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
. 2024 May;26(5):456-465.
doi: 10.1016/j.jcyt.2024.01.012. Epub 2024 Feb 19.

Prognostic differences between carmustine, etoposide, cytarabine and melphalan (BEAM) and carmustine, etoposide, cytarabine, melphalan and fludarabine (BEAMF) regimens before autologous stem cell transplantation plus chimeric antigen receptor T therapy in patients with refractory/relapsed B-cell non-Hodgkin-lymphoma

Affiliations
Free article

Prognostic differences between carmustine, etoposide, cytarabine and melphalan (BEAM) and carmustine, etoposide, cytarabine, melphalan and fludarabine (BEAMF) regimens before autologous stem cell transplantation plus chimeric antigen receptor T therapy in patients with refractory/relapsed B-cell non-Hodgkin-lymphoma

Xiangke Xin et al. Cytotherapy. 2024 May.
Free article

Abstract

Background aims: The combination therapy of autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (ASCT) and chimeric antigen receptor T-cell (CART) therapy has been employed to improve outcomes for relapsed or refractory (R/R) B-cell non-Hodgkin-lymphoma (B-NHL). The widely used conditioning regimen before ASCT plus CART therapy reported in the literature was carmustine, etoposide, cytarabine and melphalan (BEAM). However, whether adding fludarabine to the BEAM regimen (BEAMF) can improve the survival of patients with R/R B-NHL remains unknown.

Methods: In total, 39 and 19 patients with R/R B-NHL were enrolled to compare clinical outcomes in the BEAM and BEAMF regimens before ASCT plus CD19/22 CART therapy, respectively.

Results: The objective response (OR) rates at 3 months to BEAM and BEAMF regimens before ASCT plus CD19/22 CART therapy were 71.8% and 94.7%, respectively (P = 0.093). The BEAMF regimen showed a trend towards a superior duration of response compared with the BEAM regimen (P = 0.09). After a median follow-up of 28 months (range: 0.93-51.9 months), the BEAMF regimen demonstrated superior 2-year progression-free survival (PFS) (89.5% versus 63.9%; P = 0.048) and 2-year overall survival (OS) (100% vs 77.3%; P = 0.035) compared with the BEAM regimen. In the multivariable Cox regression analysis, OR at month 3 (responders) was remarkably correlated with better OS (hazard ratio: 0.112, P = 0.005) compared with OR (non-responders).

Conclusions: For patients with R/R B-NHL, the BEAMF regimen before ASCT plus CD19/22 CART therapy was correlated with superior PFS and OS than the BEAM regimen, and the BEAMF regimen is a promising alternative conditioning regimen for ASCT plus CAR-T therapy.

Keywords: B-cell non-Hodgkin-lymphoma; autologous stem cell transplantation; chimeric antigen receptor T-cell; conditioning regimen; relapsed or refractory.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Declaration of competing interest The authors have no commercial, proprietary or financial interest in the products or companies described in this article.

Similar articles

Cited by

Publication types

MeSH terms

Supplementary concepts

LinkOut - more resources