Abstract
We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and toxicity profile of busulfan–fludarabine (Bu–Flu) compared with busulfan–cyclophosphamide (Bu–Cy) as a preparative regimen for patients undergoing allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of all comparative trials, both randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomized. Our search yielded 15 trials recruiting 1830 patients. Four trials were RCTs and 11 were either one-arm intervention trials compared with historical controls or retrospective studies. There was a lower risk for non-relapse mortality (NRM) at 100 days in patients given Bu–Flu regimen compared with those given Bu–Cy regimen (relative risk (RR) 0.56; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.34–0.92, 8 trials); however, there were no differences in all-cause mortality at 100 days (RR 0.85; 95% CI 0.56–1.30, 9 trials) and at the end of study (RR 0.81; 95% CI 0.64–1.02, 13 trials). The risks of sinusoidal obstruction syndrome (SOS) and microbiologically documented infections were lower in patients given Bu–Flu regimen (RR 0.34; 95% CI 0.19–0.62, 8 trials and RR 0.79; 95% CI 0.64–0.97, 2 trials, respectively); however, risk for SOS was no longer lower when performing sensitivity analysis according to RCTs. Engraftment kinetics, risk of grade 3–4 mucositis, GvHD, relapse and NRM at the end of the study were all similar between the two groups. We conclude that both regimens have similar efficacy profiles, whereas toxicity is lower with the Bu–Flu regimen.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution
Access options
Subscribe to this journal
Receive 12 print issues and online access
$259.00 per year
only $21.58 per issue
Rent or buy this article
Prices vary by article type
from$1.95
to$39.95
Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout
References
Gooley TA, Chien JW, Pergam SA, Hingorani S, Sorror ML, Boeckh M et al. Reduced mortality after allogeneic hematopoietic-cell transplantation. N Engl J Med 2010; 363: 2091–2101.
Gyurkocza B, Sandmaier BM . Conditioning regimens for hematopoietic cell transplantation: one size does not fit all. Blood 2014; 124: 344–353.
De Lima M, Couriel D, Thall PF, Wang X, Madden T, Jones R et al. Once-daily intravenous busulfan and fludarabine: clinical and pharmacokinetic results of a myeloablative, reduced-toxicity conditioning regimen for allogeneic stem cell transplantation in AML and MDS. Blood 2004; 104: 857–864.
Bacigalupo A, Ballen K, Rizzo D, Giralt S, Lazarus H, Ho V et al. Defining the intensity of conditioning regimens: working definitions. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant 2009; 15: 1628–1633.
Dickersin K, Scherer R, Lefebvre C . Identifying relevant studies for systematic reviews. BMJ 1994; 309: 1286–1291.
Hahn T, Wall D, Camitta B, Davies S, Dillon H, Gaynon P et al. The role of cytotoxic therapy with hematopoietic stem cell transplantation in the therapy of acute lymphoblastic leukemia in adults: an evidence-based review. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant 2006; 12: 1–30.
Liu DH, Xu LP, Zhang XH, Wang Y, Yan CH, Wang JZ et al. Substitution of cyclophosphamide in the modified BuCy regimen with fludarabine is associated with increased incidence of severe pneumonia: A prospective, randomized study. Int J Hematol 2013; 98: 708–715.
Lee J-H, Joo Y-D, Kim H, Ryoo HM, Kim MK, Lee G-W et al. Randomized trial of myeloablative conditioning regimens: busulfan plus cyclophosphamide versus busulfan plus fludarabine. J Clin Oncol 2013; 31: 701–709.
Lee JH, Choi J, Kwon KA, Lee S, Oh SY, Kwon H-C et al. Fludarabine-based myeloablative regimen as pretransplant conditioning therapy in adult acute leukemia/myelodysplastic syndrome: comparison with oral or intravenous busulfan with cyclophosphamide. Korean J Hematol 2010; 45: 102–108.
Liu H, Zhai X, Song Z, Sun J, Xiao Y . Busulfan plus fludarabine as a myeloablaive conditiong regimen compared with busulfan plus cyclophosphamide for acute myeloid leukemia in first complete remission undergoing allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation: a prospective. J Hematol Oncol 2013; 6: 15.
Andersson BS, de Lima M, Thall PF, Wang X, Couriel D, Korbling M et al. Once daily i.v. busulfan and fludarabine (i.v. Bu-Flu) compares favorably with i.v. busulfan and cyclophosphamide (i.v. BuCy2) as pretransplant conditioning therapy in AML/MDS. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant 2008; 14: 672–684.
Chae YS, Sohn SK, Kim JG, Cho YY, Moon JH, Shin HJ et al. New myeloablative conditioning regimen with fludarabine and busulfan for allogeneic stem cell transplantation: comparison with BuCy2. Bone Marrow Transplant 2007; 40: 541–547.
