1. Comparison of BEAM vs. LEAM regimen in autologous transplant for lymphoma at AIIMS
- Author
-
Atul Sharma, Vinod Raina, Sobuhi Iqbal, Smita Kayal, and Prabhat Singh Malik
- Subjects
Melphalan ,medicine.medical_specialty ,Pathology ,Multidisciplinary ,Lymphoma ,business.industry ,Research ,BEAM ,Lomustine ,Transplant-Related Mortality ,medicine.disease ,Gastroenterology ,Regimen ,Internal medicine ,Toxicity ,medicine ,Mucositis ,LEAM ,business ,Etoposide ,medicine.drug - Abstract
BEAM (BCNU, etoposide, cytarabine, 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.
- Published
- 2013