Stephanie Hämmerle, Jana Ernst, Regula Steiner, Tayfun Güngör, Till Milde, Bernd Gruhn
{"title":"布苏凡给药途径包括治疗药物监测在儿科患者造血干细胞移植前调理方案中的意义。","authors":"Stephanie Hämmerle, Jana Ernst, Regula Steiner, Tayfun Güngör, Till Milde, Bernd Gruhn","doi":"10.1007/s00432-025-06179-w","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Busulfan is an important myeloablative agent in various conditioning regimens prior to hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) in pediatric patients. This retrospective study compares three different routes of busulfan administration and their impact on transplantation-related mortality (TRM) and overall survival (OS).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The study included 250 pediatric patients with malignant and non-malignant diseases who underwent HSCT at the Department of Pediatrics, Jena University Hospital, Jena, Germany. One hundred forty-eight patients received busulfan orally without therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) (group 1), 62 patients received busulfan intravenously (i.v.) without TDM (group 2) and 40 patients received busulfan i.v. with additional TDM (group 3).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The TRM rate at 5 years after transplantation for all patients was 40.5% for group 1, 25.2% for group 2, and 8.4% for group 3 (p < 0.001). The TRM rate at 5 years after transplantation for patients with malignant diseases only was 40.3% for group 1 compared to 28.4% for group 2 and 15.3% for group 3 (p = 0.051). For patients with non-malignant diseases, group 1 showed a TRM rate of 43.8% compared to 15.4% in group 2 and 4.6% in group 3 (p = 0.009). In addition, the 5-year OS rate for all patients was 39.9% for group 1, 61.2% for group 2, and 83.9% for group 3 (p < 0.001). Regarding the OS of the groups for patients with only malignant or only non-malignant diseases, we obtained similar results with p-values of p = 0.017 and p = 0.007, respectively. The cumulative incidence of hepatic sinusoidal obstruction syndrome (SOS) for patients with malignant diseases and a cumulative AUC > 85.0 mg/L x h was 55.6%, while patients with malignant diseases and a cumulative AUC < 85.0 mg/L x h showed a cumulative incidence of 11.1% (p = 0.038).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In this study, we demonstrate that patients with i.v. administration of busulfan with TDM had a significantly lower rate of TRM and a significantly improved OS compared to patients who received i.v. administration of busulfan without TDM, who, in turn, had a better outcome than patients with oral busulfan administration. Additionally, these data emphasize the clinical relevance of AUC measurements in patients with malignant diseases to prevent hepatic SOS.</p>","PeriodicalId":15118,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Cancer Research and Clinical Oncology","volume":"151 4","pages":"132"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11971230/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Significance of busulfan administration route including therapeutic drug monitoring in the conditioning regimen of pediatric patients prior to hematopoietic stem cell transplantation.\",\"authors\":\"Stephanie Hämmerle, Jana Ernst, Regula Steiner, Tayfun Güngör, Till Milde, Bernd Gruhn\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s00432-025-06179-w\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Busulfan is an important myeloablative agent in various conditioning regimens prior to hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) in pediatric patients. This retrospective study compares three different routes of busulfan administration and their impact on transplantation-related mortality (TRM) and overall survival (OS).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The study included 250 pediatric patients with malignant and non-malignant diseases who underwent HSCT at the Department of Pediatrics, Jena University Hospital, Jena, Germany. One hundred forty-eight patients received busulfan orally without therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) (group 1), 62 patients received busulfan intravenously (i.v.) without TDM (group 2) and 40 patients received busulfan i.v. with additional TDM (group 3).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The TRM rate at 5 years after transplantation for all patients was 40.5% for group 1, 25.2% for group 2, and 8.4% for group 3 (p < 0.001). The TRM rate at 5 years after transplantation for patients with malignant diseases only was 40.3% for group 1 compared to 28.4% for group 2 and 15.3% for group 3 (p = 0.051). For patients with non-malignant diseases, group 1 showed a TRM rate of 43.8% compared to 15.4% in group 2 and 4.6% in group 3 (p = 0.009). In addition, the 5-year OS rate for all patients was 39.9% for group 1, 61.2% for group 2, and 83.9% for group 3 (p < 0.001). Regarding the OS of the groups for patients with only malignant or only non-malignant diseases, we obtained similar results with p-values of p = 0.017 and p = 0.007, respectively. The cumulative incidence of hepatic sinusoidal obstruction syndrome (SOS) for patients with malignant diseases and a cumulative AUC > 85.0 mg/L x h was 55.6%, while patients with malignant diseases and a cumulative AUC < 85.0 mg/L x h showed a cumulative incidence of 11.1% (p = 0.038).