Feasibility of thiotepa addition to the fludarabine-busulfan conditioning with tacrolimus/sirolimus as graft vs host disease prophylaxis.

6533b853fe1ef96bd12ac2a3

RESEARCH PRODUCT

Feasibility of thiotepa addition to the fludarabine-busulfan conditioning with tacrolimus/sirolimus as graft vs host disease prophylaxis.

José Luis Piñana Francesc Bosch Guillermo Ortí Irene García-cadenas Albert Esquirol Anna Bosch Vilaseca Olga Salamero Elisa Roldán Jordi Sierra Silvana Saavedra Pere Barba Maria Laura Fox Guillermo Villacampa Juan Montoro Rodrigo Martino Jaime Sanz Ariadna Pérez Juan Carlos Hernández-boluda Carlos Solano David Valcárcel

subject

Cancer Research medicine.medical_specialty Transplantation Conditioning Urology Graft vs Host Disease chemical and pharmacologic phenomena ThioTEPA Reduce intensity conditioning sirolimus and tacrolimus graft vs host disease prophylaxis Tacrolimus 03 medical and health sciences 0302 clinical medicine hemic and lymphatic diseases reduce intensity conditioning medicine Humans Host disease Busulfan Retrospective Studies Sirolimus allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation business.industry Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation Hematology Tacrolimus Fludarabine surgical procedures operative Oncology 030220 oncology & carcinogenesis Sirolimus Feasibility Studies Conditioning Thiotepa-fludarabine-busulfan business Thiotepa Vidarabine Busulfan 030215 immunology medicine.drug

description

In classical reduced-intensity conditioning (RIC) regimens, including the fludarabine and busulphan (BF) combination, sirolimus and tacrolimus (SIR-TAC) as graft vs host disease (GVHD) prophylaxis has shown acceptable results. The outcomes of SIR-TAC in a more intense RIC regimen as Thiotepa-fludarabine-busulfan (TBF) have been hardly investigated. This retrospective study included all consecutive patients receiving an allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation for myeloid malignancies (January 2009-2017) conditioned with either TBF or BF and receiving SIR-TAC. Patients receiving TBF presented higher non-relapse mortality (31.6 vs 12.3%,p = .01), along with shorter overall survival (51.8% vs 77.8%,p < .01) at 2 years than patients treated with BF. There were no significant differences in the cumulative incidence of grade II-IV acute GVHD or moderate-severe chronic GVHD or relapse between both groups. These results suggest that TBF does not seem to improve the traditional RIC BF regimen, at least when associated with SIR-TAC prophylaxis.

year	journal	country	edition	language
2020-01-01

https://www.fundanet.incliva.es/publicaciones/ProdCientif/PublicacionFrw.aspx?id=4681