Bendamustine-EAM versus R-BEAM after high-dose cytarabine-based induction in newly diagnosed patients with mantle
Domitille Costes-Tertrais1,2, Thomas Hueso3,4, Thomas Gastinne1
1Department of Hematology, CHU de Nantes, University Hospital of Nantes, Nantes, France.
Abstract:
Cytarabine-based immuno-chemotherapy followed by autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) consolidation is standard of care for fit patients with Mantle Cell Lymphoma (MCL). BEAM (Carmustine, Etoposide, Aracytine, Melphalan) is among the most frequently used conditioning regimen. Studies comparing BEAM with Bendamustine-EAM (BeEAM) have suggested that patients treated with BeEAM have a better progression-free survival (PFS). We performed a cross-study analysis to better evaluate BeEAM. Thirty-five patients from a retrospective study who received R-DHAP/BeEAM were compared to 245 patients from the LyMa trial (NCT00921414) who all received R-DHAP followed by R-BEAM. PFS and Overall Survival (OS) were estimated using Kaplan-Meier methods. At 2 years there was no difference between R-BEAM and BeEAM in either PFS (84.9% versus 87.9%; p = 0.95) or OS (91.8% versus 94.2%; p = 0.30). Analyses were repeated on a propensity score to reduce biases. Each patient from the BeEAM cohort (n = 30) was matched to three patients from the R-BEAM cohort (n = 90) for age, sex, MIPI score, pre-transplant status disease and rituximab maintenance (RM). PFS and OS at 2 years remained similar between R-BEAM and BeEAM with more renal toxicity in BeEAM group. MCL patients who received R-DHAP induction before ASCT have similar outcome after R-BEAM or BeEAM conditioning regimen.
