Phase III randomized study of rituximab/carmustine, etoposide, cytarabine, and melphalan (BEAM) compared with iodine-131 tositumomab/BEAM with autologous hematopoietic cell transplantation for relapsed diffuse large B-cell lymphoma: results from the BMT C

TitlePhase III randomized study of rituximab/carmustine, etoposide, cytarabine, and melphalan (BEAM) compared with iodine-131 tositumomab/BEAM with autologous hematopoietic cell transplantation for relapsed diffuse large B-cell lymphoma: results from the BMT C
Publication TypeJournal Article
Year of Publication2013
AuthorsVose, JM, Carter, S, Burns, LJ, Ayala, E, Press, OW, Moskowitz, CH, Stadtmauer, EA, Mineshi, S, Ambinder, R, Fenske, T, Horowitz, M, Fisher, R, Tomblyn, M
JournalJ Clin Oncol
Volume31
Issue13
Pagination1662-8
Date Published2013 May 01
ISSN1527-7755
KeywordsAdolescent, Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Antibodies, Monoclonal, Antibodies, Monoclonal, Murine-Derived, Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols, Carmustine, Combined Modality Therapy, Cytarabine, Etoposide, Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation, Humans, Lymphoma, Large B-Cell, Diffuse, Melphalan, Middle Aged, Prospective Studies, Radioimmunotherapy, Recurrence, Rituximab, Transplantation, Autologous, Young Adult
Abstract

PURPOSE: This clinical trial evaluated standard-dose radioimmunotherapy with a chemotherapy-based transplantation regimen followed by autologous hematopoietic cell transplantation versus rituximab with the same regimen in patients with relapsed diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL).

PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with chemotherapy-sensitive persistent or relapsed DLBCL were randomly assigned to receive iodine-131 tositumomab (dosimetric dose of 5 mCi on day -19 and therapeutic dose of 0.75 Gy on day -12), carmustine 300 mg/m(2) (day -6), etoposide 100 mg/m(2) twice daily (days -5 to -2), cytarabine 100 mg/m(2) twice daily (days -5 to -2), and melphalan 140 mg/m(2) (day -1; B-BEAM) or rituximab 375 mg/m(2) on days -19 and -12 and the same chemotherapy regimen (R-BEAM).

RESULTS: Two hundred twenty-four patients were enrolled, with 113 patients randomly assigned to R-BEAM and 111 patients assigned to B-BEAM. Two-year progression-free survival (PFS) rates, the primary end point, were 48.6% (95% CI, 38.6% to 57.8%) for R-BEAM and 47.9% (95% CI, 38.2% to 57%; P = .94) for B-BEAM, and the 2-year overall survival (OS) rates were 65.6% (95% CI, 55.3% to 74.1%) for R-BEAM and 61% (95% CI, 50.9% to 69.9%; P = .38) for B-BEAM. The 100-day treatment-related mortality rates were 4.1% (95% CI, 0.2% to 8.0%) for R-BEAM and 4.9% (95% CI, 0.8% to 9.0%; P = .97) for B-BEAM. The maximum mucositis score was higher in the B-BEAM arm (0.72) compared with the R-BEAM arm (0.31; P

CONCLUSION: The B-BEAM and R-BEAM regimens produced similar 2-year PFS and OS rates for patients with chemotherapy-sensitive relapsed DLBCL. No differences in toxicities other than mucositis were noted.

DOI10.1200/JCO.2012.45.9453
Alternate JournalJ Clin Oncol
PubMed ID23478060
PubMed Central IDPMC3635682
Grant ListU10 HL069294 / HL / NHLBI NIH HHS / United States
UG1 HL069286 / HL / NHLBI NIH HHS / United States
U10 HL069290 / HL / NHLBI NIH HHS / United States
U10 HL069301 / HL / NHLBI NIH HHS / United States
U10 HL069330 / HL / NHLBI NIH HHS / United States
U10 HL069249 / HL / NHLBI NIH HHS / United States
U10 HL069310 / HL / NHLBI NIH HHS / United States
U01 HL069294 / HL / NHLBI NIH HHS / United States
P30 CA016520 / CA / NCI NIH HHS / United States
U10 HL069348 / HL / NHLBI NIH HHS / United States
U24 CA076518 / CA / NCI NIH HHS / United States
U10 HL069286 / HL / NHLBI NIH HHS / United States
U01HL069294 / HL / NHLBI NIH HHS / United States