Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2020 Apr;26(4):683-690.
doi: 10.1016/j.bbmt.2019.10.029. Epub 2019 Nov 1.

R-BEAM versus Reduced-Intensity Conditioning Regimens in Patients Undergoing Allogeneic Stem Cell Transplantation for Relapsed Refractory Diffuse Large B Cell Lymphoma

Affiliations

R-BEAM versus Reduced-Intensity Conditioning Regimens in Patients Undergoing Allogeneic Stem Cell Transplantation for Relapsed Refractory Diffuse Large B Cell Lymphoma

Dipenkumar Modi et al. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2020 Apr.

Abstract

Allogeneic stem cell transplant (alloSCT) is considered in diffuse large B cell lymphoma (DLBCL) patients with chemorefractory disease or who have relapsed after autologous SCT. Here we present the first report of alloSCT using the R-BEAM (rituximab, carmustine, etoposide, cytarabine, melphalan) conditioning regimen in DLBCL patients. We retrospectively compared long-term alloSCT outcomes of DLBCL patients who received either R-BEAM (n = 47) or reduced-intensity conditioning (RIC) regimens (n = 23). Seventy patients (median age, 53 years) with DLBCL received alloSCT between January 2005 and December 2017. The median number of pretransplant therapies was 3, and 17 patients (24%) received prior autologous SCT. All received rituximab as a frontline or salvage therapy before alloSCT. The donor was unrelated in 42 patients (60%), and peripheral blood stem cells were commonly used (96%). The 6-month cumulative incidence of grades III to IV acute graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) was 36.2% and 8.7% for R-BEAM and RIC, respectively (P = .03). Median follow-up of surviving patients after R-BEAM and RIC was 3.1 and 5.5 years, respectively. Three-year overall survival (OS) after R-BEAM and RIC was 34.4% and 43.4%, respectively (P = .48). At 3 years, R-BEAM was associated with a similar relapse rate (25.5% versus 26.1%, P = .96), nonrelapse mortality (NRM; 39.7% versus 39.1%, P = .98), and relapse-free survival (RFS; 34.8% versus 34.7%, P = .75) compared with RIC. In multivariable analysis lower Karnofsky performance score was associated with lower OS (hazard ratio, .96; P = .05), whereas chemorefractory disease was associated with a higher relapse risk (hazard ratio, 8.8; P = .04). No difference in OS, relapse, NRM, or RFS was noticed between R-BEAM and RIC. R-BEAM regimen seems to be feasible and results in equivalent rates of long-term OS, relapse, NRM, and RFS compared with RIC. However, a significantly higher rate of severe acute GVHD was noticed.

Keywords: Allogeneic stem cell transplantation; Diffuse large B cell lymphoma; R-BEAM; Reduced-intensity conditioning regimen; Transformed diffuse large B cell lymphoma.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Financial Disclosure: The authors have no existing or potential financial conflict of interest to disclose.

Conflict of interest: No relevant conflict of interests exists.

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
(a) Cumulative incidence curves for grade III-IV acute GVHD (aGVHD) with disease relapse or death as competing risks by group (R-BEAM vs. Reduced intensity). (b) Cumulative incidence curves for extensive chronic GVHD (cGVHD) with disease relapse or death as competing risks by group.
Figure 2.
Figure 2.
(a) Kaplan-Meier survival curves for overall survival (OS) by group (R-BEAM vs. Reduced intensity). (b) Kaplan-Meier survival curves for overall survival (OS) by cell of origin (GCB vs. NonGCB).
Figure 3.
Figure 3.
(a) Cumulative incidence curves for relapse with death without relapse as a competing risk by group (R-BEAM vs. Reduced intensity conditioning). (b) Cumulative incidence curves for non-relapse mortality (NRM) with relapse as a competing risk by group. (c) Kaplan-Meier survival curves for relapse-free survival (RFS) by group. (d) Kaplan-Meier survival curves for GVHD-free/relapse-free survival (GRFS) by group.

Comment in

References

    1. Coiffier B, Lepage E, Briere J, et al. : CHOP chemotherapy plus rituximab compared with CHOP alone in elderly patients with diffuse large-B-cell lymphoma. N Engl J Med 346:235–42, 2002 - PubMed
    1. Scott DW, Mottok A, Ennishi D, et al. : Prognostic Significance of Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma Cell of Origin Determined by Digital Gene Expression in Formalin-Fixed Paraffin-Embedded Tissue Biopsies. J Clin Oncol 33:2848–56, 2015 - PMC - PubMed
    1. Philip T, Guglielmi C, Hagenbeek A, et al. : Autologous bone marrow transplantation as compared with salvage chemotherapy in relapses of chemotherapy-sensitive non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. N Engl J Med 333:1540–5, 1995 - PubMed
    1. Van Den Neste E, Schmitz N, Mounier N, et al. : Outcomes of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma patients relapsing after autologous stem cell transplantation: an analysis of patients included in the CORAL study. Bone Marrow Transplant 52:216–221, 2017 - PubMed
    1. Nagle SJ, Woo K, Schuster SJ, et al. : Outcomes of patients with relapsed/refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma with progression of lymphoma after autologous stem cell transplantation in the rituximab era. Am J Hematol 88:890–4, 2013 - PubMed