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In this study, we demonstrate that patients with i.v. administration of busulfan with TDM had a significantly lower rate of TRM and a significantly improved OS compared to patients who received i.v. administration of busulfan without TDM, who, in turn, had a better outcome than patients with oral busulfan administration. Additionally, these data emphasize the clinical relevance of AUC measurements in patients with malignant diseases to prevent hepatic SOS.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15118,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Cancer Research and Clinical Oncology\",\"volume\":\"151 4\",\"pages\":\"132\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11971230/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Cancer Research and Clinical Oncology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00432-025-06179-w\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ONCOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Cancer Research and Clinical Oncology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00432-025-06179-w","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
目的:在儿科患者造血干细胞移植(HSCT)前的各种调理方案中,布苏凡是一种重要的清髓剂。本回顾性研究比较了三种不同的布苏凡给药途径及其对移植相关死亡率(TRM)和总生存率(OS)的影响。方法:该研究包括250例在德国耶拿大学医院儿科接受HSCT治疗的恶性和非恶性疾病的儿童患者。148例患者口服布磺凡,无治疗药物监测(TDM)(1组),62例患者静脉注射布磺凡,无TDM(2组),40例患者静脉注射布磺凡,合并TDM(3组)。结果:移植后5年TRM率1组为40.5%,2组为25.2%,3组为8.4% (p 85.0 mg/L x h为55.6%)。在这项研究中,我们证明,与静脉给药无TDM的患者相比,静脉给药有TDM的患者TRM率显著降低,OS显著改善,而静脉给药无TDM的患者则比口服busulfan患者有更好的结果。此外,这些数据强调了AUC测量在恶性疾病患者中预防肝脏SOS的临床意义。
Significance of busulfan administration route including therapeutic drug monitoring in the conditioning regimen of pediatric patients prior to hematopoietic stem cell transplantation.
Purpose: Busulfan is an important myeloablative agent in various conditioning regimens prior to hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) in pediatric patients. This retrospective study compares three different routes of busulfan administration and their impact on transplantation-related mortality (TRM) and overall survival (OS).
Methods: The study included 250 pediatric patients with malignant and non-malignant diseases who underwent HSCT at the Department of Pediatrics, Jena University Hospital, Jena, Germany. One hundred forty-eight patients received busulfan orally without therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) (group 1), 62 patients received busulfan intravenously (i.v.) without TDM (group 2) and 40 patients received busulfan i.v. with additional TDM (group 3).
Results: The TRM rate at 5 years after transplantation for all patients was 40.5% for group 1, 25.2% for group 2, and 8.4% for group 3 (p < 0.001). The TRM rate at 5 years after transplantation for patients with malignant diseases only was 40.3% for group 1 compared to 28.4% for group 2 and 15.3% for group 3 (p = 0.051). For patients with non-malignant diseases, group 1 showed a TRM rate of 43.8% compared to 15.4% in group 2 and 4.6% in group 3 (p = 0.009). In addition, the 5-year OS rate for all patients was 39.9% for group 1, 61.2% for group 2, and 83.9% for group 3 (p < 0.001). Regarding the OS of the groups for patients with only malignant or only non-malignant diseases, we obtained similar results with p-values of p = 0.017 and p = 0.007, respectively. The cumulative incidence of hepatic sinusoidal obstruction syndrome (SOS) for patients with malignant diseases and a cumulative AUC > 85.0 mg/L x h was 55.6%, while patients with malignant diseases and a cumulative AUC < 85.0 mg/L x h showed a cumulative incidence of 11.1% (p = 0.038).
Conclusion: In this study, we demonstrate that patients with i.v. administration of busulfan with TDM had a significantly lower rate of TRM and a significantly improved OS compared to patients who received i.v. administration of busulfan without TDM, who, in turn, had a better outcome than patients with oral busulfan administration. Additionally, these data emphasize the clinical relevance of AUC measurements in patients with malignant diseases to prevent hepatic SOS.
期刊介绍:
The "Journal of Cancer Research and Clinical Oncology" publishes significant and up-to-date articles within the fields of experimental and clinical oncology. The journal, which is chiefly devoted to Original papers, also includes Reviews as well as Editorials and Guest editorials on current, controversial topics. The section Letters to the editors provides a forum for a rapid exchange of comments and information concerning previously published papers and topics of current interest. Meeting reports provide current information on the latest results presented at important congresses.
The following fields are covered: carcinogenesis - etiology, mechanisms; molecular biology; recent developments in tumor therapy; general diagnosis; laboratory diagnosis; diagnostic and experimental pathology; oncologic surgery; and epidemiology.