Abstract
Introduction: Allogeneic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) is a potential curative treatment for TDT. BuCy based regimen has been used widely as a standard myeloablative chemotherapy. However, the use of treosulfan based conditioning regimen has increased over the last decade (Choudhary D et al BBMT 2013). We analysed the safety and efficacy of BuCy based vs Treosulfan/Thiotepa/Fludrabine (Treo/Thio/Flu) regimens in TDT between September 2013 and March 2021.
Method: This is an observational retrospective hospital record-based study approved by Institutional Review Board. Regimen used: Treo/Thio/ Flu : Thiotepa 8 mg/kg , treosulfan 14 g/m2/day for 3 days, and fludarabine 40 mg/m2/day for 4 days . Flu/Bu/Cy/ATG : Fludrabine 30mg/ m2/ day for 6 days ,Antithymocytoglobulin 4.5mg/kg in 3 days , Busulfan (per oral) 14mg/kg ( boys) and 12mg/kg (girls) in 4 days, Cyclophosphamide 40mg/kg/day ( boys)and 50mg/kg/day ( girls) for 4 days.
Statistical Analysis: Fisher's exact test was used for discrete variables and t-test was used for continuous variables. Log-rank test was used for the difference in survival between the groups. P value < .05 was considered statistically significant. Cox regression for survival analysis was also used for time to event data of the predicted variables.
Results: As shown in Table 1, 74 patients were enrolled, out of which 35 (47.2%) patients received BuCy based regimen whereas 39(52.7%) patients received Treo/Thio/Flu. All were fully HLA matched. Median age was 5.5 (1-12) years and 9 (1-15) years respectively. According to Lucarelli classification, number of patients with Class I, II, III were 17, 12, 6 in BuCy group vs 2, 14,18 in Treo/Thio/Flu group respectively. When stratified according to Matthew classification, 06 (17.1%) and 11 (28.2%) patients were in class IIIB respectively (Mathews V et al, BBMT 2007). Source of graft was bone marrow in BuCy group vs peripheral blood stem cell (PBSC) in Treo/Thio/Flu group. Mean CD34 cell dose was 3.82(2.2-9.1) vs 5(1.65-8.01) 106/kg in BuCy vs Treo/ Thio/Flu group respectively. Neutrophils and platelets engrafted at median of 16 days (14-21) and 16 days (9-47 ) in BuCy and 15 days (10-20) and 13 days (9-41) in Treo/ Thio/ Flu. Median duration of follow-up was 28 (23-32.9) months. Two (5.7%) patients had rejection (primary=1, secondary=1) in BuCy group whereas none in Treo/Thio/Flu. Five (14.3%) vs 10 (25.6%) patients developed grade ¾ oral mucositis respectively where 1 patient in each group belonged to Class III. Sinusoidal obstruction Syndrome (SOS) was observed in 02 (5.7%) vs 04 (10.3%) patients (p=0.047) respectively, with no patients affected in Class III. BuCy group had 04(11.4%) patients with acute GVHD, including one patient with grade 3. Treo/Thio/Flu group had 15(38.5%) patients with acute GVHD including 4 patients with grade 3 which had significant impact on survival (p=0.038). We also observed chronic GVHD in 04(11.4%) and 11(28.2%) patients respectively which was mainly limited stage in former and extensive in later which impacted the survival (p=0.031). CMV viremia was observed in 14 (40%) vs 8 (20.5%) patients respectively. We also encountered significant infections in both groups {21 (60%) vs 17 (43.6%)}, however, difference was not statistically significant. Four (5.1%) patients had transplant related mortality (TRM) in Treo/Thio/Flu group, in contrast to none in BuCy group. Commonest cause of death was sepsis. Mixed chimerism was commonly seen in BuCy group {20 (57.1%)} vs Treo/Thio/Flu group {12(30.1%)}.(Table 2) At last follow up, all alive patients except two patients with rejection are transfusion independent. Five-year Thalassemia-free survival (TFS) and overall survival (OS) of entire cohort was 94%+3% and 93%+4% respectively. Estimated OS and Event free survival (EFS) of BuCy vs Treo/Thio/ Flu was 100% vs 89.7% (p=0.060) and 93.9% vs 89.7% (p=0.472) respectively.(Figure 1)
Discussion: We observed significant difference in TRM, acute and chronic GvHD and SOS favoring the BuCy group even in class III. On the contrary, we encountered rejections(n=2) and increased number of mixed chimerism in BuCy group which corroborates with previous literature (Fouzia N et al, BMT 2018).
Conclusion: In our experience BuCy based conditioning regimen is a safe and effective regimen even in high risk class III TDT, with less TRM in comparison to Thio/Treo/Flu regimen. However, one needs to be vigilant for rejections and mixed chimerism.
No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.
This feature is available to Subscribers Only
Sign In or Create an Account Close Modal