BeEAM conditioning regimen is a safe, efficacious and economical alternative to BEAM chemotherapy

Clinical and safety outcomes of BeEAM (Bendamustine, Etoposide, Cytarabine, Melphalan) versus CEM (Carboplatin, Etoposide, Melphalan) in lymphoma patients as a conditioning regimen before autologous hematopoietic cell transplantation

BACKGROUND

Autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) is a pivotal treatment for lymphoma patients. The BeEAM regimen (Bendamustine, Etoposide, Cytarabine, Melphalan) traditionally relies on cryopreservation, whereas the CEM regimen (Carboplatin, Etoposide, Melphalan) has been optimized for short-duration administration without the need for cryopreservation. This study rigorously compares the clinical and safety profiles of the BeEAM and CEM regimens.

METHODS

A controlled, randomized clinical trial was conducted with 58 lymphoma patients undergoing ASCT at the International Medical Center (IMC) in Cairo, Egypt. Patients were randomly assigned to either the BeEAM (n = 29) or CEM (n = 29) regimen, with an 18-month follow-up period. Clinical and safety outcomes were meticulously compared, focusing on time to engraftment for neutrophils and platelets, side effects, length of hospitalization, transplant-related mortality (TRM), and survival rates.

RESULTS

The findings demonstrate a significant advantage for the CEM regimen. Neutrophil recovery was markedly faster in the CEM group, averaging 8.5 days compared to 14.5 days in the BeEAM group (p < 0.0001). Platelet recovery was similarly expedited, with 11 days in the CEM group versus 23 days in the BeEAM group (p < 0.0001). Hospitalization duration was substantially shorter for CEM patients, averaging 18.5 days compared to 30 days for those on BeEAM (p < 0.0001). Furthermore, overall survival (OS) was significantly higher in the CEM group at 96.55% (95% CI: 84.91-99.44%) compared to 79.31% (95% CI: 63.11-89.75%) in the BeEAM group (p = 0.049). Progression-free survival (PFS) was also notably superior in the CEM group, at 86.21% (95% CI: 86.14-86.28%) versus 62.07% (95% CI: 61.94-62.20%) in the BeEAM group (p = 0.036).

CONCLUSION

The CEM regimen might demonstrate superiority over the BeEAM regimen, with faster neutrophil and platelet recovery, reduced hospitalization time, and significantly improved overall and progression-free survival rates. Future studies with longer duration and larger sample sizes are warranted.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This study is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov under the registration number NCT05813132 ( https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05813132 ). (The first submitted registration date: is March 16, 2023).

Evaluation of outcome and safety profile in high-dose BEAM and Benda-EAM chemotherapy with subsequent autologous stem cell transplantation in lymphoma patients

Introduction

Autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (auto- HSCT) preceded by high-dose chemotherapy is a mainstay in relapsed/refractory lymphoma. The study aimed to compare the efficacy and adverse event profile between BEAM and Benda-EAM (BeEAM) regimens and to evaluate prognostic factors for survival in lymphoma patients undergoing auto-HSCT.

Material and methods

We present a single-center retrospective analysis of 82 lymphoma patients (median age 52; IQR 38.2-62.2) who received BEAM (47.6%) or BeEAM (52.4%) followed by auto-HSCT between January 2015 and December 2021.

Results

During the post-HSCT period 58% of patients experienced febrile neutropenia (51.3% vs. 64.3% in BEAM and BeEAM, respectively; p = 0.27), 80.5% mucositis (69.2% vs. 90.7%; p = 0.02), 42.5% bacteremia (50% vs. 35.7%; p = 0.26), and 18.8% pneumonia (31.6% vs. 7.1%; p = 0.01). Patients who received bendamustine required more platelet transfusions (p = 0.02). In the multivariate Cox regression model, C-reactive protein level on the first day of hospitalization (hazard ratio - HR = 1.03, 95% CI: 1.01-1.06) and days of agranulocytosis (HR = 1.15, 95% CI: 1.00-1.32) were predictors of poorer overall survival (OS), whereas hemoglobin level at the auto-HSCT was a protective factor in terms of OS (HR = 0.43, 95% CI: 0.23-0.78) and progression-free survival (PFS) (HR = 0.66, 95% CI: 0.45-0.96). The median OS since auto-HSCT was 87 months, while the median PFS was 49 months. No differences in PFS and OS between BEAM and BeEAM regimens were proven.

Conclusions

Conditioning with BEAM and BeEAM regimens is associated with comparable post-transplant outcomes. The toxicity of these regimens is comparable; however, BEAM is associated with a higher risk of pneumonia, while BeEAM is associated with a higher risk of mucositis.

BeEAM vs. BEAM: evaluating conditioning regimens for autologous stem cell transplantation in patients with relapsed or refractory DLBCL

PURPOSE

To evaluate whether BeEAM is an alternative to BEAM for autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) in patients with relapsed or refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL).

METHODS

Data of 60 patients with relapsed or refractory DLBCL who underwent ASCT from January 2018 to June 2023 in our center, including 30 patients in the BeEAM group and 30 patients in the BEAM group, were retrospectively analyzed. The time to hematopoietic reconstitution, treatment-related adverse events, number of hospitalization days, hospitalization cost, and survival benefit were compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

The clinical characteristics of the patients did not significantly differ between the two groups. The median number of reinfused CD34 + cells was 5.06 × 106/kg and 5.17 × 106/kg in the BeEAM and BEAM groups, respectively, which did not significantly different (p = 0.8829). In the BeEAM and BEAM groups, the median time to neutrophil implantation was 10.2 and 10.27 days, respectively (p = 0.8253), and the median time to platelet implantation was 13.23 and 12.87 days, respectively (p = 0.7671). In the BeEAM and BEAM groups, the median hospitalization duration was 30.37 and 30.57 days, respectively (p = 0.9060), and the median hospitalization cost was RMB 83,425 and RMB 96,235, respectively (p = 0.0560). The hospitalization cost was lower in the BeEAM group. The most common hematologic adverse events were grade ≥ 3 neutropenia and thrombocytopenia, whose incidences were similar in the two groups. The most common non-hematologic adverse events were ≤ grade 2 and the incidences of these events did not significantly differ between the two groups. Median overall survival was not reached in either group, with predicted 5-year overall survival of 72.5% and 60% in the BeEAM and BEAM groups, respectively (p = 0.5872). Five-year progression-free survival was 25% and 20% in the BeEAM and BEAM groups, respectively (p = 0.6804).

CONCLUSION

As a conditioning regimen for relapsed or refractory DLBCL, BeEAM has a desirable safety profile and is well tolerated, and its hematopoietic reconstitution time, number of hospitalization days, and survival benefit are not inferior to those of BEAM. BeEAM has a lower hospitalization cost and is an alternative to BEAM.

Cisplatin as a Viable and Secure Alternative to Carmustine in BEAM-Based Conditioning for Autologous Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation in Patients with Lymphoma

BACKGROUND

High-dose chemotherapy followed by autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (auto-HSCT) is a standard treatment for relapsed/refractory lymphoma patients. Yet, the widespread use of BEAM is hindered by carmustine accessibility. This study evaluates the efficacy and safety of PEAM (Cisplatin, Etoposide, Cytarabine, and Melphalan) versus BEAM in auto-HSCT for Hodgkin (HL) and non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) patients.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective single-center study of adult lymphoma patients who received PEAM or BEAM pretransplant conditioning between January 2004 to December 2022, comparing efficacy and safety outcomes.

RESULTS

Among 143 patients (median age of 33 years, 58% males), 55 had HL, and 88 had NHL. The overall response rate (ORR) was 86.7% for PEAM and 72.3% for BEAM, and the relapse rate (RR) was lower for PEAM than BEAM (22.9% vs 45.6%). Median time to relapse (TTR) and overall survival (OS) were not reached for either group. PEAM exhibited a shorter time to both neutrophil (NE) and platelet (PE) engraftment compared to BEAM (10 vs 12 days), with a more tolerable gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity profile.

