Medivizor

Title of notification

Here comes the notification
X
 
 

leukemia

Research

Treatment

Source: American Journal of Hematology

icon
icon
  • Published: May 26, 2022
  • Added to your feed: May 14, 2023
  • Added by Medivizor: Dec 31, 2022
  • Updated by Medivizor: Dec 31, 2022
  • In association with: http://lls.org/irc

    Evaluating treosulfan vs reduced-intensity busulfan conditioning for allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation in older patients with acute myeloid leukemia

    In a nutshell

    This study aimed to compare the outcomes of allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplant (alloHCT) for older patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) using treosulfan (Trecondi) compared to reduced intensity busulfan (Myleran) conditioning. 

    This study concluded that treosulfan conditioning appears to be more suitable for these patients.  

    Some background

    AlloHCT is frequently the only curative treatment for patients with AML. Allo HCT involves the transplantation of healthy stem cells from a donor. Before alloHCT, a conditioning regimen is used. Conditioning regimens involve powerful chemotherapy that kills bone marrow cells. This makes room in the bone marrow for new cells to grow and prevent the rejection of transplanted cells.

    Reduced-intensity conditioning (RIC) uses less chemotherapy and radiation than the standard regimen. Older patients are usually more fragile and need a RIC regimen in order to prevent side effects. RIC using busulfan in combination with fludarabine (Fludara) is often used in these patients. Treosulfan can also be used in combination with fludarabine as a conditioning regimen before transplant. Studies have shown that treosulfan is associated with fewer side effects. However, whether treosulfan conditioning is suitable for older patients with AML before alloHCT is still unknown.  

    Methods & findings

    This study involved 570 patients with AML undergoing alloHCT. Patients were treated with intravenous (IV) fludarabine with either treosulfan (group 1) or RIC busulfan (group 2). Patients were followed up for an average of 2.5 years.  

    After 36 months, 59.5% of the patients in group 1 were alive without complications from AML compared to 49.7% in group 2. After 36 months, 66.8% of patients in group 1 were alive compared to 56.3% in group 2. Side effects were similar between groups. 

    The bottom line

    This study concluded that treosulfan conditioning appears suitable for older patients with AML undergoing alloHCT.  

    The fine print

    The patients knew which treatment they were getting. This may have influenced the results. This study was funded by Medac, the manufacturer of treosulfan

    Disclaimer:
    This information should not be relied upon as a substitute for personal medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. Use the information provided by Medivizor solely at your own risk. Medivizor makes no warranties or representations as to the accuracy of information provided herein. If you have any concerns about your health, please consult a physician.

    Discussion about this item

    Follow this discussion

    Notes:



     

    Was this helpful?

    Ask a question