Treosulfan is a Safe and Effective Alternative to Busulfan for Conditioning in Adult Allogeneic HSCT Patients: Data from a Single Center

Overview

Journal Cancer Med

Specialty Oncology

Date 2024 May 16

PMID 38752476

Authors

Ant Uzay

Yasemin Gundogdu

Baris Kosan

Tugba Yetis

S Sami Karti

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Introduction: Type of conditioning regimen impacts the outcome of patients who undergo allogeneic HSCT since graft versus host disease (GVHD), infections, regimen related toxicities (RRT) are important causes of post-transplant mortality. Despite the RRT profile of busulfan, it is frequently used worldwide. Treosulfan has advantages in terms of dose of administration, lower incidence of sinusoidal obstruction syndrome and lower neurotoxicity. We retrospectively investigated outcomes of patients who underwent allogeneic HSCT with treosulfan or busulfan based conditioning regimens in our institution.

Methods: Treosulfan was administered to 94 patients while 85 patients received busulfan. Our outcomes were RRT, chronic and acute GVHD, relapse related mortality (RRM), non-relapse mortality, and fungal infection. The clinical follow up data, regarding the primary and secondary endpoints of our study, of the patients who received treosulfan or busulfan based conditioning regimens were statistically analyzed.

Results: The median follow-up was 14 months for the treosulfan group while it was 11 months for the busulfan group (p = 0.16). RRT was 11.7% and 7.1% for treosulfan and busulfan respectively. The incidence of extensive chronic GVHD was less frequent in the treosulfan group compared to the busulfan group (15.7% vs. 32.1%) (p < 0.001). The incidence of acute GVHD (Grade 3 or higher) was 32.2% in the treosulfan group while it was 31.6% in the busulfan group. The RRM was 17% in the treosulfan group while it was 34% in the busulfan group. The non-relapse mortality was 35.5% and 29.4% in the treosulfan group and in the busulfan group respectively (p = 0.962).

Conclusion: Treosulfan, with a lower RRM, lower chronic GVHD incidence and with a similar RRT profile appears to be a safe alternative to busulfan.

Citing Articles

Treosulfan is a safe and effective alternative to busulfan for conditioning in adult allogeneic HSCT patients: Data from a single center.

Uzay A, Gundogdu Y, Kosan B, Yetis T, Karti S Cancer Med. 2024; 13(10):e7292.

PMID: 38752476 PMC: 11097247. DOI: 10.1002/cam4.7292.

References

Hill G . Inflammation and bone marrow transplantation. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2009; 15(1 Suppl):139-41. DOI: 10.1016/j.bbmt.2008.11.008. View

Bearman S, Appelbaum F, Buckner C, Petersen F, Fisher L, Clift R . Regimen-related toxicity in patients undergoing bone marrow transplantation. J Clin Oncol. 1988; 6(10):1562-8. DOI: 10.1200/JCO.1988.6.10.1562. View

Nagler A, Labopin M, Beelen D, Ciceri F, Volin L, Shimoni A . Long-term outcome after a treosulfan-based conditioning regimen for patients with acute myeloid leukemia: A report from the Acute Leukemia Working Party of the European Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation. Cancer. 2017; 123(14):2671-2679. DOI: 10.1002/cncr.30646. View

Ruutu T, Volin L, Beelen D, Trenschel R, Finke J, Schnitzler M . Reduced-toxicity conditioning with treosulfan and fludarabine in allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation for myelodysplastic syndromes: final results of an international prospective phase II trial. Haematologica. 2011; 96(9):1344-50. PMC: 3166105. DOI: 10.3324/haematol.2011.043810. View

Chaguaceda C, Aguilera-Jimenez V, Gutierrez G, Roura J, Riu G . Oral levetiracetam for prevention of busulfan-induced seizures in adult hematopoietic cell transplant. Int J Clin Pharm. 2020; 42(2):351-354. DOI: 10.1007/s11096-020-00977-7. View

Styczynski J, Tridello G, Koster L, Iacobelli S, van Biezen A, van der Werf S . Death after hematopoietic stem cell transplantation: changes over calendar year time, infections and associated factors. Bone Marrow Transplant. 2019; 55(1):126-136. PMC: 6957465. DOI: 10.1038/s41409-019-0624-z. View

Beelen D, Stelljes M, Remenyi P, Wagner-Drouet E, Dreger P, Bethge W . Treosulfan compared with reduced-intensity busulfan improves allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation outcomes of older acute myeloid leukemia and myelodysplastic syndrome patients: Final analysis of a prospective randomized trial. Am J Hematol. 2022; 97(8):1023-1034. DOI: 10.1002/ajh.26620. View

Sjoo F, Hassan Z, Abedi-Valugerdi M, Griskevicius L, Nilsson C, Remberger M . Myeloablative and immunosuppressive properties of treosulfan in mice. Exp Hematol. 2006; 34(1):115-21. DOI: 10.1016/j.exphem.2005.09.015. View

Glucksberg H, Storb R, Fefer A, Buckner C, Neiman P, Clift R . Clinical manifestations of graft-versus-host disease in human recipients of marrow from HL-A-matched sibling donors. Transplantation. 1974; 18(4):295-304. DOI: 10.1097/00007890-197410000-00001. View

10.

Kroger N, Bornhauser M, Stelljes M, Pichlmeier U, Trenschel R, Schmid C . Allogeneic stem cell transplantation after conditioning with treosulfan, etoposide and cyclophosphamide for patients with ALL: a phase II-study on behalf of the German Cooperative Transplant Study Group and ALL Study Group (GMALL). Bone Marrow Transplant. 2015; 50(12):1503-7. DOI: 10.1038/bmt.2015.202. View

11.

Gyurkocza B, Sandmaier B . Conditioning regimens for hematopoietic cell transplantation: one size does not fit all. Blood. 2014; 124(3):344-53. PMC: 4102707. DOI: 10.1182/blood-2014-02-514778. View

12.

Shimoni A, Labopin M, Savani B, Hamladji R, Beelen D, Mufti G . Intravenous Busulfan Compared with Treosulfan-Based Conditioning for Allogeneic Stem Cell Transplantation in Acute Myeloid Leukemia: A Study on Behalf of the Acute Leukemia Working Party of European Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2017; 24(4):751-757. DOI: 10.1016/j.bbmt.2017.12.776. View

13.

Greystoke B, Bonanomi S, Carr T, Gharib M, Khalid T, Coussons M . Treosulfan-containing regimens achieve high rates of engraftment associated with low transplant morbidity and mortality in children with non-malignant disease and significant co-morbidities. Br J Haematol. 2008; 142(2):257-62. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2141.2008.07064.x. View

14.

Casper J, Knauf W, Kiefer T, Wolff D, Steiner B, Hammer U . Treosulfan and fludarabine: a new toxicity-reduced conditioning regimen for allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Blood. 2003; 103(2):725-31. DOI: 10.1182/blood-2002-11-3615. View

15.

Danylesko I, Shimoni A, Nagler A . Treosulfan-based conditioning before hematopoietic SCT: more than a BU look-alike. Bone Marrow Transplant. 2011; 47(1):5-14. DOI: 10.1038/bmt.2011.88. View

16.

Uzay A, Gundogdu Y, Kosan B, Yetis T, Karti S . Treosulfan is a safe and effective alternative to busulfan for conditioning in adult allogeneic HSCT patients: Data from a single center. Cancer Med. 2024; 13(10):e7292. PMC: 11097247. DOI: 10.1002/cam4.7292. View

17.

Strong Rodrigues K, Oliveira-Ribeiro C, de Abreu Fiuza Gomes S, Knobler R . Cutaneous Graft-Versus-Host Disease: Diagnosis and Treatment. Am J Clin Dermatol. 2017; 19(1):33-50. PMC: 5797560. DOI: 10.1007/s40257-017-0306-9. View

18.

Sennett R, Jama B, Hinds B, Tzachanis D, Morris G, Marsch A . Local immune cell infiltration in cutaneous acute graft versus host disease. Int J Womens Dermatol. 2020; 6(4):311-317. PMC: 7522857. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijwd.2020.05.009. View

19.

Zhu S, Liu G, Liu J, Chen Q, Wang Z . Long-Term Outcomes of Treosulfan- vs. Busulfan-Based Conditioning Regimen for Patients With Myelodysplastic Syndrome and Acute Myeloid Leukemia Before Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Front Oncol. 2021; 10:591363. PMC: 7793760. DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2020.591363. View

20.

Andersson B, Thall P, Madden T, Couriel D, Wang X, Tran H . Busulfan systemic exposure relative to regimen-related toxicity and acute graft-versus-host disease: defining a therapeutic window for i.v. BuCy2 in chronic myelogenous leukemia. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2002; 8(9):477-85. DOI: 10.1053/bbmt.2002.v8.pm12374452. View