Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorÇiftçiler, Rafiye
dc.contributor.authorGöker, Hakan
dc.contributor.authorDemiroğlu, Haluk
dc.contributor.authorAladağ, Elifcan
dc.contributor.authorAksu, Salih
dc.contributor.authorHaznedaroğlu, İbrahim Celalettin
dc.contributor.authorSayınalp, Nilgün
dc.contributor.authorÖzcebe, Osman
dc.contributor.authorTekin, Fatma
dc.contributor.authorBüyükaşık, Yahya
dc.date.accessioned2021-06-03T05:20:10Z
dc.date.available2021-06-03T05:20:10Z
dc.date.issued2019
dc.identifier.issn1300-7777
dc.identifier.urihttp://dx.doi.org/10.4274/tjh.galenos.2019.2018.0220
dc.identifier.urihttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6516104/
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11655/23998
dc.description.abstractObjective: Allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) is an effective treatment modality for a variety of malignant and non-malignant hematologic disorders. Myeloablative conditioning (MAC) and reduced-intensity conditioning (RIC) regimens could have different clinical outcomes. This purpose of this study was to assess the long-term outcome of MAC versus RIC regimens in patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) undergoing allogeneic HSCT. Materials and Methods: We retrospectively compared long-term outcomes with MAC and RIC regimens in patients with AML who underwent allo-HSCT at our tertiary transplantation center. Results: We analyzed survival outcomes after MAC-HSCT versus RICHSCT among 107 adult patients with AML diagnosed from 2001 through 2017. Of those, 44 patients underwent a MAC regimen, whereas 63 patients received a RIC regimen. The median follow-up time was 37 months (range: 6-210) for the entire group. The 3-year overall survival (OS) for RIC and MAC patients was 67% and 60%, respectively (p>0.05). The 3-year progression-free survival (PFS) for RIC and MAC patients was 88% and 77%. In multivariate analysis, the type of conditioning regimen (RIC vs. MAC) did not influence PFS (p=0.24). Acute graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) was seen in five of the RIC patients and 9 of the MAC patients. Chronic GVHD was seen in 16 of the RIC patients and 6 of the MAC patients. There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of acute GVHD (p=0.089), but there was a significant difference between the two groups in terms of chronic GVHD (p=0.03). Conclusion: This retrospective analysis confirmed that MAC and RIC regimens had a consistently equivalent rate of OS and PFS in AML patients who underwent allo-HSCT. The choice of MAC versus RIC conditioning regimen might be decided on the basis of patient and disease characteristics.
dc.language.isoen
dc.relation.isversionof10.4274/tjh.galenos.2019.2018.0220
dc.rightsAttribution 4.0 United States
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
dc.rights.urihttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
dc.titleComparison Of Myeloablative Versus Reduced-Intensity Conditioning Regimens For Allogeneic Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation In Acute Myeloid Leukemia: A Cohort Study
dc.title.alternativeComparison of Myeloablative Versus Reduced-Intensity Conditioning Regimens for Allogeneic Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation in Acute Myeloid Leukemia
dc.typeinfo:eu-repo/semantics/article
dc.typeinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
dc.relation.journalTurkish Journal Of Hematology
dc.contributor.departmentİç Hastalıkları
dc.identifier.volume36
dc.identifier.issue2
dc.description.indexPubMed
dc.description.indexWoS
dc.description.indexScopus


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Attribution 4.0 United States
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as Attribution 4.0 United States