Background: ASCT is the standard of care for patients with relapsed HL. Most relapses occur in the first 2 years (y) after ASCT and the long term outcomes for 2 y post-ASCT survivors have not been well described. No prospective trials have compared the impact of different conditioning regimens on outcomes. Methods: We searched the Nebraska Lymphoma Study Group database to identify patients with HL who received ASCT from 1984 to 2007. Patients were conditioned with CBV (cyclophosphamide 6000 mg/m², BCNU 300 mg/m² and etoposide 600-900 mg/m²) or BEAM (BCNU 300 mg/m², etoposide 800 mg/m², cytarabine 800 mg/m² and melphalan 140 mg/m²). Progression, progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were compared between the 2 regimens while adjusting for significant patient, disease and transplant related characteristics. Results: The median duration of follow up was 8 (2-26) y. Among the 461 transplanted patients, during the study period, 330 received CBV and 131 received BEAM. At 2 y post-ASCT, 225 (49%) were alive and disease-free. Median age of patients was 33 (8-64) y. The PFS at 5 y was 92% for the BEAM and 73% for the CBV group (p=0.002). The OS at 5 y was 95% for the BEAM and 87% for the CBV group (p=0.07). The PFS at 10 y was 79% for the BEAM and 59% for the CBV group (p=0.01). The OS at 10 y was 84% for the BEAM and 66% for the CBV group (p=0.02). The cumulative incidence of progression at 5 y was 4% vs 24% (for BEAM and CBV respectively, p<0.01) and at 10 y was 9% vs 33% (for BEAM and CBV respectively, p<0.001). Higher relative risk (RR) of progression (4.54, p<0.001), treatment failure (2.92; p=0.002) and mortality (2.74; p=0.03) was observed with use of CBV compared to BEAM. Higher RR of mortality was also observed with age of 40 y or older at transplant (1.69, p=0.04) and with chemoresistant disease (1.99, p=0.02). Conclusions: Patients with HL, who are disease-free and alive 2 y post-ASCT, have favorable long-term outcomes. In the dose and schedule used, we observed a lower risk of progression and longer survival associated with use of BEAM, as a conditioning regimen, compared to CBV. With this study design, we cannot rule out a selection bias favoring patients transplanted in more recent years.