Andersson BS, de Lima M, Thall PF, Madden T, Russell JA, Champlin RE . Reduced-toxicity conditioning therapy with allogeneic stem cell transplantation for acute leukemia. Curr Opin Oncol 2009; 21: S11–S15.
Wong AM, Allen JC, Goh YT, Linn YC, Loh SMY, Diong CP et al. Single center retrospective analysis of BU-based conditioning regimens in allogeneic transplantation. Bone Marrow Transplant 2012; 47: 181–189.
Bredeson C, Zhang M . Outcomes following HSCT using fludarabine, busulfan, and thymoglobulin: a matched comparison to allogeneic transplants conditioned with busulfan and. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant 2008; 14: 993–1003.
Vokurka S, Steinerova K, Karas M, Koza V . Characteristics and risk factors of oral mucositis after allogeneic stem cell transplantation with FLU/MEL conditioning regimen in context with BU/CY2. Bone Marrow Transplant 2009; 44: 601–605.
Shin HC, Lee YJ, Moon JH, Lee SJ, Kang BW, Chae YS et al. Feasibility of non-TBI conditioning with busulfan and fludarabine for allogeneic stem cell transplantation in lymphoid malignancy. Korean J Intern Med 2012; 27: 72–83.
Raida L, Tucek P, Vondrakova J, Rusinakova Z, Faber E, Indrak K . Comparison of conditioning regimens BU-CY and FLU-BU12-TG used in the patients undergoing allogeneic stem cell transplantation (SCT) for acute myeloid leukemia (AML). Biomed Pap Med Fac Univ Palacky Olomouc Czech Repub 2011; 155: 327–332.
Fedele R, Moscato T, Massara E, Messina G, OI, Pontari A et al. Fludarabine and busulfan as conditioning regimen in allogeneic stem cell transplantation: comparison with BuCy2. Abstract P1084 EBMT 2012; 47: s418–s419.
Rambaldi A, Grassi A, Micò C, Oldani E, Boschini C, Busca A et al. Myeloablative, reduced toxicity versus standard conditioning in AML: a randomized clinical trial from Gruppo Italiano Trapianto di Midollo Osseo (GITMO)no title. Bone Marrow Transplant 2015; 50: s52–s53.
Coiteux V, Leclercq P, Vasseur T, Wemeau M, De Berranger E, RD, Magro L et al. Myeloablative fludarabine plus busulfan IV (FB4) regiman compares favourable with cyclophosphaminde plus busulfan (BUCY) in patients undergoing allo-SCT for myeloid malignancy. Hematologica 2013; 98: s371.
Song I, Ryu H, Choi Y, Lee H, Yun H, Kim DJ S . Busulfan/cyclophosphamode vs. busulfan/fludarabine conditioning for allogeneic haematopoietic stem cell transplantation in patients with AML/MDS: a single-center retrospective analysis. Abstract B1675 EHA 2013.
Liu DH, Huang LPX XJ . Higher incidence of severe pneumonia after conditioning with busulfan-fludarabine compared to busulfan-cyclophosphamide in a perspective, randomized study. Hematologica 2012; 97: s183.
González de Villambrosia S, Moretó A, Núñez AB J, Yáñez L, Insunza AI A . Comparison Of IV busulfan and fludarabine vs IV busulfan and cyclophosphamide as conditioning regimen in myeloabaltive allogeneic stem cell transplantation. Hematologica 2008; 93: s192.
Park S, Hong JY, Choi MK, Kim YS, Lee JY, Lim SH et al. Comparison of BuCy (Busulfan plus Cyclophosphamide) Versus FluBu4 (Fludarabine plus Busulfan) As a Conditioning Regimen for Allogeneic Stem Cell Transplantation. ASH Annu Meet Abstr 2012; 120: 4522.
Jaimovich G, Requejo A, Milovic V, Escobar NF, Drelichman G, Real J et al. Comparison of IV busulfan and fludarabine vs oral busulfan plus cyclophosphamide as myeloablative conditioning regimens for acute leukemias and myelodisplastic syndromes. ASH Annu Meet Abstr 2011; 118: 4575.
Mohty M, Labopin M, Socie G, Milpied N-J, Attal M, Blaise D et al. Comparison of busulfan and cyclophosphamide (Bu-Cy)-based standard myeloablative conditioning (MAC) vs. fludarabine and busulfan (Flu-Bu)-based reduced-intensity conditioning (RIC) prior to allogeneic stem cell transplantation (allo-SCT) from an HLA ident. ASH Annu Meet Abstr 2009; 114: 3364.
De Lima M, Wang X, Thall PF, Couriel D, Jones RB, Shpall EJ et al. Long-term follow-Up of IV busulfan (Bu) with fludarabine (Flu) vs IV Bu with cyclophosphamide (Cy) as pre (Allogeneic) transplant conditioning therapy for AML/MDS. ASH Annu Meet Abstr 2006; 108: 322.
Altman J, Venepalli N, Monreal J, Rashid K, Gordon L, Winter J et al. Oral busulfan and cyclophosphamide or IV busulfan and fludarabine for allogeneic HSCT in hematologic malignancies? ASH Annu Meet Abstr 2006; 108: 2940.
Kozuka T, Ishimaru F, Matsuo K, Nakashima H, Fujii N, Matsuoka K et al. Early kinetics of engraftment following reduced-intensity stem cell transplantation: fludarabine and cyclophosphamide versus fludarabine and busulfan. ASH Annu Meet Abstr 2006; 108: 2957.
De Lima M, Couriel D, Shahjahan M, Alamo J, Thall PF, Russell J et al. IV busulfan (Bu) with fludarabine (Flu) or cyclophosphamide (Cy) - comparing ablative conditioning regimens for allogeneic transplantation in AML/MDS. ASH Annu Meet Abstr 2004; 104: 97.
Przepiorka D, Weisdorf D, Martin P, Klingemann HG, Beatty P, Hows J et al. 1994 Consensus Conference on acute GVHD grading. Bone Marrow Transplant 1995; 15: 825–828.
Pasquini M, Le-Rademacher J, Kato K, Zhu X, McCarthy P, Ho V et al. Comparison of myeloablative intravenous busulfan with cyclophosphamide (BuCy) or fludarabine (BuFlu) prior to haematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) for myeloid malignancies. Bone Marrow Transplant 2013; 48: s61–s62. Available at http://registration.akm.ch/einsicht.php?XNABSTRACT_ID=170217&XNSPRACHE_ID=2&XNKONGRESS_ID=179&XNMASKEN_ID=900.
Russell JA, Tran HT, Quinlan D, Chaudhry A, Duggan P, Brown C et al. Once-daily intravenous busulfan given with fludarabine as conditioning for allogeneic stem cell transplantation: study of pharmacokinetics and early clinical outcomes. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant 2002; 8: 468–476.
Ram R, Herscovici C, Dahan D, Israeli M, Dreyer J, Peck A et al. Tailoring the GVHD prophylaxis regimen according to transplantation associated toxicities-Substituting the 3rd dose of methotrexate to mycophenolate mofetil. Leuk Res 2014; 38: 913–917.
Bartelink IH, van Reij EML, Gerhardt CE, van Maarseveen EM, de Wildt A, Versluys B et al. Fludarabine and exposure-targeted busulfan compares favorably with busulfan/cyclophosphamide-based regimens in pediatric hematopoietic cell transplantation: maintaining efficacy with less toxicity. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant 2014; 20: 345–353.
Wang F, Huang X, Liu D, Chen H, Wang Y, Tang F et al. [The efficacy and safety of modified busulfan/fludarabine conditioning regimen in elderly or drug-intolerable patients with hematologic malignancies]. Zhonghua nei ke za zhi 2013; 52: 1028–1032.
Alatrash G, de Lima M, Hamerschlak N, Pelosini M, Wang X, Xiao L et al. Myeloablative reduced-toxicity i.v. busulfan-fludarabine and allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant for patients with acute myeloid leukemia or myelodysplastic syndrome in the sixth through eighth decades of life. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant 2011; 17: 1490–1496.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Additional information
Supplementary Information accompanies this paper on Bone Marrow Transplantation website
Supplementary information
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Ben-Barouch, S., Cohen, O., Vidal, L. et al. Busulfan fludarabine vs busulfan cyclophosphamide as a preparative regimen before allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation: systematic review and meta-analysis. Bone Marrow Transplant 51, 232–240 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1038/bmt.2015.238
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/bmt.2015.238
This article is cited by
-
Myeloablative conditioning regimens in adult patients with acute myeloid leukemia undergoing allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation in complete remission: a systematic review and network meta-analysis
Bone Marrow Transplantation (2023)
-
Total body irradiation plus fludarabine versus busulfan plus fludarabine as a myeloablative conditioning for adults with acute myeloid leukemia treated with allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation. A study on behalf of the Acute Leukemia Working Party of the EBMT
Bone Marrow Transplantation (2023)
-
Phase II study of myeloablative allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation for acute lymphoblastic leukemia in adults using fludarabine and total body irradiation 12 Gy
Bone Marrow Transplantation (2022)
-
Long-term survival with mixed chimerism in patients with AML and MDS transplanted after conditioning with targeted busulfan, fludarabine, and thymoglobulin
Bone Marrow Transplantation (2022)
-
Comparative analysis of Decitabine intensified BUCY2 and BUCY2 conditioning regimen for high-risk MDS patients undergoing allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation
Bone Marrow Transplantation (2022)