BACKGROUND: @entity786 plus intravenous @entity1863 has not been compared with @entity786 plus @entity348 ( @entity348 ) in adults with advanced refractory @entity3052 before allogeneic haemopoietic stem-cell transplantation (HCT). We aimed to assess whether survival of @entity1 receiving ablative intravenous @entity1863 -based conditioning regimens before a related or volunteer-unrelated donor HCT for refractory @entity3052 is not inferior to that of @entity1 receiving an ablative @entity348 -based regimen. METHODS: In this retrospective, multicentre, registry-based study, we obtained data for @entity1 (aged >18 years) with refractory @entity3052 in active phase of disease, who had received HCT from an HLA-identical sibling or an unrelated donor after intravenous @entity1863 plus @entity786 or @entity786 plus @entity348 conditioning between 2000 and 2012. Data was obtained from the European Group for Blood and Marrow Transplantation registry. The primary endpoints of the study were overall survival and @entity1778 -free survival. FINDINGS: We obtained data for 514 @entity1 who had received intravenous @entity1863 plus @entity786 and 338 @entity1 who had received @entity786 plus @entity348 . The median percentage of blasts before HCT did not differ significantly between groups (20% [range 5-100; IQR 10-32] in the intravenous @entity1863 plus @entity786 group vs 16% [5-95; 9-33] in the @entity786 plus @entity348 group; p=0  16). Overall survival at 2 years did not differ between the groups in the univariate analysis (31  2% [95% CI 26  8-35  5] with intravenous @entity1863 plus @entity786 vs 33  4% [28  1-38  7] wth @entity786 plus @entity348 ; p=0  65). @entity1778 -free survival at 2 years also did not differ between groups (25  0% [95% CI 21  0-29  0] vs 28  4% [23  4-33  5]; p=0  47). In multivariable analysis adjusting for differences between both groups, no difference was noted between the two groups in terms of overall survival (hazard ratio [HR] 0  99 [95% CI 0  83-1  20]; p=0  95) or @entity1778 -free survival (HR 0  97 [0  81-1  16]; p=0  71). Main causes of non-relapse mortality were @entity2132 (49 [10%] in the intravenous @entity1863 plus @entity786 group vs 25 [7%] in the @entity786 plus @entity348 group) and @entity281 (36 [7%] vs 18 [5%]). INTERPRETATION: From a practical standpoint, the use of intravenous @entity1863 plus @entity786 is likely to be a valid and efficient alternative to @entity786 plus @entity348 conditioning regimen for @entity1 with refractory @entity3052 , especially for those transplant centres without access to radiation facilities. FUNDING: None.

Outcomes after use of two standard ablative regimens in XXXX with refractory @entity3052 : a retrospective, multicentre, registry analysis.

@entity1 :: ('9606', 'Species') :: ['patients'] @entity786 :: ('MESH:D003520', 'Chemical') :: ['cyclophosphamide', 'Cyclophosphamide'] @entity3052 :: ('MESH:D015470', 'Disease') :: ['acute myeloid leukaemia'] @entity281 :: ('MESH:D007239', 'Disease') :: ['infection'] @entity1778 :: ('MESH:D007938', 'Disease') :: ['leukaemia', 'Leukaemia'] @entity2132 :: ('MESH:D006086', 'Disease') :: ['graft-versus-host disease'] @entity348 :: ('MESH:C535338', 'Disease') :: ['TBI', 'total body irradiation'] @entity1863 :: ('MESH:D002066', 'Chemical') :: ['busulfan']
@entity1 :: (9606,Species) :: ['patients']