CONCLUSIONS

Both BEAM and PEAM showed similar outcomes, demonstrating comparable efficacy in terms of ORR, TTR, and OS for both HL and NHL patients. However, PEAM-conditioning was associated with a shorter time to engraftment and fewer GI adverse events.

Autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation conditioning regimens and chimeric antigen receptor T cell therapy in various diseases

Conditioning regimens employed in autologous stem cell transplantation have been proven useful in various hematological disorders and underlying malig nancies; however, despite being efficacious in various instances, negative consequences have also been recorded. Multiple conditioning regimens were extracted from various literature searches from databases like PubMed, Google scholar, EMBASE, and Cochrane. Conditioning regimens for each disease were compared by using various end points such as overall survival (OS), progression free survival (PFS), and leukemia free survival (LFS). Variables were presented on graphs and analyzed to conclude a more efficacious conditioning regimen. In multiple myeloma, the most effective regimen was high dose melphalan (MEL) given at a dose of 200/mg/m2. The comparative results of acute myeloid leukemia were presented and the regimens that proved to be at an admirable position were busulfan (BU) + MEL regarding OS and BU + VP16 regarding LFS. In case of acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL), BU, fludarabine, and etoposide (BuFluVP) conferred good disease control not only with a paramount improvement in survival rate but also low risk of recurrence. However, for ALL, chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cell therapy was preferred in the context of better OS and LFS. With respect to Hodgkin's lymphoma, mitoxantrone (MITO)/MEL overtook carmustine, VP16, cytarabine, and MEL in view of PFS and vice versa regarding OS. Non-Hodgkin's lymphoma patients were administered MITO (60 mg/m2) and MEL (180 mg/m2) which showed promising results. Lastly, amyloidosis was considered, and the regimen that proved to be competent was MEL 200 (200 mg/m2). This review article demonstrates a comparison between various conditioning regimens employed in different diseases.

Identification of clinical factors impacting outcome in patients undergoing autologous hematopoietic cell transplantation after BEAM and TEAM conditioning

Organ dysfunction, including pulmonary function impairment, plays a key role in the choice of conditioning chemotherapy before autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (auto-HSCT). Replacement of BCNU/carmustine as part of BEAM (BCNU/carmustine, etoposide, cytarabine, and melphalan) conditioning protocol by thiotepa (TEAM) reduces pulmonary toxicity while maintaining efficacy. We retrospectively analyzed the association of clinical characteristics, comorbidities, and organ function with outcomes after conditioning with BEAM or TEAM. Three hundred ninety-six patients undergoing auto-HSCT (n = 333 with BEAM; n = 63 with TEAM) at our institution between 2008 and 2021 were included in this study. In the multivariate analysis, CO-diffusion capacity corrected for hemoglobin (DLCOcSB) ≤ 60% of predicted, progressive disease (PD) before auto-HSCT, Karnofsky performance score (KPS) ≤ 80%, HCT-CI score ≥ 4, and cardiac disease before auto-HSCT were associated with decreased overall survival (OS) in patients treated with BEAM. In contrast, only PD before auto-HSCT was identified in patients treated with TEAM. Patients conditioned with BEAM and DLCOcSB ≤ 60% had higher non-relapse mortality, including pulmonary cause of death. In summary, we have identified clinical and pulmonary risk factors associated with worse outcomes in patients conditioned with BEAM compared to TEAM. Our data suggest TEAM conditioning as a valid alternative for patients with comorbidities, including pulmonary dysfunction and/or poorer performance scores, before auto-HSCT.

Rapid Detection of the Anti-Tumor Drug Etoposide in Biological Samples by Using a Nanoporous-Gold-Based Electrochemical Sensor

Monitoring etoposide is important due to its wide usage in anti-tumor therapy; however, the commonly used HPLC method is expensive and often requires complicated extraction and detection procedures. Electrochemical analysis has great application prospects because of its rapid response and high specificity, sensitivity, and efficiency with low cost and high convenience. In this study, we constructed a nanoporous gold (NPG)-modified GCE for the detection of etoposide. The electrochemical oxidation of etoposide by NPG caused a sensitive current peak at +0.27 V with good reproductivity in 50 mM of phosphate buffer (pH 7.4). The relationship between etoposide concentration and peak current was linear in the range between 0.1 and 20 μM and between 20 and 150 μM, with a detection sensitivity of 681.8 μA mM-1 cm-2 and 197.2 μA mM-1 cm-2, respectively, and a limit of detection (LOD) reaching 20 nM. The electrode had a good anti-interference ability to several common anions and cations. Spiked recovery tests in serum, urine, and fermentation broth verified the excellent performance of the sensor in terms of sensitivity, reproducibility, and specificity. This may provide a promising tool for the detection of etoposide in biological samples.

An evidence-based and risk-adapted GSF versus GSF plus plerixafor mobilization strategy to obtain a sufficient CD34+ cell yield in the harvest for autologous stem cell transplants

BACKGROUND

Plerixafor is a bicyclam molecule with the ability to reversibly bind to receptor CXCR-4 thus leading to an increased release of stem cells (SC) into the circulation. This study aims to evaluate the efficacy of G-CSF plus plerixafor versus G-CSF alone mobilizing regimens on the basis of CD34+ cell yield and engraftment kinetics following hematopoietic SC transplants.

METHODS

The study incorporated 173 patients with plasma cell neoplasms (PCN), Hodgkin's lymphoma (HL) and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL), undergoing mobilization and following autologous SC-transplant. For patients with mobilization failure and those predicted to be at risk of harvesting inadequate CD34+ yields (poor-responders), plerixafor was administered. Data was collected and compared in relation to the harvesting protocols used, cell quantification, cell-engraftment potential and overall clinical outcome.

RESULTS

A total of 101 patients received plerixafor (58.4 %) and the median CD34+increase was 312 %. Chemotherapy-mobilized PCN-patients required less plerixafor administration (p = 0.01), no difference was observed in lymphoma groups (p = 0.46). The median CD34+cell yield was 7.8 × 106/kg bm. Patients requiring plerixafor achieved lower, but still comparable cell yields. Total cell dose infused was in correlation with engraftment kinetics. Patients requiring plerixafor had delayed platelet engraftment (p = 0.029).

CONCLUSIONS

Adequately selected plerixafor administration reduces "mobilization-related-failure" rate and assure a high-level cell dose for SC transplants, with superior "therapeutic-potential" and safety profile. The mobilization strategy that incorporates "just-in-time" plerixafor administration, also leads to a reduction of hospitalization days and healthcare resource utilization. For definitive conclusions, further controlled/larger clinical trials concerning correlation of CD34+ cell count/yield, with hematopoietic reconstitution are required.

BendaEAM versus BEAM as conditioning regimen for ASCT in patients with relapsed lymphoma (BEB): a multicentre, randomised, phase 2 trial

Background

Replacement of carmustine (BCNU) in the BEAM regimen (BCNU, etoposide, cytarabine, melphalan) with bendamustine (BendaEAM) before autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) is feasible in lymphoma. However, randomised trials are lacking. Here, we present the first trial addressing this topic.

Methods

This multicentre, randomised, phase 2 study (BEB-trial) conducted at four haematological centres in Austria and Switzerland compares BEAM with BendaEAM in patients with relapsed lymphoma. Both regimens were administered intravenously before ASCT, in BEAM according to the standard protocol (300 mg/m2 BCNU on day -6), in BendaEAM, BCNU was replaced by 200 mg/m2 bendamustine given on days -7 and -6. Eligible patients were aged 18-75 years and had mantle cell lymphoma, diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, or follicular lymphoma in first or second remission or chemosensitive relapse. The primary endpoint of the study was to evaluate whether replacement of BCNU by bendamustine reduces lung toxicity, defined as a decrease of the diffusion capacity of the lung for carbon monoxide by at least 20% at three months after ASCT. Data analyses were performed on an intention-to-treat basis. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02278796, and is complete.

Findings

Between April 20, 2015, and November 28, 2018, 108 patients were enrolled; of whom 53 were randomly assigned to receive BendaEAM (36 male, 17 female) and 55 to receive BEAM (39 male, 16 female). All patients engrafted rapidly. Lung toxicity did not differ between groups (BendaEAM: n = 8, 19.5%; BEAM: n = 11, 25.6%; risk difference = -6.1%: 95% confidence interval: -23.9% to 11.7%). Acute toxicities of at least grade 3 were comparable in both groups (BendaEAM: 35.8%, BEAM: 30.9%). Overall survival (BendaEAM: 92.5%, BEAM: 89.1%) and complete remission (BendaEAM: 76.7%, BEAM: 74.3%) after 1 year (median follow-up: 369 days) were similar. No difference in quality of life was observed.

Interpretation

Results were similar for both regimens in terms of survival and response rates. A phase 3 non-inferiority study is required to investigate whether BendaEAM can be considered as an alternative to BEAM.

Funding

Mundipharma.

Etoposide: A rider on the cytokine storm

For more than 40 years, the epipodophyllotoxin drug etoposide is prescribed to treat cancer. This semi-synthetic compound remains extensively used to treat advanced small-cell lung cancer and in various chemotherapy regimen for autologous stem cell transplantation, and other anticancer protocols. Etoposide is a potent topoisomerase II poison, causing double-stranded DNA breaks which lead to cell death if they are not repaired. It is also a genotoxic compound, responsible for severe side effects and secondary leukemia occasionally. Beyond its well-recognized function as an inducer of cancer cell death (a "killer on the road"), etoposide is also useful to treat immune-mediated inflammatory diseases associated with a cytokine storm syndrome. The drug is essential to the treatment of hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis (HLH) and the macrophage activation syndrome (MAS), in combination with a corticosteroid and other drugs. The use of etoposide to treat HLH, either familial or secondary to a viral or parasitic infection, or treatment-induced HLH and MAS is reviewed here. Etoposide dampens inflammation in HLH patients via an inhibition of the production of pro-inflammatory mediators, such as IL-6, IL-10, IL-18, IFN-γ and TNF-α, and reduction of the secretion of the alarmin HMGB1. The modulation of cytokines production by etoposide contributes to deactivate T cells and to dampen the immune stimulation associated to the cytokine storm. This review discussed the clinical benefits and mechanism of action of etoposide (a "rider on the storm") in the context of immune-mediated inflammatory diseases, notably life-threatening HLH and MAS. The question arises as to whether the two faces of etoposide action can apply to other topoisomerase II inhibitors.

Evaluating the Efficacy of Modified BeEAM(Bendamustine, Etoposide, Cytarabine, Melphalan) Regimen as Conditioning for Autologous Stem Cell Transplantation in Relapsed or Refractory Lymphoma: An Experience from Two Centers of a Developing Country

Background: High-dose chemotherapy followed by Autologous SCT (stem cell transplantation) is a treatment of choice for relapsed and refractory lymphoma. Due to cost, toxicity, and shortage of Carmustine, we decided to conduct a phase 2 clinical trial to evaluate the safety and efficacy of Bendamustine instead of Carmustine in a previously used BEAM-like protocol. Materials and Methods:102 patients (median age,37) with Hodgkin(n=54) and non-Hodgkin lymphoma(n=48) were recruited and transplanted in two centers. After stem cell harvesting, a modified BeEAM regimen was administered to all the patients. Overall survival and disease-free survival (DFS) at two years were calculated as the study's primary endpoints. Results: Neutrophil and platelet recovery were observed after a median of 12 and 13 days, and all the patients were engrafted. Fever was observed in 25(24.5%) with only two documented infections. The only grade III toxicities were mucositis (20%) and nausea (15.6%). No transplant-related mortality (TRM) was observed after 100 days. After a median follow-up of 37(range 25-48) months, 68(66.6%) patients were in complete remission while 21 patients were in partial response, and 16 patients (15.6%) developed progressive disease, among which 13 (12.7%) had died. The OS at two years was (89 of 102, 87.3%), and the DFS rate was 68 of 102(66.7%). Conclusion: Our study showed that modified BeEAM is a safe, effective, and feasible conditioning regimen for ASCT in lymphoma instead of the BEAM regimen.

BeEAM (Bendamustine, Etoposide, Cytarabine, Melphalan) Versus BEAM (Carmustine, Etoposide, Cytarabine, Melphalan) as Conditioning Regimen Before Autologous Haematopoietic Cell Transplantation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

High-dose chemotherapy followed by autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) is a standard of care for selected patients with refractory/relapsed Hodgkin's lymphoma (HL) or non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL), and it is also used as first-line clinical consolidation option for some aggressive NHL subtypes. Conditioning regimen prior to ASCT is one of the essential factors related with clinical outcomes post transplant. The conditioning regimen of carmustine, etoposide, cytarabine, and melphalan (BEAM) traditionally is considered the standard of care for patients with lymphoma who are eligible for transplantation. Replacement of carmustine with bendamustine (BeEAM) was described as an alternative conditioning regimen in the autograft setting for patients with lymphoma. Several studies have reported inconsistent clinical outcomes comparing BeEAM and BEAM. Therefore, in the lack of well-designed prospective comparative studies, the comparison of BeEAM versus BEAM is based on retrospective trials. To compare the clinical outcomes between BeEAM and BEAM, we performed a meta-analysis of 10 studies which compared the outcomes between BeEAM and BEAM in patients autografted for lymphoma disease (HL or NHL). We searched article titles and compared transplantation with BeEAM versus BEAM in MEDLINE (PubMed), Cochrane library, and EMBASE database. Here, we report the results of nine main endpoints in our meta-analysis comparing BeEAM and BEAM, including neutrophil engraftment (NE), platelet engraftment (PE), overall survival (OS), progression free survival (PFS), non-relapse mortality (NRM), relapse rate (RR), grade 3 mucositis, renal toxicity, and cardiotoxicity. We discovered that the BeEAM regimen was associated with a slightly better PFS [pooled odds ratio (OR) of 0.70, 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.52-0.94, P = 0.02], lower RR (0.49, 95% CI, 0.31-0.76, P = 0.002), higher mucositis (3.43, 95% CI, 2.29-5.16, P = 0.001), renal toxicity (4.49, 95% CI, 2.68-7.51, P = 0.001), and cardiotoxicity (1.88, 95% CI, 1.03-3.40, P = 0.03). We also discovered that the two groups had equivalent NE (pooled WMD -0.64, 95% CI, -1.46 to 0.18, P = 0.13), PE (pooled WMD -0.3, 95% CI, -1.68 to 2.28, P = 0.77), OS (0.73, 95% CI, 0.52-1.01, P = 0.07), and NRM (1.51, 95% CI, 0.76-2.98, P = 0.24). The results of this meta-analysis show that the BeEAM regimen is a viable alternative to BEAM. More prospective comparisons between BeEAM and BEAM are required.

Impact of Implementing a Bendamustine-Based Conditioning Regimen on Outcomes of Autologous Stem Cell Transplantation in Lymphoma while Novel Cellular Therapies Emerge

With the advent of new cellular and targeted therapies, treatment options for relapsed and refractory (r/R) lymphomas have multiplied, and the optimal approach offering the best outcomes remains a matter of passionate debate. High-dose chemotherapy followed by autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) is still considered a treatment option for patients with chemosensitive lymphoma when cure is the expected goal. The myeloablative conditioning regimen preceding the stem cell infusion is considered the effective component of this approach. Carmustine (BCNU)-based preparative regimens, such as BEAM and BEAC, are considered the standard of care and have shown efficacy and low nonrelapse mortality (NRM). Comparative studies between conditioning regimens have failed to identify a better option. After a BCNU drug shortage in Canada followed by a steep increase in price, we elected to substitute BCNU for bendamustine (benda) in the preparative regimen. The purpose of this substitution was to improve response while preserving safety and controlling costs. From May 2015 to May 2018, a total of 131 consecutive lymphoma patients received benda-EAM conditioning. These patients were compared with 96 consecutive patients who received BCNU-based conditioning from January 2012 to May 2015. Apart from conditioning, supportive care measures were the same in the 2 groups. Patients receiving benda were older (55.7 years versus 51.1 years; P = .002). The development of grade ≥3 mucositis was more frequent with benda conditioning (39.5% versus 7.8%; P < .001) leading to a greater requirement for parenteral nutrition (48.9% versus 21.9%; P < .001). A transient creatinine increase >1.5 times the upper limit of normal (15.3% versus 4.2%; P < .008) and intensive care unit admission (6.9% versus 1.1%; P < .029) were more frequent with benda; however, there were no between-group differences in cardiac, pulmonary, or liver toxicity and NRM. With a median follow-up of 48 months for the benda group and 60 months for the BCNU group, benda was associated with significantly better progression-free survival (71% versus 61%; P = .040; hazard ratio [HR], 1.6; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.0 to 2.7) and overall survival (86% vs 71%; P = .0066; HR, 2.6; 95% CI, 1.3 to 5.4) compared with BCNU-based conditioning regimens. While novel therapies emerge, our study demonstrates that benda-EAM is safe and effective and should be considered a valid alternative to BCNU conditioning to improve outcomes of patients with chemosensitive r/R lymphomas undergoing ASCT.

