الفهرس 
Hodgkin LymphomaOnly 14 pages are availabe for public view
 |  | from | 409 |  |  |
| | | from | 409 | | |
Abstract
M
ost patients with classical Hodgkin lymphoma (cHL) will be cured with standard frontline therapy, but 20% of patients will be refractory or relapse after cytotoxic chemotherapy, radiation therapy, or a combination of the two. Some of these patients may be cured by salvage chemotherapy and autologous stem cell transplant (autoSCT). However, those who have refractory or relapsed disease after autoSCT have poor prognosis with conventional therapies and a median overall survival (OS) of about 25 months. In recent years, outcomes have been improving in the post-autoSCT relapsed setting as new therapies such as immune checkpoint inhibitors have emerged for relapsed/refractory cHL (R/R cHL).
Our study is a prospective study to review 60 cases of adult Hodgkin lymphoma submitted for autologus HSCT at Ain Shams transplantation and national cancer institute bone marrow transplantation unit during the period from jaunary 2016- Jaunary 2020. BeEAM and CMV conditioning regimens were compared regarding: regimen related toxicities (RRT), disease free and overall survival.
The sixty patients were divided into two groups according to their conditioning regimen, 30 patients in each group, the mean of their age was 35.08 years, 26 (43.3%) were male patients and 34(56.7%) were female patients with a male to female ratio 1.3, 37(61.7%) received HSCT in second and third CR while 23 (38.3%) of the patients were in delayed CR1 before HSCT.
Incidence of regimen related toxicities were higher in BeEAM protocol than in CMV protocol with a non significant P value.
Incidence of disease relapse and death was higher in CMV in comparison with BeEAM protocol, incidence was (20.7%, 10%) and (0%, 10.3%) repectively but also P value wasnot significant.
Overall survival in BeEAM was 96.6 % and in CMV protocol it was 89.7% with a non significant P value.
Although statistically P value wasn’t significant in three points of comparison between two regimens and regimen related toxicities were higher in BeEAM and this is due to small number of patients and longer follow up is needed but we concluded that BeEAM is a better regimen CMV, as it has a better disease free and over survival.