Abstract
Fludarabine with busulfan (FB) and fludarabine with melphalan (FM) are commonly used reduced-intensity conditioning (RIC) regimens. Pharmacokinetic dosing of busulfan (Bu) is frequently done for myeloablative conditioning, but evidence for its use is limited in RIC transplants. We compared transplant outcomes of FB versus FM using i.v. Bu targeted to the area under the curve (AUC). A total of 134 RIC transplants (47 FB and 87 FM) for acute myelogenous leukemia and myelodysplastic syndrome were identified, and median follow-up of the cohort was 40 months (range, 0 to 63.3). A significantly higher 2-year cumulative incidence of relapse (CIR) was associated with FB versus FM at 35.6% versus 17.3%, respectively (P = .0058). Furthermore, 2-year progression-free survival rates were higher for FM versus FB at 60.5% versus 48.7%, respectively (P = .04). However, 2-year rates of nonrelapse mortality (NRM) and overall survival (OS) were similar. The need for dose adjustment based on AUC did not alter relapse risk or NRM. Patients with Karnofsky performance status ≥ 90 who received FM had a 2-year OS rate of 74.8% versus 48.3% for FB (P = .03). FB use remained prognostic for relapse in multivariable analysis (hazard ratio, 2.75; 95% confidence interval, 1.28 to 5.89; P = .0097). In summary, in spite of AUC-directed dosing, FB compared with FM was associated with a significantly higher CIR.
•FB was associated with higher CIR and lower PFS compared with FM in RIC-HCT.•Dose adjustment of busulfan based on AUC did not alter the risk of relapse.•Engraftment and acute or chronic GVHD rates were similar between both regimens.•FM was associated with an OS advantage in patients with KPS ≥ 90.