Combining BeEAM with Brentuximab Vedotin for High-Dose Therapy in CD30 Positive Lymphomas before Autologous Transplantation-A Phase I Study

The prognosis for patients with CD30+ lymphomas (Hodgkin lymphoma and various T-cell lymphomas) relapsing after autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) is critical. Brentuximab vedotin (BV), an ADC targeting CD30, is an obvious candidate for inclusion into high-dose chemotherapy (HDCT) regimens to improve outcomes. This single center phase I trial investigated 12 patients with CD30+ lymphoma (AITL: n = 5; relapsed HL: n = 7; median of two previous treatment lines) undergoing ASCT. In a 3 + 3 dose escalation design, 12 patients received a single BV dose at three dose levels (DL) (0.9/1.2/1.8 mg/kg b.w.) prior to standard BeEAM. All patients were treated as planned; no dose limiting toxicities (DLTs) occurred at DL 1 and 2. At DL 3, one DLT (paralytic ileus, fully recovering) occurred. Grade III febrile neutropenia occurred in one patient, and two others had septic complications, all fully recovering. Median hospitalization was 23 days. Hematologic recovery was normal. Six of twelve (50%) patients achieved CR. PFS and OS at 1 year were 67% (n = 8/12) and 83% (n = 10/12), respectively. The addition of brentuximab to standard BeEAM HDCT seems to be safe. We observed a CR rate of 75% post-ASCT in a highly pretreated population. The efficacy of this novel HDCT combination with BV at a 1.8 mg/kg dose level needs to be explored in larger studies.

BeEAM High-Dose Chemotherapy with Polatuzumab (Pola-BeEAM) before ASCT in Patients with DLBCL—A Pilot Study

(1) Introduction: BEAM is a high-dose chemotherapy (HDCT) frequently administered before autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL). Bendamustine replacing BCNU (BeEAM) is similarly effective at lower toxicities. However, relapse remains the major cause of death in DLBCL. (2) Methods: This is a 12-patient pilot study of the BeEAM preparative regimen with additional polatuzumab vedotin (PV, targeting CD79b) aiming to establish feasibility and to reduce toxicity without increasing the early progression rate. PV was given once at the standard dose of 1.8 mg/kg at day −6 together with BeEAM-HDCT (days −7 to −1) before ASCT. (3) Results: 8/12 patients (67%) received PV with BeEAM as a consolidation of first-line treatment, and 4/12 patients (33%) received PV with BeEAM after relapse treatment. All patients experienced complete engraftment (neutrophils: median 11 days; platelets: 13 days). Gastrointestinal toxicities occurred in 7/12 patients (58%, grade 3). All patients developed neutropenic infections with at least one identified pathogen (bacterial: 10/12 patients; viral: 2/12; and fungal: 1/12). The complete remission rate by PET-CT 100 days post-ASCT was 92%, with one mortality due to early progression. Eleven out of twelve patients (92%) were alive without progression after a median follow-up of 15 months. (4) Conclusions: Our study with 12 patients suggests that combining PV with BeEAM HDCT is feasible and safe, but the limited cohort prevents definite conclusions regarding efficacy. Larger cohorts must be evaluated.