Premium
IVE (ifosfamide, epirubicin and etoposide) is a more effective stem cell mobilisation regimen than ICE (ifosphamide, carboplatin and etoposide) in the context of salvage therapy for lymphoma
Author(s) -
Fox C. P.,
McMillan A. K.,
Bishton M. J.,
Haynes A. P.,
Russell N. H.
Publication year - 2008
Publication title -
british journal of haematology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.907
H-Index - 186
eISSN - 1365-2141
pISSN - 0007-1048
DOI - 10.1111/j.1365-2141.2008.07068.x
Subject(s) - etoposide , ifosfamide , carboplatin , epirubicin , medicine , autologous stem cell transplantation , regimen , rituximab , salvage therapy , oncology , chemotherapy , context (archaeology) , surgery , lymphoma , urology , cyclophosphamide , biology , cisplatin , paleontology
Summary Two commonly used chemotherapy regimens for lymphoma salvage therapy were compared: ICE (ifosphamide, carboplatin and etoposide) ± rituximab and IVE (ifosfamide, epirubicin and etoposide) ± rituximab, for their efficacy in mobilising peripheral blood stem cells for autologous transplantation. Significant differences were observed between the cohorts in terms of number of patients mobilising the stipulated minimum >2 × 10 6 CD34 + /kg (99·2% in IVE group versus 83% in ICE group: P = 0·0002) and also in terms of the number of patients achieving the predetermined target of >5 × 10 6 CD34 + /kg, both in total and during the first apheresis procedure (72% in IVE versus 51% in ICE group and 49% in IVE versus 7% in ICE group: P = 0·02 and P < 0·0001 respectively). This analysis of two similar groups of patients treated within a single‐centre appears to demonstrate that the IVE regimen is a more effective stem cell mobilisation regimen than ICE in the context of salvage therapy for Hodgkin and non‐Hodgkin lymphoma, allowing more patients to achieve the target CD34 + cell collection and proceed to high‐dose therapy and autologous stem cell transplantation.