A retrospective study of treosulfan versus busulfan‐based conditioning in pediatric patients

OBJECTIVES: To compare the outcomes of treosulfan-based vs busulfan-based conditioning regimens in allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) in pediatric patients. METHODS: Retrospective study of all consecutive patients (2012-2019) treated with allogenic HSCT and treosulfan- or busulfan-based conditioning regimens at a single center. RESULTS: A total of 101 HSCT were included: 66 HSCT with busulfan and 35 with treosulfan. In malignant diseases (n = 62), busulfan-based conditioning was more commonly employed than treosulfan: 82.3% vs 17.7%. However, the use of treosulfan for malignant diseases increased over time: 6.5% of HSCT in 2012-2015 vs 29% of HSCT in 2015-2019 (p = .02). The cohort of treosulfan had more children under 1-year of age than the busulfan cohort (31 vs 13%; p = .033). The percentage of patients who received serotherapy was 73 and 89% in the nonmalignant and malignant groups, respectively. The engraftment, time to neutrophil, and platelet engraftment were not significantly different between the busulfan and the treosulfan cohorts. Rate of grade II-IV acute GvHD was significantly higher in the busulfan cohort than the treosulfan cohort (39% vs 15%; p = .016). No differences were observed in endothelial damage complications, chronic GvHD, relapse, overall survival, and transplant-related mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Busulfan-based conditioning regimens are used more frequently for children undergoing allogenic HSCT, but treosulfan-based conditioning is gaining acceptance. Treosulfan-based conditioning is associated with lower rates of acute GvHD, and no significant differences on overall survival were observed compared with busulfan.