Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Article
  • Published:

Reduced intensity vs. myeloablative conditioning with fludarabine and PK-guided busulfan in allogeneic stem cell transplantation for patients with AML/MDS

Abstract

Conditioning regimens contribute significantly to outcomes following allogeneic stem cell transplantation (allo-SCT). Reduced-intensity conditioning (RIC) regimens provide lower toxicity at the cost of reduced efficacy compared with myeloablative conditioning (MAC) regimens. However, because pre-transplant prognostic variables often determine the conditioning regimen, studies of RIC vs. MAC have been inconclusive. We present a retrospective analysis of 242 acute myeloid leukemia (AML) or myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) patients, 112 of whom were in 56 pairs matched using propensity scores, to account for variation that may confound clinical outcomes. The uniform conditioning regimens consisted of fludarabine with pharmacokinetic (PK)-guided intravenous busulfan (Bu). The RIC and MAC regimens were dosed at the average daily area under the concentration-vs-time curve (AUC) of 4000 µMol min and 5000–6000 µMol min, or total course AUC of 16,000 µMol min and 20,000–24,000 µMol min, respectively; PK-guided dosing removes overlap in systemic Bu exposure. When patients’ data were propensity-matched, there was a trend toward significantly increased full donor chimerism and decreased chronic graft vs. host disease in RIC, and no significant differences in progression free survival and overall survival between RIC and MAC. Our results also elucidate the efficacy of PK-guided-dosing in the setting of allo-SCT for AML and MDS.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Rent or buy this article

