BU, melphalan and thiotepa as a preparative regimen for auto-transplantation in Hodgkin’s disease

Advances in the pathophysiology and treatment of relapsed/refractory Hodgkin's lymphoma with an emphasis on targeted therapies and transplantation strategies

Hodgkin’s lymphoma (HL) is highly curable with first-line therapy. However, a minority of patients present with refractory disease or experience relapse after completion of frontline treatment. These patients are treated with salvage chemotherapy followed by autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT), which remains the standard of care with curative potential for refractory or relapsed HL. Nevertheless, a significant percentage of such patients will progress after ASCT, and allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation remains the only curative approach in that setting. Recent advances in the pathophysiology of refractory or relapsed HL have provided the rationale for the development of novel targeted therapies with potent anti-HL activity and favorable toxicity profile, in contrast to cytotoxic chemotherapy. Brentuximab vedotin and programmed cell death-1-based immunotherapy have proven efficacy in the management of refractory or relapsed HL, whereas several other agents have shown promise in early clinical trials. Several of these agents are being incorporated with transplantation strategies in order to improve the outcomes of refractory or relapsed HL. In this review we summarize the current knowledge regarding the mechanisms responsible for the development of refractory/relapsed HL and the outcomes with current treatment strategies, with an emphasis on targeted therapies and hematopoietic stem cell transplantation.

Thiotepa-based high-dose therapy for autologous stem cell transplantation in lymphoma: a retrospective study from the EBMT

Clinical information about thiotepa-based autologous stem cell transplantation (auto-SCT) outside the primary central nervous system lymphoma (PCNSL) field is sparse. In this registry-based retrospective study, we evaluated potential risks and benefits of thiotepa-based preparative regimens compared with BEAM (carmustine, etoposide, cytarabine, melphalan) in auto-SCT for diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL, excluding PCNSL), follicular lymphoma (FL) or Hodgkin lymphoma (HL). A total of 14 544 patients (589 thiotepa and 13 955 BEAM) met the eligibility criteria, and 535 thiotepa- and 1031 BEAM-treated patients were matched in a 1:2 ratio for final comparison. No significant differences between thiotepa and BEAM groups for any survival end point were identified in the whole sample or disease entity subsets. For a more detailed analysis, 47 TEAM (thiotepa, etoposide, cytarabine, melphalan)-treated patients were compared with 75 matched BEAM patients with additional collection of toxicity data. Again, there were no significant differences between the two groups for any survival end point. In addition, the frequency of common infectious and non-infectious complications including secondary malignancies was comparable between TEAM and BEAM. These results indicate that thiotepa-based high-dose therapy might be a valuable alternative to BEAM in DLBCL, HL and FL. Further evaluation by prospective clinical trials is warranted.