Cargando…

Comparison of BEAM vs. LEAM regimen in autologous transplant for lymphoma at AIIMS

BEAM (BCNU, etoposide, cytrabine, melphalan) is the most widely used high dose chemotherapy regimen for autologous transplant in lymphoid malignancies. We report our early experience with an alternative regimen LEAM where BCNU was replaced with the oral analogue CCNU (lomustine) to tide over the non...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Sharma, Atul, Kayal, Smita, Iqbal, Sobuhi, Malik, Prabhat Singh, Raina, Vinod
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer International Publishing 2013
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4320155/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25674395
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/2193-1801-2-489
_version_ 1782356072071168000
author Sharma, Atul
Kayal, Smita
Iqbal, Sobuhi
Malik, Prabhat Singh
Raina, Vinod
author_facet Sharma, Atul
Kayal, Smita
Iqbal, Sobuhi
Malik, Prabhat Singh
Raina, Vinod
author_sort Sharma, Atul
collection PubMed
description BEAM (BCNU, etoposide, cytrabine, melphalan) is the most widely used high dose chemotherapy regimen for autologous transplant in lymphoid malignancies. We report our early experience with an alternative regimen LEAM where BCNU was replaced with the oral analogue CCNU (lomustine) to tide over the non-availability of BCNU. Fifty one patients of relapsed or refractory lymphoma who received BEAM (n= 34) and LEAM (n= 17) from September 2001 to February 2012 were analyzed. From October 2009 onwards LEAM was used as the conditioning regimen instead of conventional BEAM. Patients in the LEAM group had more chemorefractory disease (35% vs 9%, p = 0.045) and high risk comorbidity score (24% vs 0%, p = 0.019). Grade 3 and 4 oral mucositis (67.6% vs. 64.7%, p = 0.834) and diarrhea (47% vs. 41.1%, p = 0.691) were similar. No difference was noted between the two groups in terms of engraftment, documented infections, antibiotic use, cumulative toxicity risk, length of hospital stay and 100 day transplant related mortality. The estimated 2 year overall survival (61.7% vs. 62.7%, p = 0.928) and event free survival (44.6% vs. 41.1%, p = 0.510) of the regimens BEAM and LEAM respectively were comparable. Thus LEAM appeared equivalent to BEAM in terms of toxicity and efficacy and can be used as an alternative to BEAM.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4320155
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2013
publisher Springer International Publishing
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-43201552015-02-11 Comparison of BEAM vs. LEAM regimen in autologous transplant for lymphoma at AIIMS Sharma, Atul Kayal, Smita Iqbal, Sobuhi Malik, Prabhat Singh Raina, Vinod Springerplus Research BEAM (BCNU, etoposide, cytrabine, melphalan) is the most widely used high dose chemotherapy regimen for autologous transplant in lymphoid malignancies. We report our early experience with an alternative regimen LEAM where BCNU was replaced with the oral analogue CCNU (lomustine) to tide over the non-availability of BCNU. Fifty one patients of relapsed or refractory lymphoma who received BEAM (n= 34) and LEAM (n= 17) from September 2001 to February 2012 were analyzed. From October 2009 onwards LEAM was used as the conditioning regimen instead of conventional BEAM. Patients in the LEAM group had more chemorefractory disease (35% vs 9%, p = 0.045) and high risk comorbidity score (24% vs 0%, p = 0.019). Grade 3 and 4 oral mucositis (67.6% vs. 64.7%, p = 0.834) and diarrhea (47% vs. 41.1%, p = 0.691) were similar. No difference was noted between the two groups in terms of engraftment, documented infections, antibiotic use, cumulative toxicity risk, length of hospital stay and 100 day transplant related mortality. The estimated 2 year overall survival (61.7% vs. 62.7%, p = 0.928) and event free survival (44.6% vs. 41.1%, p = 0.510) of the regimens BEAM and LEAM respectively were comparable. Thus LEAM appeared equivalent to BEAM in terms of toxicity and efficacy and can be used as an alternative to BEAM. Springer International Publishing 2013-09-26 /pmc/articles/PMC4320155/ /pubmed/25674395 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/2193-1801-2-489 Text en © Sharma et al.; licensee Springer. 2013 This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research
Sharma, Atul
Kayal, Smita
Iqbal, Sobuhi
Malik, Prabhat Singh
Raina, Vinod
Comparison of BEAM vs. LEAM regimen in autologous transplant for lymphoma at AIIMS
title Comparison of BEAM vs. LEAM regimen in autologous transplant for lymphoma at AIIMS
title_full Comparison of BEAM vs. LEAM regimen in autologous transplant for lymphoma at AIIMS
title_fullStr Comparison of BEAM vs. LEAM regimen in autologous transplant for lymphoma at AIIMS
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of BEAM vs. LEAM regimen in autologous transplant for lymphoma at AIIMS
title_short Comparison of BEAM vs. LEAM regimen in autologous transplant for lymphoma at AIIMS
title_sort comparison of beam vs. leam regimen in autologous transplant for lymphoma at aiims
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4320155/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25674395
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/2193-1801-2-489
work_keys_str_mv AT sharmaatul comparisonofbeamvsleamregimeninautologoustransplantforlymphomaataiims
AT kayalsmita comparisonofbeamvsleamregimeninautologoustransplantforlymphomaataiims
AT iqbalsobuhi comparisonofbeamvsleamregimeninautologoustransplantforlymphomaataiims
AT malikprabhatsingh comparisonofbeamvsleamregimeninautologoustransplantforlymphomaataiims
AT rainavinod comparisonofbeamvsleamregimeninautologoustransplantforlymphomaataiims