Prices vary by article type

from$1.95

to$39.95

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Andersson BS, de Lima M, Thall PF, Wang X, Couriel D, Korbling M, et al. 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. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2008;14:672–84.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. de Lima M, Couriel D, Thall PF, Wang X, Madden T, Jones R, et al. Once-daily intravenous busulfan and fludarabine: clinical and pharmacokinetic results of a myeloablative, reduced-toxicity conditioning regimen for allogeneic stem cell transplantation in AML and MDS. Blood. 2004;104:857–64.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Lee JH, Joo YD, Kim H, Ryoo HM, Kim MK, Lee GW, et al. Randomized trial of myeloablative conditioning regimens: busulfan plus cyclophosphamide versus busulfan plus fludarabine. J Clin Oncol. 2013;31:701–9.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Liu H, Zhai X, Song Z, Sun J, Xiao Y, Nie D, et al. Busulfan plus fludarabine as a myeloablative conditioning regimen compared with busulfan plus cyclophosphamide for acute myeloid leukemia in first complete remission undergoing allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation: a prospective and multicenter study. J Hematol Oncol. 2013;6:15.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Rambaldi A, Grassi A, Masciulli A, Boschini C, Mico MC, Busca A, et al. Busulfan plus cyclophosphamide versus busulfan plus fludarabine as a preparative regimen for allogeneic haemopoietic stem-cell transplantation in patients with acute myeloid leukaemia: an open-label, multicentre, randomised, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2015;16:1525–36.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Russell JA, Savoie ML, Balogh A, Turner AR, Larratt L, Chaudhry MA, et al. Allogeneic transplantation for adult acute leukemia in first and second remission with a novel regimen incorporating daily intravenous busulfan, fludarabine, 400 CGY total-body irradiation, and thymoglobulin. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2007;13:814–21.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Russell JA, Tran HT, Quinlan D, Chaudhry A, Duggan P, Brown C, et al. Once-daily intravenous busulfan given with fludarabine as conditioning for allogeneic stem cell transplantation: study of pharmacokinetics and early clinical outcomes. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2002;8:468–76.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Blaise D, Vey N, Faucher C, Mohty M. Current status of reduced-intensity-conditioning allogeneic stem cell transplantation for acute myeloid leukemia. Haematologica. 2007;92:533–41.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Hamadani M, Mohty M, Kharfan-Dabaja MA. Reduced-intensity conditioning allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation in adults with acute myeloid leukemia. Cancer Control. 2011;18:237–45.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Shimoni A, Hardan I, Shem-Tov N, Yeshurun M, Yerushalmi R, Avigdor A, et al. Allogeneic hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation in AML and MDS using myeloablative versus reduced-intensity conditioning: the role of dose intensity. Leukemia. 2006;20:322–8.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Baron F, Storb R, Storer BE, Maris MB, Niederwieser D, Shizuru JA, et al. Factors associated with outcomes in allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation with nonmyeloablative conditioning after failed myeloablative hematopoietic cell transplantation. J Clin Oncol. 2006;24:4150–7.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. McClune BL, Weisdorf DJ. Reduced-intensity conditioning allogeneic stem cell transplantation for older adults: is it the standard of care? Curr Opin Hematol. 2010;17:133–8.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Corradini P, Zallio F, Mariotti J, Farina L, Bregni M, Valagussa P, et al. Effect of age and previous autologous transplantation on nonrelapse mortality and survival in patients treated with reduced-intensity conditioning and allografting for advanced hematologic malignancies. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23:6690–8.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Diaconescu R, Flowers CR, Storer B, Sorror ML, Maris MB, Maloney DG, et al. Morbidity and mortality with nonmyeloablative compared with myeloablative conditioning before hematopoietic cell transplantation from HLA-matched related donors. Blood. 2004;104:1550–8.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Abdul Wahid SF, Ismail NA, Mohd-Idris MR, Jamaluddin FW, Tumian N, Sze-Wei EY, et al. Comparison of reduced-intensity and myeloablative conditioning regimens for allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation in patients with acute myeloid leukemia and acute lymphoblastic leukemia: a meta-analysis. Stem Cells Dev. 2014;23:2535–52.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Tanaka J, Kanamori H, Nishiwaki S, Ohashi K, Taniguchi S, Eto T, et al. Reduced-intensity vs myeloablative conditioning allogeneic hematopoietic SCT for patients aged over 45 years with ALL in remission: a study from the Adult ALL Working Group of the Japan Society for Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation (JSHCT). Bone Marrow Transplant. 2013;48:1389–94.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Andersson BS, Thall PF, Madden T, Couriel D, Wang X, Tran HT, et al. Busulfan systemic exposure relative to regimen-related toxicity and acute graft-versus-host disease: defining a therapeutic window for i.v. BuCy2 in chronic myelogenous leukemia. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2002;8:477–85.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Slattery JT, Clift RA, Buckner CD, Radich J, Storer B, Bensinger WI, et al. Marrow transplantation for chronic myeloid leukemia: the influence of plasma busulfan levels on the outcome of transplantation. Blood. 1997;89:3055–60.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Russell JA, Kangarloo SB, Williamson T, Chaudhry MA, Savoie ML, Turner AR, et al. Establishing a target exposure for once-daily intravenous busulfan given with fludarabine and thymoglobulin before allogeneic transplantation. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2013;19:1381–6.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Geddes M, Kangarloo SB, Naveed F, Quinlan D, Chaudhry MA, Stewart D, et al. High busulfan exposure is associated with worse outcomes in a daily i.v. busulfan and fludarabine allogeneic transplant regimen. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2008;14:220–8.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Dix SP, Wingard JR, Mullins RE, Jerkunica I, Davidson TG, Gilmore CE, et al. Association of busulfan area under the curve with veno-occlusive disease following BMT. Bone Marrow Transplant. 1996;17:225–30.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Slattery JT, Sanders JE, Buckner CD, Schaffer RL, Lambert KW, Langer FP, et al. Graft-rejection and toxicity following bone marrow transplantation in relation to busulfan pharmacokinetics. Bone Marrow Transplant. 1995;16:31–42.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Shimoni A, Hardan I, Shem-Tov N, Yerushalmi R, Nagler A. Allogeneic hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation in AML and MDS using myeloablative versus reduced-intensity conditioning: long-term follow-up. Leukemia. 2010;24:1050–2.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Andersson BS, Thall PF, Valdez BC, Milton DR, Al-Atrash G, Chen J, et al. Fludarabine with pharmacokinetically guided IV busulfan is superior to fixed-dose delivery in pretransplant conditioning of AML/MDS patients. Bone Marrow Transplant. 2017;52:580–7.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Tang X, Alatrash G, Ning J, Jakher H, Stafford P, Zope M, et al. Increasing chimerism after allogeneic stem cell transplantation is associated with longer survival time. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2014;20:1139–44.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  26. Keating MJ, Smith TL, Gehan EA, McCredie KB, Bodey GP, Spitzer G, et al. Factors related to length of complete remission in adult acute leukemia. Cancer. 1980;45:2017–29.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Greenberg P, Cox C, LeBeau MM, Fenaux P, Morel P, Sanz G, et al. International scoring system for evaluating prognosis in myelodysplastic syndromes. Blood. 1997;89:2079–88.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Andersson BS, Valdez BC, de Lima M, Wang X, Thall PF, Worth LL, et al. Clofarabine+/- fludarabine with once daily i.v. busulfan as pretransplant conditioning therapy for advanced myeloid leukemia and MDS. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2011;17:893–900.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Valdez BC, Li Y, Murray D, Champlin RE, Andersson BS. The synergistic cytotoxicity of clofarabine, fludarabine and busulfan in AML cells involves ATM pathway activation and chromatin remodeling. Biochem Pharmacol. 2011;81:222–32.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Przepiorka D, Khouri I, Ippoliti C, Ueno NT, Mehra R, Korbling M, et al. Tacrolimus and minidose methotrexate for prevention of acute graft-versus-host disease after HLA-mismatched marrow or blood stem cell transplantation. Bone Marrow Transplant. 1999;24:763–8.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Fisher R. On the interpretation of χ2 from contingency tables, and the calculation of P. J R Stat Soc. 1922;85:87–94.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Freeman GH, Halton JH. Note on an exact treatment of contingency, goodness of fit and other problems of significance. Biometrika. 1951;38:141–9.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Randles R, Wolfe D. Introduction to the Theory of Nonparametric Statistics: John Wiley; 1979.

