Table 3.

Selected studies investigating conditioning regimens and intensities in MF

StudyRegimenSurvivalNonrelapse mortalityRelapse
McLornan et al82 (RIC vs MAC) Busulfan/fludarabine (57%) Busulfan/fludarabine (47%) 5 y:
53% vs 51% 
3 y:
32% vs 33% 
3 y:
17% vs 20% 
Patriarca et al90 (RIC) Busulfan/fludarabine Thiotepa/fludarabine 2 y:
54% vs 70% 
2 y:
21% vs 21% 
2 y:
36% vs 24% 
Kröger et al58 (RIC) Busulfan/fludarabine 5 y: 56% 1 y: 21% 5 y: 25% 
Gupta et al80 (RIC) Busulfan/fludarabine (38%), fludarabine/melphalane (28%), fludarabine/TBI (22%) 5 y: 47% 3 y: 22% 3 y: 47% 
Gagelmann et al29 (RIC vs MAC) Busulfan/fludarabine (63%) Busulfan/cyclophosphamide (59%) 6 y:
63% vs 59% 
2 y:
26% vs 29% 
2 y:
10% vs 9% 
Murthy et al75  Fludarabine/melphalane (66%), busulfan/fludarabine (34%) Busulfan/fludarabine (65%), busulfan/cyclophosphamide (35%) 2 y:
57% vs 72%  
1 y:
20% vs 16% 
1 y:
49% vs 41% 
StudyRegimenSurvivalNonrelapse mortalityRelapse
McLornan et al82 (RIC vs MAC) Busulfan/fludarabine (57%) Busulfan/fludarabine (47%) 5 y:
53% vs 51% 
3 y:
32% vs 33% 
3 y:
17% vs 20% 
Patriarca et al90 (RIC) Busulfan/fludarabine Thiotepa/fludarabine 2 y:
54% vs 70% 
2 y:
21% vs 21% 
2 y:
36% vs 24% 
Kröger et al58 (RIC) Busulfan/fludarabine 5 y: 56% 1 y: 21% 5 y: 25% 
Gupta et al80 (RIC) Busulfan/fludarabine (38%), fludarabine/melphalane (28%), fludarabine/TBI (22%) 5 y: 47% 3 y: 22% 3 y: 47% 
Gagelmann et al29 (RIC vs MAC) Busulfan/fludarabine (63%) Busulfan/cyclophosphamide (59%) 6 y:
63% vs 59% 
2 y:
26% vs 29% 
2 y:
10% vs 9% 
Murthy et al75  Fludarabine/melphalane (66%), busulfan/fludarabine (34%) Busulfan/fludarabine (65%), busulfan/cyclophosphamide (35%) 2 y:
57% vs 72%  
1 y:
20% vs 16% 
1 y:
49% vs 41% 

MAC, myeloablative conditioning.

Results are shown for busulfan/fludarabine regimen in both groups.

Close Modal

or Create an Account

Close Modal
Close Modal