ArticleAnnals of hematology2026
Toxicity and efficacy of four carmustine-substituted conditioning regimens followed by autologous stem cell transplantation in lymphoma: a real-world comparative study.
Article in Annals of hematology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
High-dose chemotherapy followed by autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) remains a key consolidation strategy for patients with relapsed/refractory (R/R) lymphoma. The BEAM regimen (carmustine, etoposide, cytarabine, melphalan) is the standard conditioning therapy, but clinical carmustine supply shortages have necessitated the search for alternatives. This study compared the toxicity and transplant outcomes of four carmustine-substituted conditioning regimens. We retrospectively analyzed 80 lymphoma patients who underwent ASCT between January 2018 and December 2023. Patients received one of four regimens: BeEAM (bendamustine, etoposide, cytarabine, melphalan; n = 16), CBV (cyclophosphamide, oral semustine, etoposide; n = 12), CEAC (oral semustine, etoposide, cytarabine, cyclophosphamide; n = 16), or SEAM (oral semustine, etoposide, cytarabine, melphalan; n = 36). The primary endpoint was severe toxicity. Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), complete response rate (CRR) and non-relapse mortality. The SEAM regimen was associated with a significantly higher rate of BNP elevation (61.1%, p = 0.040). All patients in the BeEAM group developed febrile neutropenia (p = 0.004), and this regimen also led to more platelet transfusions (median 6.5 units, p = 0.001) and longer hospital stays (median 28.5 days, p = 0.012). The CBV group had the highest rate of cardiovascular adverse events (25.0%, p = 0.081), while the CEAC group showed the highest incidence of hypoproteinemia (100.0%, p = 0.006) and a notably high rate of intestinal infection (81.3%, p = 0.069). No significant intergroup differences were observed in PFS, OS, day + 100 CRR, or non-relapse mortality. Multivariate Cox analysis identified pre-transplant partial remission as an independent adverse prognostic factor for PFS (HR: 4.864; 95% CI: 1.094-21.634, p = 0.038). Although the four carmustine-substituted conditioning regimens demonstrated similar efficacy outcomes for ASCT in lymphoma patients, their distinct toxicity profiles highlight the need for personalized regimen selection, particularly in the context of carmustine shortages.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.