CEAC (oral semustine, etoposide, cytarabine and cyclophosphamide) vs BEAM (carmustine, etoposide, cytarabine, and melphalan) conditioning regimen of autologous stem cell transplantation for diffuse large B-cell lymphoma: a post-hoc, propensity score-matched, cohort study in Chinese patients.

Abstract

Autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) is a salvage therapy for relapsed or refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL). We have developed a novel conditioning regimen called CEAC (oral semustine 250mg/m2 d-6, etoposide 300mg/m2 d-5 ~ d-2, cytarabine 500mg/m2 d-5 ~ d-2, and cyclophosphamide 1200mg/m2 d-5 ~ d-2) In lymphoma patients in China. Here, we conducted a study to compare the conventional BEAM regimen with the CEAC regimen in 110 DLBCL patients. Propensity-score matching was performed in a 1:4 ratio (22 patients received BEAM and 88 received CEAC). Our results showed no significant difference in the overall response rate (95% vs 97%, P = 1.000) and complete response rate (66% vs 73%, P = 0.580) between the two cohorts. The 5-year progression-free survival (PFS), 5-year overall survival (OS), and 5-year cumulative incidence of relapse (CIR) for all patients were 72% (95% CI 62%-82%), 92% (95% CI 86%-97%), and 29% (95% CI 17%-38%), respectively. There was no significant difference in the 5-year PFS (80% vs 70%, P = 0.637), 5-year OS (95% vs 91%, P = 0.496), and 5-year CIR (20% vs 30%, P = 0.733) between cohorts. In terms of safety, the CEAC cohort had a lower incidence rate of grade 1-2 gastrointestinal hemorrhage (P = 0.023) and severe nausea (P = 0.007) compared with the BEAM cohort. In conclusion, the CEAC regimen seems to be a suitable alternative to the BEAM regimen for ASCT in DLBCL patients.