Reduced-Intensity Compared to Nonmyeloablative Conditioning in Patients with Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma Undergoing Allogeneic Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation.

ABSTRACT

Reduced-intensity conditioning (RIC) and nonmyeloablative (NMA) conditioning are preferred for patients with non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) undergoing allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (allo-HCT). Although prior studies have suggested that higher-intensity regimens in RIC-NMA conditioning are associated with inferior outcomes in patients with NHL, the optimal conditioning regimen remains unknown. We performed a retrospective single-center analysis to determine outcomes of adult patients with B cell and T cell NHL who underwent allo-HCT and received either RIC or NMA conditioning between March 2008 and December 2019. RIC regimens included fludarabine-cyclophosphamide-thiotepa-4 Gy-total body irradiation (Flu-Cy-TT-4Gy-TBI), fludarabine-melphalan (Flu-Mel), fludarabine-cyclophosphamide-4 Gy-total body irradiation (Flu-Cy-4Gy-TBI), and fludarabine-busulfan-4 (Flu-Bu-4). The NMA regimen comprised fludarabine-cyclophosphamide-2 Gy-total body irradiation (Flu-Cy-2Gy-TBI). The primary outcome was overall survival (OS); secondary outcomes included progression-free survival (PFS), nonrelapse mortality (NRM), and the incidence of acute and chronic graft-versus-host-disease (GVHD). Of 279 transplants recipients (median age, 58 years), 110 received RIC (55% Flu-Mel, 38% Flu-Cy-TT-4Gy-TBI, 6% Flu-Bu-4, 1% Flu-Cy-4Gy-TBI) and 169 received NMA conditioning with Flu-Cy-2Gy-TBI. With a median of 64 months of follow-up post-allo-HCT, there was no significant difference in OS between the NMA and RIC groups (median, not reached [NR] versus 103 months; P = .1), and this was maintained on multivariable analysis. Similarly, after adjustment for all independently significant covariates (age, Karnofsky Performance Status [KPS], Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation Comorbidity Index [HCT-CI], and disease histology), the regression analysis showed no significant difference in PFS with RIC compared to NMA conditioning (hazard ratio [HR] 1.38; 95% confidence interval [CI], .92 to 2.09; P = .24). On univariable analysis, there was no significant difference in NRM between the RIC and NMA arms (100-day estimate, 10.0% versus 1.8%; P = .5). After adjustment for age, ethnicity, KPS, HCT-CI, GVHD prophylaxis, and donor source, RIC conditioning was associated with a significantly higher incidence of NRM compared to NMA conditioning (HR, 2.61; 95% CI, 1.04 to 6.52; P = .039). On multivariable analysis, compared with the NMA arm, the RIC arm had higher rates of grade II-IV (HR, 2.25; 95% CI, 1.31 to 3.86; P = .002) and grade III-IV acute GVHD (HR, 5.62; 95% CI, 2.03 to 15.6; P < .001). The findings of this study suggest that NMA conditioning with Flu-Cy-TBI-2Gy may be considered over more intensive RIC regimens for patients with NHL undergoing allo-HCT.