Division of Stem Cell and Molecular Medicine, The Institute of Medical Science, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan.
Department of Hematology, Kobe City Hospital Organization, Kobe City Medical Centre General Hospital, Kobe, Japan; Department of Environmental Medicine and Population Science, Graduate School of Medicine, Osaka University, Suita, Japan.
Transplant Cell Ther. 2022 Jun;28(6):323.e1-323.e9. doi: 10.1016/j.jtct.2022.03.011. Epub 2022 Mar 13.
There are limited data comparing myeloablative conditioning with fludarabine/busulfan (Flu/Bu4) and reduced-intensity conditioning with fludarabine/busulfan (Flu/Bu2) in patients with myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) undergoing allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (allo-HSCT). We retrospectively analyzed nationwide registry data and compared the outcomes of adult patients with MDS receiving Flu/Bu4 and Flu/Bu2 by propensity score (PS) matching. Patients who met the following criteria were eligible for enrollment: (1) age ≥16 years; (2) diagnosis of de novo MDS; (3) first allo-HSCT between 2006 and 2018; (4) related bone marrow transplantation (BMT) or peripheral blood stem cell transplantation from an HLA-matched donor, unrelated BMT from an HLA-matched or HLA-1 allele-mismatched donor, or unrelated cord blood transplantation; and (5) receiving Flu/Bu4 or Flu/Bu2 as a conditioning regimen. Flu/Bu4 comprised intravenous busulfan (total dose, 12.8 mg/kg) combined with fludarabine (total dose, 125-180 mg/m). Flu/Bu2 comprised intravenous busulfan (total dose, 6.4 mg/kg) combined with the same dose of fludarabine. To minimize selection bias and confounding factors, we performed a propensity score (PS)-matched analysis. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS) after allo-HSCT. A total of 3386 patients with de novo MDS underwent their first allo-HSCT between 2006 and 2018. Among them, 202 patients were assigned each to the Flu/Bu4 and Flu/Bu2 groups after PS-matched analysis. The median age was 61 (interquartile, 57-65) years. The 3-year OS rates were 44.8% (95% confidence interval [CI], 37.1-52.1%) and 46.9% (95% CI, 39.2-54.2%) in the Flu/Bu4 and Flu/Bu2 groups, respectively (P = .67). The 3-year rates of graft-versus-host disease (GVHD)-free survival, relapse-free survival (GRFS) were 28.8% (95% CI, 22.2-35.7%) and 33.0% (95% CI, 26.2-40.0%), respectively (P = .36). The 3-year cumulative incidence rates of relapse were 28.9% (95% CI, 22.6-35.6%) and 30.0% (95% CI, 23.6-36.6%), respectively (P = .47). The 3-year cumulative incidence rates of non-relapse mortality (NRM) were 28.2% (95% CI, 21.7-35.0%) and 27.1% (95% CI, 20.6-33.9%), respectively (P = .60). The 100-day cumulative incidence rate of grade II-IV acute GVHD was significantly higher in the Flu/Bu4 group than in the Flu/Bu2 group (41.7% [95% CI, 34.8%-48.4%] versus 29.3% [95% CI, 23.2%-35.7%], P = 0.012). To identify patients who had more favorable outcomes with 1 of the 2 regimens, we compared the outcomes between the 2 groups after stratifying by age, hematopoietic cell transplantation-comorbidity index, cytogenetic risk, disease status at allo-HSCT, stem cell source, and donor type. OS, GRFS, relapse, and NRM did not differ between the 2 groups in any subgroup analyses. There were no significant interactions between the choice of conditioning regimens and any other factors. There are no differences in survival between Flu/Bu4 and Flu/Bu2, although our study population was highly selected by PS matching. Data from more patients and prospective studies are needed to determine the optimal intensity of conditioning regimens in patients with MDS.
在接受异基因造血干细胞移植 (allo-HSCT) 的骨髓增生异常综合征 (MDS) 患者中,与氟达拉滨/白消安 (Flu/Bu4) 和氟达拉滨/白消安 (Flu/Bu2) 相比,接受清髓性预处理方案与强度降低预处理方案的相关数据有限。我们回顾性分析了全国性登记数据,并通过倾向评分 (PS) 匹配比较了接受 Flu/Bu4 和 Flu/Bu2 的 MDS 成年患者的结局。符合以下条件的患者有资格入组:(1)年龄≥16 岁;(2)诊断为初发性 MDS;(3)2006 年至 2018 年期间首次 allo-HSCT;(4)相关骨髓移植 (BMT) 或来自 HLA 匹配供体的外周血干细胞移植、来自 HLA 匹配或 HLA-1 等位基因错配供体的无关 BMT 或无关脐带血移植;以及 (5)接受 Flu/Bu4 或 Flu/Bu2 作为预处理方案。Flu/Bu4 包括静脉注射白消安 (总剂量 12.8mg/kg) 联合氟达拉滨 (总剂量 125-180mg/m)。Flu/Bu2 包括静脉注射白消安 (总剂量 6.4mg/kg) 联合相同剂量的氟达拉滨。为了最大限度地减少选择偏差和混杂因素,我们进行了倾向评分 (PS) 匹配分析。主要终点是 allo-HSCT 后的总生存 (OS)。2006 年至 2018 年间,3386 例初发性 MDS 患者接受了他们的首次 allo-HSCT。其中,202 例患者在 PS 匹配分析后分别被分配到 Flu/Bu4 和 Flu/Bu2 组。中位年龄为 61(四分位距,57-65)岁。Flu/Bu4 和 Flu/Bu2 组的 3 年 OS 率分别为 44.8%(95%CI,37.1-52.1%)和 46.9%(95%CI,39.2-54.2%)(P=0.67)。无移植物抗宿主病 (GVHD)-无复发生存率、无复发生存率 (GRFS) 分别为 28.8%(95%CI,22.2-35.7%)和 33.0%(95%CI,26.2-40.0%)(P=0.36)。复发的 3 年累积发生率分别为 28.9%(95%CI,22.6-35.6%)和 30.0%(95%CI,23.6-36.6%)(P=0.47)。3 年非复发死亡率 (NRM) 的累积发生率分别为 28.2%(95%CI,21.7-35.0%)和 27.1%(95%CI,20.6-33.9%)(P=0.60)。Flu/Bu4 组 100 天累积 2-4 级急性 GVHD 的发生率明显高于 Flu/Bu2 组(41.7%[95%CI,34.8%-48.4%]与 29.3%[95%CI,23.2%-35.7%],P=0.012)。为了确定在这 2 种方案中哪种方案的患者结局更好,我们根据年龄、造血细胞移植合并症指数、细胞遗传学风险、allo-HSCT 时疾病状态、干细胞来源和供体类型对两组患者进行分层,比较了两组患者的结局。在任何亚组分析中,两组患者的 OS、GRFS、复发和 NRM 均无差异。在选择预处理方案的情况下,没有发现与任何其他因素之间存在显著的相互作用。在经过 PS 匹配后,我们发现 Flu/Bu4 和 Flu/Bu2 之间的生存没有差异,尽管我们的研究人群是通过 PS 匹配高度选择的。需要更多的患者和前瞻性研究来确定 MDS 患者的最佳预处理方案强度。