Table 2.

Disease status, cytogenetic risk stratification and outcomes for acute myeloid leukemia

	Disease status	Risk stratification	RIC	MAC	Outcomes
Bornhäuser 2018	CR1; <5% marrow myeloblasts pre-HSCT	Intermediate§	77	70	No significant difference in OS, PFS, RI, NRM
		High¶	22	26	No significant difference in OS, PFS, RI, NRM
Rinden 2013	CR1 or CR2	Intermediate	11	12	3-year PFS was better in RIC group than in MAC group (90% vs. 75%)
		High	3	3	3-year PFS was better in RIC group than in MAC group (67% vs. 0%)
Scott 2020*	CR; <5% marrow myeloblasts pre-HCT	Intermediate†	71	74	No significant difference in OS
		High‡	61	54	MAC was associated with a significant OS benefit.

RIC, reduced-intensity conditioning; MAC, myeloablative conditioning; CR, complete remission; OS, overall survival; PFS, progression-free survival; RI, relapse incidence; NRM, non-relapse mortality.

§Intermediate=normal and non-high risk, including normal karyotype and other intermediate abnormalities.

¶Including the following cytogenetic abnormalities: +8; Complex (≥3 aberrations); -5, -7, del(5q); Inv(3), t(3;3); t(6;11), t(11;19); t(6;9).

†Defined according to the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group/SWOG cytogenetic classification schema.

‡Including unfavorable risk cytogenetics according to the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group/SWOG, FLT3 mutation regardless of accompanied cytogenetic risk.

*Data are for patients with acute myeloid leukemia and myelodysplastic syndromes combined.