High incidence rate of human herpesvirus 6 infection after Bendamustine, Cytarabine, Etoposide and Melphalan conditioning regimen: A monocentric and retrospective study
S. Favre, M. Sauvezie, S. Vigouroux, R. Tabrizi, M. Dilhuydy, G. Labouré, M. Robles, N. Milpied, K. Bouabdallah
{"title":"High incidence rate of human herpesvirus 6 infection after Bendamustine, Cytarabine, Etoposide and Melphalan conditioning regimen: A monocentric and retrospective study","authors":"S. Favre, M. Sauvezie, S. Vigouroux, R. Tabrizi, M. Dilhuydy, G. Labouré, M. Robles, N. Milpied, K. Bouabdallah","doi":"10.17352/acn.000054","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Following shortage of Carmustine, BeEAM regimen (Bendamustine, Etoposide, Cytarabine and Melphalan) was used before autologous transplant in relapsed/refractory lymphoma patients. We evaluated safety and efficacy of BeEAM compared to BEAM. \nPatients and methods: Ninety consecutive patients receiving BeEAM (30pts) (Bendamustine 100, 120 or 200 mg/m²/d) or BEAM (60 pts) were retrospectively analyzed. \nResults: In the BEAM group, 68% had NHL and 32% HL compared to 87% and 13% in the BeEAM group (p = 0,014). Pts were in CR or PR at time of transplant. There was no difference regarding hematologic recovery and transfusion requirements. Highest dose of Bendamustine were associated with grade ≥ 2 kidney toxicity. We observed a significant higher incidence of symptomatic HHV-6 infection (53.3% versus 8.3%), digestive toxicity (36.6% versus 15%) and prolonged hospitalization (25 versus 21 days) with BeEAM. After a median follow up of 61 and 49 months for BEAM and BeEAM, 5y-OS and PFS (76% versus 67% and 56% versus 70%) and TRM (0% versus 3%) were not different. \nConclusions: BeEAM with the highest doses of Bendamustine was associated with increased risk of HHV-6 infection, longer duration of hospitalization, higher rate of digestive toxicity and increased acute kidney failure while survival was comparable.","PeriodicalId":127781,"journal":{"name":"Archives of Clinical Nephrology","volume":"246 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Archives of Clinical Nephrology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17352/acn.000054","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Following shortage of Carmustine, BeEAM regimen (Bendamustine, Etoposide, Cytarabine and Melphalan) was used before autologous transplant in relapsed/refractory lymphoma patients. We evaluated safety and efficacy of BeEAM compared to BEAM.
Patients and methods: Ninety consecutive patients receiving BeEAM (30pts) (Bendamustine 100, 120 or 200 mg/m²/d) or BEAM (60 pts) were retrospectively analyzed.
Results: In the BEAM group, 68% had NHL and 32% HL compared to 87% and 13% in the BeEAM group (p = 0,014). Pts were in CR or PR at time of transplant. There was no difference regarding hematologic recovery and transfusion requirements. Highest dose of Bendamustine were associated with grade ≥ 2 kidney toxicity. We observed a significant higher incidence of symptomatic HHV-6 infection (53.3% versus 8.3%), digestive toxicity (36.6% versus 15%) and prolonged hospitalization (25 versus 21 days) with BeEAM. After a median follow up of 61 and 49 months for BEAM and BeEAM, 5y-OS and PFS (76% versus 67% and 56% versus 70%) and TRM (0% versus 3%) were not different.
Conclusions: BeEAM with the highest doses of Bendamustine was associated with increased risk of HHV-6 infection, longer duration of hospitalization, higher rate of digestive toxicity and increased acute kidney failure while survival was comparable.