Currently, the indications to perform reduced-intensity conditioning allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant (RIC-HCT) are based on data derived mainly from large registry and single-centre retrospective studies. Thus, at the present time, there is limited direct evidence supporting the current practice in selecting patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) and acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) for RIC versus myeloablative conditioning (MAC) transplants. To determine the relationship between dose intensity of conditioning regimen and survival outcomes after allografting in AML/ALL patients, we performed a meta-analysis of 23 clinical trials reported between 1990 and 2013 involving 15,258 adult patients that compare survival outcomes after RIC-HCT versus MAC-HCT. RIC-HCT resulted in comparable <2-year and 2-6 year overall survival (OS) rates post-transplantation even though the RIC-HCT recipients were older and had more active disease than MAC-HCT recipients. The 2-6 year progression-free survival (PFS), nonrelapse mortality, acute graft-versus-host disease (GvHD) and chronic GvHD rates were reduced after RIC-HCT, but relapse rate was increased. Similar outcomes were observed regardless of disease type and status at transplantation. Odds ratio for all outcomes remained comparable with or without performing separate analyses for the year of HCT and for retrospective versus prospective studies. Among RIC-HCT recipients, survival rates were superior if patients were in CR at transplantation. Significant inter-study heterogeneity for aGvHD data and publication bias for PFS data were observed. This meta-analysis showed no OS benefit of MAC-HCT over RIC-HCT across the entire cohort of patients suggesting that RIC-HCT could be an effective therapeutic option for AML/ALL patients who are ineligible for MAC-HCT and CR status is preferred before RIC-HCT.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract