Fludarabine melphalan versus fludarabine treosulfan for reduced intensity conditioning regimen in allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation: a retrospective analysis

Various reduced-intensity conditioning (RIC) regimens are used to decrease toxicity while providing comparable outcomes to myeloablative regimens. We compared toxicity and outcomes between two RIC regimens, fludarabine with melphalan (Flu-Mel) and fludarabine with treosulfan (Flu-Treo), retrospectively over a 10-year period in two donor groups, matched related donor (MRD)/matched unrelated donor (MUD) and haploidentical (Haplo) transplants. The study included 138 patients, of which 105 received MRD/MUD (Flu-Mel: 94, Flu-Treo: 11) and 33 Haplo (Flu-Mel: 17, Flu-Treo: 16) transplants. In the MRD/MUD group, 44 (47%) of patients who received Flu-Mel had grade 3/4 oral mucositis compared to 1 (9%) who received Flu-Treo (P = 0.02). Corresponding numbers in the Haplo group were 7 (41%) and 1 (6%). Grade 3/4 diarrhoea was more frequent with Flu-Mel than Flu-Treo in the Haplo group (41% vs 6%; P = 0.039), but not the MRD/MUD group. Median follow-up time for all patients was 4.8 years. Five-year OS in the MRD/MUD group was 62% with Flu-Mel versus 53% with Flu-Treo (P = 0.0694). Similarly, 5-year OS was 41% with Flu-Mel and 28% with Flu-Treo (P = 0.770) in the Haplo group. Severe mucositis and diarrhoea were significantly less frequent with Flu-Treo than Flu-Mel. Flu-Treo provided comparable outcomes to Flu-Mel in all donor transplants.

Automated summary

This study compares the toxicity and outcomes of two reduced-intensity conditioning regimens, Flu-Mel and Flu-Treo, in different donor groups for transplantation. The results show that Flu-Treo has lower toxicity in terms of severe mucositis and diarrhea compared to Flu-Mel. Additionally, Flu-Treo provides comparable outcomes to Flu-Mel in all donor transplants.