Treosulfan- Versus Busulfan-based Conditioning in Allogeneic Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation for Myelodysplastic Syndrome: A Single-center Retrospective Propensity Score-matched Cohort Study

Treosulfan has shown promise in allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) for its myeloablative properties and low toxicity. In this single-center retrospective propensity score-matched cohort study we compared treosulfan- and busulfan-based conditioning in allogeneic HCT for patients with myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS). This study included 138 adults who underwent allogeneic HCT for MDS or chronic myelomonocytic leukemia at Princess Margaret Hospital, Toronto, from 2015 to 2022. Using propensity score matching, we compared transplant outcomes between 2 well-matched cohorts who received conditioning with either fludarabine-treosulfan (FT) (n = 46) or fludarabine-busulfan with total body irradiation (FBT200) (n = 92). A scoring system based on patient age, Karnofsky performance score, and hematopoietic cell transplant comorbidity index was used to assign patients based on fitness to low-dose (30 g/m2) or high-dose (42 g/m2) treosulfan: 32 (69.6%) received high-dose treosulfan. The racial composition of the 2 groups was similar, with 27.2% and 21.7% of FBT200 and FT recipients, respectively, identifying as non-Caucasian (P = .61). Primary outcomes were analyzed at a median follow-up of 747 days. Of all participants, 116 (84.0%) received graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) prophylaxis with posttransplant cyclophosphamide (PTCY) and antithymocyte globulin (ATG). Patients who received FT had a superior 2-year overall survival (OS) compared to those who received FBT200: 66.9% (95% confidence interval (CI): 46.1 to 81.2) versus 44.5% (95% CI: 34 to 54.4), hazard ratio (HR): 0.43, 95% CI: 0.22 to 0.84 (P = .013). In multivariate analysis (MVA), only the use of fresh grafts (P = .02) and FT (P = .01) were associated with improved OS. FT was associated with superior 2-year relapse-free survival (RFS) compared to FBT200: 63.1% (95% CI: 42.6 to 77.9) versus 39.1% (95% CI: 29.1 to 49.1), HR: 0.44 (95% CI: 0.24 to 0.81), P = .008. In MVA, the use of fresh grafts ( P = .03) and FT ( P = .009) were associated with improved RFS. Recipients of FT demonstrated superior 2-year graft-versus-host disease relapse-free survival (GRFS) compared to those who received FBT200: 57.4% (95% CI: 37.8 to 72.8) versus 35.1% (95% CI: 25.5 to 45). In MVA, only FT was associated with superior GRFS ( P = .02). FT recipients exhibited markedly superior 1-year event-free survival compared to recipients of FBT200 in univariate analysis (40.3% (95% CI: 25.9 to 54.2) versus 9.2% (95% CI: 4.4 to 16.3), HR: 0.47 (95% CI: 0.30 to 0.72), P < .001) and MVA ( P = .004). FT was associated with lower 1-year nonrelapse mortality compared to FBT200 in univariate analysis (9.9% (95% CI: 3.0 to 21.8) versus 29.7% (95% CI: 20.6 to 39.3), HR: 0.41 (95% CI: 0.17 to 0.96), P = .04) and MVA ( P = .04). Our study utilized propensity score matching to demonstrate superiority of treosulfanover busulfan-based conditioning in stem cell transplantation of patients with MDS and is the first to evaluate the performance of treosulfanbased conditioning in combination with ATG and PTCY. As such, it contributes to the increasing body of evidence supporting the safety of treosulfan, even at the dose of 42 g/m 2 .