Abstract
BACKGROUND The aim of this study was to compare nutrition-related adverse events and clinical outcomes of ifosfamide, carboplatin, and etoposide regimen (ICE therapy) and ranimustine, carboplatin, etoposide, and cyclophosphamide regimen (MCEC therapy) instituted as pretreatment for autologous peripheral blood stem cell transplantation. MATERIAL AND METHODS We enrolled patients who underwent autologous peripheral blood stem cell transplantation between 2007 and 2012. Outcomes were compared between ICE therapy (n=14) and MCEC therapy (n=14) in relation to nutrient balance, engraftment day, and length of hospital stay. In both groups, we compared the timing of nutrition-related adverse events with oral caloric intake, analyzed the correlation between length of hospital stay and duration of parenteral nutrition, and investigated the association between oral caloric intake and the proportion of parenteral nutrition energy in total calorie supply. Five-year survival was compared between the groups. RESULTS Compared with the MCEC group, the ICE group showed significant improvement in oral caloric intake, length of hospital stay, and timing of nutrition-related adverse events and oral calorie intake, but a delay in engraftment. Both groups showed a correlation between duration of parenteral nutrition and length of hospital stay (P=0.0001) and between oral caloric intake (P=0.0017) and parenteral nutrition energy sufficiency rate (r=-0.73, P=0.003; r=-0.76, P=0.002). Five-year survival was not significantly different between the groups (P=0.1355). CONCLUSIONS Our findings suggest that compared with MCEC therapy, ICE therapy improves nutrition-related adverse events and reduces hospital stay, conserving medical resources, with no significant improvement in long-term survival. The nutritional pathway may serve as a tool for objective evaluation of pretreatment for autologous peripheral blood stem cell transplantation.