  34. Rosenbaum PR, Rubin DB, Constructing a Control-Group. Using multivariate matched sampling methods that incorporate the propensityscore. Am Stat. 1985;39:33–8.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Ho D, Imai K, King G, Stuart E. MatchIt: nonparametric preprocessing for parametric causal inference; 2007.

  36. Snedecor GW, Cochran WG. Statistical methods. 8th edn. Ames: Iowa State University Press; 1989. p 503.

  37. Kaplan EL, Meier P. Nonparametric estimaion from incomplete observations. J Am Stat Assoc. 1958;53:457–81.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Mantel N. Evaluation of survival data and two new rank order statistics arising in its consideration. Cancer Chemother Rep. 1966;50:163–70.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Klein JP, Moeschberger ML. Survival analysis: techniques for censored and truncated data. New York: Springer-Verlag; 1997.

  40. Therneau TM, Grambsch PM. Modeling survival data: extending the Cox model. New York: Springer-Verlag; 2000.

  41. Grambsch PM, Therneau TM. Proportional hazards tests and diagnostics based on weighted residuals. Biometrika. 1994;81:515–26.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Scott BL, Pasquini MC, Logan BR, Wu J, Devine SM, Porter DL, et al. Myeloablative versus reduced-intensity hematopoietic cell transplantation for acute myeloid leukemia and myelodysplastic syndromes. J Clin Oncol. 2017;35:1154–61.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  43. Ustun C, Courville EL, DeFor T, Dolan M, Randall N, Yohe S, et al. Myeloablative, but not reduced-intensity, conditioning overcomes the negative effect of flow-cytometric evidence of leukemia in acute myeloid leukemia. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2015;22:669–75.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  44. Sibai H, Falcone U, Deotare U, Michelis FV, Uhm J, Gupta V, et al. Myeloablative versus reduced-intensity conditioning in patients with myeloid malignancies: a propensity score-matched analysis. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2016;22:2270–5.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Kim H, Kim BS, Kim DH, Hyun MS, Kim SH, Bae SH, et al. Comparison between matched related and alternative donors of allogeneic hematopoietic stem cells transplanted into adult patients with acquired aplastic anemia: multivariate and propensity score-matched analysis. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2011;17:1289–98.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Bartelink IH, Lalmohamed A, van Reij EM, Dvorak CC, Savic RM, Zwaveling J, et al. Association of busulfan exposure with survival and toxicity after haemopoietic cell transplantation in children and young adults: a multicentre, retrospective cohort analysis. Lancet Haematol. 2016;3:e526–e36.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  47. Harris AC, Ferrara JL, Levine JE. Advances in predicting acute GVHD. Br J Haematol. 2013;160:288–302.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Kebriaei P, Wilhelm K, Ravandi F, Brandt M, de Lima M, Ciurea S, et al. Feasibility of allografting in patients with advanced acute lymphoblastic leukemia after salvage therapy with inotuzumab ozogamicin. Clin Lymphoma Myeloma Leuk. 2013;13:296–301.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  49. Westin JR, Saliba RM, De Lima M, Alousi A, Hosing C, Qazilbash MH, et al. Steroid-refractory acute GVHD: predictors and outcomes. Adv Hematol. 2011;2011:601953.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  50. Kebriaei P, Cutler C, de Lima M, Giralt S, Lee SJ, Marks D, et al. Management of important adverse events associated with inotuzumab ozogamicin: expert panel review. Bone Marrow Transplant. 2018;53:449–56.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  51. de Witte T, Bowen D, Robin M, Malcovati L, Niederwieser D, Yakoub-Agha I, et al. Allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation for MDS and CMML: recommendations from an international expert panel. Blood. 2017;129:1753–62.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Borje S. Andersson.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The senior author was previously a consultant to Otsuka Research and Development, Inc.

Supplementary information

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Alatrash, G., Kidwell, K.M., Thall, P.F. 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 54, 1245–1253 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41409-018-0405-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41409-018-0405-0

This article is cited by

Search

Quick links