标题：Modified conditioning regimen with idarubicin followed by autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation for invasive B-cell non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma patients
摘要：Abstract High-dose chemotherapy followed by autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (ASCT) is still a consolidation treatment choice for relapsed/refractory B-cell non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma (NHL) patients and some aggressive B-cell NHL as frontline therapy. Due to the shortage of carmustine, we switched to idarubicin-substituted BEAC (IEAC) conditioning regimen. We retrospectively compared the outcomes of 72 aggressive B-cell NHL patients treated with IEAC or BEAC regimens followed by ASCT as upfront consolidative treatment. The median time to neutrophil and platelet reconstitution showed no difference between IEAC and BEAC groups. IEAC regimen was well tolerated without increase of adverse events. Transplant-related mortality didn’t occur. The overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) of IEAC group (33 and 23 months) were a little longer than that of BEAC group (30 and 18 months). However, due to the small sample numbers, there’s no significant difference in OS and PFS between IEAC and BEAC group with DLBCL or MCL. Multivariate analysis showed that AnnArbor staging, IPI score, lactate dehydrogenase level, remission of disease, modified regimen were related with PFS and OS. In conclusion, IEAC regimen was well tolerated and replacement with idarubicin could be an alternative when carmustine was not available.
其他摘要：Abstract High-dose chemotherapy followed by autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (ASCT) is still a consolidation treatment choice for relapsed/refractory B-cell non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma (NHL) patients and some aggressive B-cell NHL as frontline therapy. Due to the shortage of carmustine, we switched to idarubicin-substituted BEAC (IEAC) conditioning regimen. We retrospectively compared the outcomes of 72 aggressive B-cell NHL patients treated with IEAC or BEAC regimens followed by ASCT as upfront consolidative treatment. The median time to neutrophil and platelet reconstitution showed no difference between IEAC and BEAC groups. IEAC regimen was well tolerated without increase of adverse events. Transplant-related mortality didn’t occur. The overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) of IEAC group (33 and 23 months) were a little longer than that of BEAC group (30 and 18 months). However, due to the small sample numbers, there’s no significant difference in OS and PFS between IEAC and BEAC group with DLBCL or MCL. Multivariate analysis showed that AnnArbor staging, IPI score, lactate dehydrogenase level, remission of disease, modified regimen were related with PFS and OS. In conclusion, IEAC regimen was well tolerated and replacement with idarubicin could be an alternative when carmustine was not available.
