首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Medicine >Busulfan plus fludarabine compared with busulfan plus cyclophosphamide as a conditioning regimen prior to hematopoietic stem cell transplantation in patients with hematologic neoplasms: a meta-analysis
【2h】

Busulfan plus fludarabine compared with busulfan plus cyclophosphamide as a conditioning regimen prior to hematopoietic stem cell transplantation in patients with hematologic neoplasms: a meta-analysis

机译:血液肿瘤患者在造血干细胞移植前将白消安加氟达拉滨与白消安加环磷酰胺作为调理方案的比较:荟萃分析

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

Objectives: The aim of the article is to critically appraise and synthesize available evidence regarding the efficacy and regimen-related toxicity (RRT) of Busulfan plus fludarabine (BuFlu) compared to busulfan plus cyclophosphamide (BuCy) as a conditioning regimen, prior to allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) in patients with hematologic neoplasms. Methods: A meta-analysis was attempted on clinical controlled trials (CCTs), randomized or non-randomized controlled trials (RCTs or non-RCTs), comparing BuCy with BuFlu. We did a systematic search of the indexed medical literature using appropriate keywords to identify potentially relevant articles. The primary outcome of interest was efficacy measured by overall survival (OS) and event-free survival (EFS), acute graft-versus-host-disease (aGVHD). Chronic GVHD (extensive) and other toxicity were secondary endpoints. A relative risk or risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) was calculated for each outcome in the meta-analysis. Results: Nine clinical controlled trials were included, of which 4 tries were RCTs involving 584 patients and the other 5 were non-RCTs involving 571 patients. The cumulative incidences of OS, EFS, acute graft-versus-host disease (aGVHD) were not significantly different between the two regimens. The non-relapse mortality was higher in BuCy but non-significant increment (RR=1.48, 95% CI: [0.97-2.26]). Liver related toxicity was significantly higher with BuCy compared to BuFlu (RR=1.90, 95% CI: [1.00-3.61]). Conclusion: Liver related toxicity is significantly lesser with BuFlu, but BuFlu regimen has no significant benefits compared with BuCy in OS, EFS, aGVHD. For all this, the weight of evidence favors BuFlu over BuCy as a first choice-conditioning regimen for patients with hematologic neoplasms, especially for people who have poor liver function.
机译:目标:本文的目的是在同种异体造血之前,严格评估和综合有关与环丙磺胺加环磷酰胺(BuCy)相比,环丙磺胺加氟达拉滨(BuFlu)的疗效和与方案相关的毒性(RRT)的证据,血液肿瘤患者的干细胞移植(HSCT)。方法:尝试对临床对照试验(CCT),随机或非随机对照试验(RCT或非​​RCT)进行荟萃分析,比较BuCy与BuFlu。我们使用适当的关键字对被索引的医学文献进行了系统搜索,以识别可能相关的文章。感兴趣的主要结果是通过总生存期(OS)和无事件生存期(EFS),急性移植物抗宿主疾病(aGVHD)衡量的疗效。慢性GVHD(广泛性)和其他毒性是次要终点。荟萃分析中每个结局均计算出相对风险或风险比(RR)和95%置信区间(CI)。结果:包括9项临床对照试验,其中4项是涉及584例患者的RCT,另外5项是涉及571例患者的非RCT。两种方案之间的OS,EFS,急性移植物抗宿主病(aGVHD)的累积发生率无显着差异。 BuCy的非复发死亡率较高,但无显着增加(RR = 1.48,95%CI:[0.97-2.26])。与BuFlu相比,BuCy的肝脏相关毒性明显更高(RR = 1.90,95%CI:[1.00-3.61])。结论:BuFlu与肝脏相关的毒性明显降低,但BuFlu方案在OS,EFS,aGVHD方面与BuCy相比无明显益处。综上所述,对于血液肿瘤患者,尤其是肝功能较差的患者,大量证据表明BuFlu优于BuCy作为首选的调理方案。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号