongtim P, Varma A, et al. Is there an optimal conditioning for older patients with AML receiving allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation?. Blood. 2020;135(6):449–452.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hourigan CS, Dillon LW, Gui G, et al. Impact of conditioning intensity of allogeneic transplantation for acute myeloid leukemia with genomic evidence of residual disease. J Clin Oncol. 2020;38(12):1273–1283.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Choe HK, Gergis U, Mayer SA, et al. The addition of low-dose total body irradiation to fludarabine and melphalan conditioning in haplocord transplantation for high-risk hematological malignancies. Transplantation. 2017;101(1):e34–e38.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Deeg HJ, Stevens EA, Salit RB, et al. Transplant conditioning with treosulfan/fludarabine with or without total body irradiation: a randomized phase ii trial in patients with myelodysplastic syndrome and acute myeloid leukemia. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2018;24(5):956–963.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Popat UM, Bassett R, Olson A, et al. Myeloablative fractionated busulfan conditioning regimen in older patients: results of a phase II study. Transplantation & Cellular Therapy Meetings of ASTCT and CIBMTR; 2020 Feb 19–23; Orlando, FL.
   Google Scholar
• Shimoni A, Labopin M, Savani B, et al. Intravenous busulfan compared with treosulfan-based conditioning for allogeneic stem cell transplantation in acute myeloid leukemia: a study on behalf of the acute leukemia working party of European Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2018;24(4):751–757.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gyurkocza B, Nath R, Stiff PJ, et al. Re-induction and targeted conditioning with anti-CD45 iodine (131 I) apamistamab [Iomab-B] leads to high rates of transplantation and successful engraftment in older patients with active, relapsed or refractory (rel/ref) AML after failure of chemotherapy and targeted agents: preliminary midpoint results from the prospective, randomized phase 3 sierra trial. Blood. 2019;134(Supplement_1):5642–5642.
   Google Scholar
• Alatrash G, Kidwell KM, Thall PF, et al. Reduced intensity vs. myeloablative conditioning with fludarabine and PK-guided busulfan in allogeneic stem cell transplantation for patients with AML/MDS. Bone Marrow Transplant. 2019;54(8):1245–1253.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kröger N, Iacobelli S, Franke GN, et al. Dose-reduced versus standard conditioning followed by allogeneic stem-cell transplantation for patients with myelodysplastic syndrome: a prospective randomized phase III study of the EBMT (RICMAC Trial). J Clin Oncol. 2017;35(19):2157–2164.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Savani BN, Labopin M, Kroger N, et al. Expanding transplant options to patients over 50 years. Improved outcome after reduced intensity conditioning mismatched-unrelated donor transplantation for patients with acute myeloid leukemia: a report from the Acute Leukemia Working Party of the EBMT. Haematologica. 2016;101(6):773–780.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shimoni A, Labopin M, Savani B, et al. Long-term survival and late events after allogeneic stem cell transplantation from HLA-matched siblings for acute myeloid leukemia with myeloablative compared to reduced-intensity conditioning: a report on behalf of the acute leukemia working party of European group for blood and marrow transplantation. J Hematol Oncol. 2016;9(1):118.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Bornhauser M, Kienast J, Trenschel R, et al. Reduced-intensity conditioning versus standard conditioning before allogeneic haemopoietic cell transplantation in patients with acute myeloid leukaemia in first complete remission: a prospective, open-label randomised phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2012;13(10):1035–1044.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sebert M, Porcher R, Robin M, et al. Equivalent outcomes using reduced intensity or conventional myeloablative conditioning transplantation for patients aged 35 years and over with AML. Bone Marrow Transplant. 2015;50(1):74–81.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martino R, Iacobelli S, Brand R, et al. Retrospective comparison of reduced-intensity conditioning and conventional high-dose conditioning for allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation using HLA-identical sibling donors in myelodysplastic syndromes. Blood. 2006;108(3):836–846.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar