Hematology Times

Exercise intolerance was associated with worse neurocognitive function in adult survivors of pediatric acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL), according to results from a cross-sectional study.

kaspiic/thinkstockphotos.com

The findings suggest additional research is needed to better understand the effects of increased exercise capacity on neurocognitive performance in these patients.

“We used a clinically assessed cohort of childhood cancer survivors participating in the St. Jude Lifetime cohort study to determine whether exercise intolerance, expressed as decreased oxygen uptake, is associated with neurocognitive impairments in long-term survivors of childhood ALL and evaluated whether exercise intolerance mediates the association between chronic cardiac or pulmonary conditions and neurocognitive impairment,” wrote Nicholas S. Phillips, MD, PhD, of St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital in Memphis, Tenn., and colleagues. The results were published in Cancer.

The cross-sectional cohort study included 341 young adult survivors of pediatric ALL and 288 evaluable control participants. Survivors were recruited from 1980 to 2003.

Eligible participants were 18 years or older, and remained alive for a minimum of 5 years post ALL diagnosis. Control subjects were non–first-degree relatives of ALL survivors.

The researchers evaluated exercise capacity using cardiopulmonary exercise testing, expressed as relative peak volume of oxygen (rpkVO₂) max scores. Other tests included self-rated questionnaires, as well as a standardized neuropsychological evaluation.

After analysis, the researchers found that ALL survivors had lower mean rpkVO₂ scores, compared with control participants (23.45 vs. 33.03 mL/kg per min; P less than .001).

Survivors also had worse performance on several measures of neurocognitive function, including working memory, verbal intelligence, visual-motor speed, and other math and reading domains, compared with controls (all P less than .001).

The researchers also performed a multivariable analysis and found that a 1-unit metabolic equivalent increase in exercise tolerance was associated with significantly increased performance in some neurocognitive measures, including attention, verbal ability, verbal fluency, motor speed, and academics.

“Our research suggests that a minor improvement in exercise tolerance, such as going from sitting on the couch and watching TV, to walking around the block for 30 minutes a day, can have a significant impact on survivors’ intellectual health,” Dr. Phillips said in a statement.

The researchers noted that recent evidence has shown that structured exercise training may benefit younger survivors. “These studies demonstrate that a low-cost, home-based exercise training program can effectively increase cardiopulmonary fitness during and after completion of therapy,” they wrote.

The team acknowledged a key limitation of the study was the cross-sectional design. As a result, the direction of these associations remains unknown, and warrants future study.

The study was supported by the National Institutes of Health and the American Lebanese Syrian Associated Charities. The researchers did not report conflicts of interest.

SOURCE: Phillips NS et al. Cancer. 2019 Oct 21. doi: 10.1002/cncr.32510.

Exercise intolerance was associated with worse neurocognitive function in adult survivors of pediatric acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL), according to results from a cross-sectional study.

kaspiic/thinkstockphotos.com

The findings suggest additional research is needed to better understand the effects of increased exercise capacity on neurocognitive performance in these patients.

“We used a clinically assessed cohort of childhood cancer survivors participating in the St. Jude Lifetime cohort study to determine whether exercise intolerance, expressed as decreased oxygen uptake, is associated with neurocognitive impairments in long-term survivors of childhood ALL and evaluated whether exercise intolerance mediates the association between chronic cardiac or pulmonary conditions and neurocognitive impairment,” wrote Nicholas S. Phillips, MD, PhD, of St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital in Memphis, Tenn., and colleagues. The results were published in Cancer.

The cross-sectional cohort study included 341 young adult survivors of pediatric ALL and 288 evaluable control participants. Survivors were recruited from 1980 to 2003.

Eligible participants were 18 years or older, and remained alive for a minimum of 5 years post ALL diagnosis. Control subjects were non–first-degree relatives of ALL survivors.

The researchers evaluated exercise capacity using cardiopulmonary exercise testing, expressed as relative peak volume of oxygen (rpkVO₂) max scores. Other tests included self-rated questionnaires, as well as a standardized neuropsychological evaluation.

After analysis, the researchers found that ALL survivors had lower mean rpkVO₂ scores, compared with control participants (23.45 vs. 33.03 mL/kg per min; P less than .001).

Survivors also had worse performance on several measures of neurocognitive function, including working memory, verbal intelligence, visual-motor speed, and other math and reading domains, compared with controls (all P less than .001).

The researchers also performed a multivariable analysis and found that a 1-unit metabolic equivalent increase in exercise tolerance was associated with significantly increased performance in some neurocognitive measures, including attention, verbal ability, verbal fluency, motor speed, and academics.

“Our research suggests that a minor improvement in exercise tolerance, such as going from sitting on the couch and watching TV, to walking around the block for 30 minutes a day, can have a significant impact on survivors’ intellectual health,” Dr. Phillips said in a statement.

The researchers noted that recent evidence has shown that structured exercise training may benefit younger survivors. “These studies demonstrate that a low-cost, home-based exercise training program can effectively increase cardiopulmonary fitness during and after completion of therapy,” they wrote.

The team acknowledged a key limitation of the study was the cross-sectional design. As a result, the direction of these associations remains unknown, and warrants future study.

The study was supported by the National Institutes of Health and the American Lebanese Syrian Associated Charities. The researchers did not report conflicts of interest.

SOURCE: Phillips NS et al. Cancer. 2019 Oct 21. doi: 10.1002/cncr.32510.

Exercise intolerance was associated with worse neurocognitive function in adult survivors of pediatric acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL), according to results from a cross-sectional study.

kaspiic/thinkstockphotos.com

The findings suggest additional research is needed to better understand the effects of increased exercise capacity on neurocognitive performance in these patients.

“We used a clinically assessed cohort of childhood cancer survivors participating in the St. Jude Lifetime cohort study to determine whether exercise intolerance, expressed as decreased oxygen uptake, is associated with neurocognitive impairments in long-term survivors of childhood ALL and evaluated whether exercise intolerance mediates the association between chronic cardiac or pulmonary conditions and neurocognitive impairment,” wrote Nicholas S. Phillips, MD, PhD, of St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital in Memphis, Tenn., and colleagues. The results were published in Cancer.

The cross-sectional cohort study included 341 young adult survivors of pediatric ALL and 288 evaluable control participants. Survivors were recruited from 1980 to 2003.

Eligible participants were 18 years or older, and remained alive for a minimum of 5 years post ALL diagnosis. Control subjects were non–first-degree relatives of ALL survivors.

The researchers evaluated exercise capacity using cardiopulmonary exercise testing, expressed as relative peak volume of oxygen (rpkVO₂) max scores. Other tests included self-rated questionnaires, as well as a standardized neuropsychological evaluation.

After analysis, the researchers found that ALL survivors had lower mean rpkVO₂ scores, compared with control participants (23.45 vs. 33.03 mL/kg per min; P less than .001).

Survivors also had worse performance on several measures of neurocognitive function, including working memory, verbal intelligence, visual-motor speed, and other math and reading domains, compared with controls (all P less than .001).

The researchers also performed a multivariable analysis and found that a 1-unit metabolic equivalent increase in exercise tolerance was associated with significantly increased performance in some neurocognitive measures, including attention, verbal ability, verbal fluency, motor speed, and academics.

“Our research suggests that a minor improvement in exercise tolerance, such as going from sitting on the couch and watching TV, to walking around the block for 30 minutes a day, can have a significant impact on survivors’ intellectual health,” Dr. Phillips said in a statement.

The researchers noted that recent evidence has shown that structured exercise training may benefit younger survivors. “These studies demonstrate that a low-cost, home-based exercise training program can effectively increase cardiopulmonary fitness during and after completion of therapy,” they wrote.

The team acknowledged a key limitation of the study was the cross-sectional design. As a result, the direction of these associations remains unknown, and warrants future study.

The study was supported by the National Institutes of Health and the American Lebanese Syrian Associated Charities. The researchers did not report conflicts of interest.

SOURCE: Phillips NS et al. Cancer. 2019 Oct 21. doi: 10.1002/cncr.32510.

A new draft guideline for the diagnosis and management of thrombocytopenic purpura (TTP) was recently released by the International Society on Thrombosis and Hemostasis (ISTH).

Svisio/Thinkstock

According to the panel of experts involved, the ISTH guideline takes into account the latest TTP findings, offering a more up-to-date resource for clinicians than the two previously published guidelines in 2012 from the British Committee for Standards in Haematology and in 2017 from the TTP group of Japan’s Blood Coagulation Abnormalities Research Team.

“Since the publication of these guidelines, there have been significant developments in the diagnosis and treatment of TTP, and an increase in published data on how management strategies affect objective health outcomes,” the panel members wrote in the guideline, which is available at ISTH.org.

Despite these advancements, TTP remains a challenging condition for both clinicians and patients for a variety of reasons, the panel noted, which was led by clinical cochair X. Long Zheng, MD, PhD, of the University of Alabama in Birmingham and method cochair Sara K. Vesely, PhD, of the University of Oklahoma, Oklahoma City.

The ISTH guideline provides recommendations for adult patients with either immune or hereditary TTP, from acute events through remission, including diagnostic steps to determine if a case of thrombotic microangiopathy is in fact TTP.

Nearly all the recommendations are based on very-low-certainty evidence. Some of the key treatment recommendations include the following:

• For patients with immune TTP experiencing a first acute event, add corticosteroids to therapeutic plasma exchange (TPE), rather than treating with TPE alone. This is a strong recommendation.
• For patients with immune TTP experiencing a first acute event, add rituximab to corticosteroids and TPE, rather than corticosteroids and TPE alone. This is a conditional recommendation.
• For patients with immune TTP experiencing a relapse, add corticosteroids to TPE, rather than TPE alone. This is a strong recommendation.
• For patients with immune TTP experiencing a relapse, add rituximab to corticosteroids and TPE, rather than steroids and TPE alone. This is a conditional recommendation.
• For patients with immune TTP experiencing an acute event – either a first event or a relapse – use caplacizumab. This is a conditional recommendation based on moderate-certainty evidence.
• For patients with immune TTP who are in remission and have low plasma ADAMTS13 activity but no other symptoms of TMA, use rituximab for prophylaxis. This is a conditional recommendation.
• For patients with hereditary TTP who are in remission, plasma infusion or a watch-and-wait strategy is recommended. This is a conditional recommendation.
• For patients with hereditary TTP who are in remission, do not use factor VIII concentrate infusions. A watch-and-wait strategy is advised. This is a conditional recommendation.
• For patients with immune TTP who are pregnant and have decreased plasma ADAMTS13 activity but no symptoms of TMA, use prophylactic treatment. This is a strong recommendation.
• For patients with hereditary TTP who are pregnant, use prophylactic treatment. This is a strong recommendation. The panel further recommended treatment with plasma infusion rather than factor VIII products, which was a conditional recommendation.

The multidisciplinary expert panel included hematologists and pathologists with expertise in TTP, neurologists, nephrologists, intensive care specialists, and patient representatives. The panel followed the GRADE approach and the Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome (PICO) framework, and adhered to standards set forth by the Health and Medicine Division (HMD) of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine and the GIN-McMaster Guideline Development Checklist.

Even with an experienced group of physicians and a structured plan, however, the creation of guidelines for rare diseases like TTP presents a unique set of obstacles, according to the panel members. Challenges include a small body of relevant evidence that is often inconsistent and lacking in high certainty and studies that do not address outcomes important to patients. These shortcomings can make it difficult for guideline developers to issue strong recommendations.

“However, well-developed clinical practice guidelines are vital in rare diseases; these conditions are, by their nature, encountered very infrequently by individual clinicians, who may feel unprepared to address their diagnosis and treatment,” the panelists wrote. “Well-synthesized evidence and clear recommendations play an important role in supporting clinical decision making. Systematically created guidelines can also highlight areas where evidence is uncertain, clinical judgement is required, and future research in the area is warranted.”

The guideline was supported by ISTH. Fifty percent of the panel members had no or minimal conflict of interest; those with conflicts of interest abstained from voting on recommendations relevant to their conflicts.

A new draft guideline for the diagnosis and management of thrombocytopenic purpura (TTP) was recently released by the International Society on Thrombosis and Hemostasis (ISTH).

Svisio/Thinkstock

According to the panel of experts involved, the ISTH guideline takes into account the latest TTP findings, offering a more up-to-date resource for clinicians than the two previously published guidelines in 2012 from the British Committee for Standards in Haematology and in 2017 from the TTP group of Japan’s Blood Coagulation Abnormalities Research Team.

“Since the publication of these guidelines, there have been significant developments in the diagnosis and treatment of TTP, and an increase in published data on how management strategies affect objective health outcomes,” the panel members wrote in the guideline, which is available at ISTH.org.

Despite these advancements, TTP remains a challenging condition for both clinicians and patients for a variety of reasons, the panel noted, which was led by clinical cochair X. Long Zheng, MD, PhD, of the University of Alabama in Birmingham and method cochair Sara K. Vesely, PhD, of the University of Oklahoma, Oklahoma City.

The ISTH guideline provides recommendations for adult patients with either immune or hereditary TTP, from acute events through remission, including diagnostic steps to determine if a case of thrombotic microangiopathy is in fact TTP.

Nearly all the recommendations are based on very-low-certainty evidence. Some of the key treatment recommendations include the following:

• For patients with immune TTP experiencing a first acute event, add corticosteroids to therapeutic plasma exchange (TPE), rather than treating with TPE alone. This is a strong recommendation.
• For patients with immune TTP experiencing a first acute event, add rituximab to corticosteroids and TPE, rather than corticosteroids and TPE alone. This is a conditional recommendation.
• For patients with immune TTP experiencing a relapse, add corticosteroids to TPE, rather than TPE alone. This is a strong recommendation.
• For patients with immune TTP experiencing a relapse, add rituximab to corticosteroids and TPE, rather than steroids and TPE alone. This is a conditional recommendation.
• For patients with immune TTP experiencing an acute event – either a first event or a relapse – use caplacizumab. This is a conditional recommendation based on moderate-certainty evidence.
• For patients with immune TTP who are in remission and have low plasma ADAMTS13 activity but no other symptoms of TMA, use rituximab for prophylaxis. This is a conditional recommendation.
• For patients with hereditary TTP who are in remission, plasma infusion or a watch-and-wait strategy is recommended. This is a conditional recommendation.
• For patients with hereditary TTP who are in remission, do not use factor VIII concentrate infusions. A watch-and-wait strategy is advised. This is a conditional recommendation.
• For patients with immune TTP who are pregnant and have decreased plasma ADAMTS13 activity but no symptoms of TMA, use prophylactic treatment. This is a strong recommendation.
• For patients with hereditary TTP who are pregnant, use prophylactic treatment. This is a strong recommendation. The panel further recommended treatment with plasma infusion rather than factor VIII products, which was a conditional recommendation.

The multidisciplinary expert panel included hematologists and pathologists with expertise in TTP, neurologists, nephrologists, intensive care specialists, and patient representatives. The panel followed the GRADE approach and the Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome (PICO) framework, and adhered to standards set forth by the Health and Medicine Division (HMD) of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine and the GIN-McMaster Guideline Development Checklist.

Even with an experienced group of physicians and a structured plan, however, the creation of guidelines for rare diseases like TTP presents a unique set of obstacles, according to the panel members. Challenges include a small body of relevant evidence that is often inconsistent and lacking in high certainty and studies that do not address outcomes important to patients. These shortcomings can make it difficult for guideline developers to issue strong recommendations.

“However, well-developed clinical practice guidelines are vital in rare diseases; these conditions are, by their nature, encountered very infrequently by individual clinicians, who may feel unprepared to address their diagnosis and treatment,” the panelists wrote. “Well-synthesized evidence and clear recommendations play an important role in supporting clinical decision making. Systematically created guidelines can also highlight areas where evidence is uncertain, clinical judgement is required, and future research in the area is warranted.”

The guideline was supported by ISTH. Fifty percent of the panel members had no or minimal conflict of interest; those with conflicts of interest abstained from voting on recommendations relevant to their conflicts.

A new draft guideline for the diagnosis and management of thrombocytopenic purpura (TTP) was recently released by the International Society on Thrombosis and Hemostasis (ISTH).

Svisio/Thinkstock

According to the panel of experts involved, the ISTH guideline takes into account the latest TTP findings, offering a more up-to-date resource for clinicians than the two previously published guidelines in 2012 from the British Committee for Standards in Haematology and in 2017 from the TTP group of Japan’s Blood Coagulation Abnormalities Research Team.

“Since the publication of these guidelines, there have been significant developments in the diagnosis and treatment of TTP, and an increase in published data on how management strategies affect objective health outcomes,” the panel members wrote in the guideline, which is available at ISTH.org.

Despite these advancements, TTP remains a challenging condition for both clinicians and patients for a variety of reasons, the panel noted, which was led by clinical cochair X. Long Zheng, MD, PhD, of the University of Alabama in Birmingham and method cochair Sara K. Vesely, PhD, of the University of Oklahoma, Oklahoma City.

The ISTH guideline provides recommendations for adult patients with either immune or hereditary TTP, from acute events through remission, including diagnostic steps to determine if a case of thrombotic microangiopathy is in fact TTP.

Nearly all the recommendations are based on very-low-certainty evidence. Some of the key treatment recommendations include the following:

• For patients with immune TTP experiencing a first acute event, add corticosteroids to therapeutic plasma exchange (TPE), rather than treating with TPE alone. This is a strong recommendation.
• For patients with immune TTP experiencing a first acute event, add rituximab to corticosteroids and TPE, rather than corticosteroids and TPE alone. This is a conditional recommendation.
• For patients with immune TTP experiencing a relapse, add corticosteroids to TPE, rather than TPE alone. This is a strong recommendation.
• For patients with immune TTP experiencing a relapse, add rituximab to corticosteroids and TPE, rather than steroids and TPE alone. This is a conditional recommendation.
• For patients with immune TTP experiencing an acute event – either a first event or a relapse – use caplacizumab. This is a conditional recommendation based on moderate-certainty evidence.
• For patients with immune TTP who are in remission and have low plasma ADAMTS13 activity but no other symptoms of TMA, use rituximab for prophylaxis. This is a conditional recommendation.
• For patients with hereditary TTP who are in remission, plasma infusion or a watch-and-wait strategy is recommended. This is a conditional recommendation.
• For patients with hereditary TTP who are in remission, do not use factor VIII concentrate infusions. A watch-and-wait strategy is advised. This is a conditional recommendation.
• For patients with immune TTP who are pregnant and have decreased plasma ADAMTS13 activity but no symptoms of TMA, use prophylactic treatment. This is a strong recommendation.
• For patients with hereditary TTP who are pregnant, use prophylactic treatment. This is a strong recommendation. The panel further recommended treatment with plasma infusion rather than factor VIII products, which was a conditional recommendation.

The multidisciplinary expert panel included hematologists and pathologists with expertise in TTP, neurologists, nephrologists, intensive care specialists, and patient representatives. The panel followed the GRADE approach and the Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome (PICO) framework, and adhered to standards set forth by the Health and Medicine Division (HMD) of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine and the GIN-McMaster Guideline Development Checklist.

Even with an experienced group of physicians and a structured plan, however, the creation of guidelines for rare diseases like TTP presents a unique set of obstacles, according to the panel members. Challenges include a small body of relevant evidence that is often inconsistent and lacking in high certainty and studies that do not address outcomes important to patients. These shortcomings can make it difficult for guideline developers to issue strong recommendations.

“However, well-developed clinical practice guidelines are vital in rare diseases; these conditions are, by their nature, encountered very infrequently by individual clinicians, who may feel unprepared to address their diagnosis and treatment,” the panelists wrote. “Well-synthesized evidence and clear recommendations play an important role in supporting clinical decision making. Systematically created guidelines can also highlight areas where evidence is uncertain, clinical judgement is required, and future research in the area is warranted.”

The guideline was supported by ISTH. Fifty percent of the panel members had no or minimal conflict of interest; those with conflicts of interest abstained from voting on recommendations relevant to their conflicts.

Vitamin D deficiency is associated with worse progression-free and overall survival among patients with Hodgkin lymphoma, according to new study findings.

Sven Borchmann, MD, of the University of Cologne (Germany) and German Hodgkin Study Group and coauthors conducted a case-control study of 351 patients enrolled in the German Hodgkin Study Group trials who had available baseline serum samples. Pretreatment vitamin D levels were assessed and categorized as deficient (less than 30 nmol/L), insufficient (30-49 nmol/L), or sufficient (50 nmol/L or greater). The findings were published in the Journal of Clinical Oncology.

The researchers found that before starting treatment, 50% of patients were vitamin D deficient.

Patients with baseline vitamin D deficiency had significantly lower progression-free survival – 10.2% lower at 5 years and 17.6% lower at 10 years – compared with patients with either sufficient or insufficient vitamin D levels (P less than .001). They also had 2% lower overall survival at 5 years and 11.1% lower overall survival at 10 years (P less than .001).

The researchers also conducted preclinical studies in effort to understand the effect of vitamin D on Hodgkin lymphoma cells and in Hodgkin lymphoma tumor models.

They explored the effect of vitamin D on cultured Hodgkin lymphoma cell lines and saw a dose-response effect of calcitriol in reducing cell proliferation rates. They then looked at the effect of calcitriol on cell lines that were also exposed to doxorubicin or etoposide, and found calcitriol improved the cytotoxicity of these chemotherapy agents, especially at lower doses.

Finally, they conducted an in-vivo mouse study using Hodgkin lymphoma xenografts, and looked at whether vitamin D supplementation increased the effect of doxorubicin or etoposide. This revealed that chemotherapy and vitamin D supplementation together were significantly better at controlling tumor growth, compared with monotherapy with either vitamin D or doxorubicin and compared with placebo.

“On the basis of our study results and the limited toxicity of vitamin D replacement therapy, we would advocate for vitamin D deficiency screening and replacement to be incorporated into future randomized clinical trials to properly clarify the role of vitamin D replacement in HL [Hodgkin lymphoma],” the researchers wrote. “The goal of these trials should be to determine whether vitamin D replacement in HL improves outcome.”

No study funding information was reported. Dr. Borchmann reported honoraria and research funding from Takeda. Other authors reported financial disclosures related to Takeda, Roche, Bristol-Myers Squibb, and other companies.

SOURCE: Borchmann S et al. J Clin Oncol. 2019 Oct 17. doi:10.1200/JCO.19.00985.

Vitamin D deficiency is associated with worse progression-free and overall survival among patients with Hodgkin lymphoma, according to new study findings.

Sven Borchmann, MD, of the University of Cologne (Germany) and German Hodgkin Study Group and coauthors conducted a case-control study of 351 patients enrolled in the German Hodgkin Study Group trials who had available baseline serum samples. Pretreatment vitamin D levels were assessed and categorized as deficient (less than 30 nmol/L), insufficient (30-49 nmol/L), or sufficient (50 nmol/L or greater). The findings were published in the Journal of Clinical Oncology.

The researchers found that before starting treatment, 50% of patients were vitamin D deficient.

Patients with baseline vitamin D deficiency had significantly lower progression-free survival – 10.2% lower at 5 years and 17.6% lower at 10 years – compared with patients with either sufficient or insufficient vitamin D levels (P less than .001). They also had 2% lower overall survival at 5 years and 11.1% lower overall survival at 10 years (P less than .001).

The researchers also conducted preclinical studies in effort to understand the effect of vitamin D on Hodgkin lymphoma cells and in Hodgkin lymphoma tumor models.

They explored the effect of vitamin D on cultured Hodgkin lymphoma cell lines and saw a dose-response effect of calcitriol in reducing cell proliferation rates. They then looked at the effect of calcitriol on cell lines that were also exposed to doxorubicin or etoposide, and found calcitriol improved the cytotoxicity of these chemotherapy agents, especially at lower doses.

Finally, they conducted an in-vivo mouse study using Hodgkin lymphoma xenografts, and looked at whether vitamin D supplementation increased the effect of doxorubicin or etoposide. This revealed that chemotherapy and vitamin D supplementation together were significantly better at controlling tumor growth, compared with monotherapy with either vitamin D or doxorubicin and compared with placebo.

“On the basis of our study results and the limited toxicity of vitamin D replacement therapy, we would advocate for vitamin D deficiency screening and replacement to be incorporated into future randomized clinical trials to properly clarify the role of vitamin D replacement in HL [Hodgkin lymphoma],” the researchers wrote. “The goal of these trials should be to determine whether vitamin D replacement in HL improves outcome.”

No study funding information was reported. Dr. Borchmann reported honoraria and research funding from Takeda. Other authors reported financial disclosures related to Takeda, Roche, Bristol-Myers Squibb, and other companies.

SOURCE: Borchmann S et al. J Clin Oncol. 2019 Oct 17. doi:10.1200/JCO.19.00985.

Vitamin D deficiency is associated with worse progression-free and overall survival among patients with Hodgkin lymphoma, according to new study findings.

Sven Borchmann, MD, of the University of Cologne (Germany) and German Hodgkin Study Group and coauthors conducted a case-control study of 351 patients enrolled in the German Hodgkin Study Group trials who had available baseline serum samples. Pretreatment vitamin D levels were assessed and categorized as deficient (less than 30 nmol/L), insufficient (30-49 nmol/L), or sufficient (50 nmol/L or greater). The findings were published in the Journal of Clinical Oncology.

The researchers found that before starting treatment, 50% of patients were vitamin D deficient.

Patients with baseline vitamin D deficiency had significantly lower progression-free survival – 10.2% lower at 5 years and 17.6% lower at 10 years – compared with patients with either sufficient or insufficient vitamin D levels (P less than .001). They also had 2% lower overall survival at 5 years and 11.1% lower overall survival at 10 years (P less than .001).

The researchers also conducted preclinical studies in effort to understand the effect of vitamin D on Hodgkin lymphoma cells and in Hodgkin lymphoma tumor models.

They explored the effect of vitamin D on cultured Hodgkin lymphoma cell lines and saw a dose-response effect of calcitriol in reducing cell proliferation rates. They then looked at the effect of calcitriol on cell lines that were also exposed to doxorubicin or etoposide, and found calcitriol improved the cytotoxicity of these chemotherapy agents, especially at lower doses.

Finally, they conducted an in-vivo mouse study using Hodgkin lymphoma xenografts, and looked at whether vitamin D supplementation increased the effect of doxorubicin or etoposide. This revealed that chemotherapy and vitamin D supplementation together were significantly better at controlling tumor growth, compared with monotherapy with either vitamin D or doxorubicin and compared with placebo.

“On the basis of our study results and the limited toxicity of vitamin D replacement therapy, we would advocate for vitamin D deficiency screening and replacement to be incorporated into future randomized clinical trials to properly clarify the role of vitamin D replacement in HL [Hodgkin lymphoma],” the researchers wrote. “The goal of these trials should be to determine whether vitamin D replacement in HL improves outcome.”

No study funding information was reported. Dr. Borchmann reported honoraria and research funding from Takeda. Other authors reported financial disclosures related to Takeda, Roche, Bristol-Myers Squibb, and other companies.

SOURCE: Borchmann S et al. J Clin Oncol. 2019 Oct 17. doi:10.1200/JCO.19.00985.

EDINBURGH – Routine empiric prophylaxis against pneumocystis jiroveci pneumonia (PJP) may be unwarranted in chronic lymphocytic leukemia patients initiating Bruton tyrosine kinase (BTK) inhibitor therapy, a retrospective chart review suggests.

Among 212 patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) who were treated with ibrutinib or acalabrutinib either as monotherapy or as part of a combination regimen for at least 30 days between Jan. 1, 2010, and Feb. 1, 2019, at Dana-Farber Cancer Institute and Brigham and Women’s Hospital in Boston, 125 (59%) received PJP prophylaxis, including either trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (74%) or atovaquone (26%), Christine Ryan, MD, reported at the International Workshop on CLL.

Two PJP cases occurred in the 120 patients on single-agent ibrutinib, including one in a previously untreated patient and one in a patient with relapsed/refractory CLL. Neither patient had received PJP prophylaxis, said Dr. Ryan, a senior resident at Brigham and Women’s Hospital.

No PJP cases occurred in the 21 patients who received acalabrutinib monotherapy or in the 14 patients who received acalabrutinib combination therapy, and 1 occurred in a trial cohort of 57 patients receiving frontline ibrutinib plus fludarabine-based chemotherapy (FCR). The latter had been prescribed PJP prophylaxis, but “unfortunately self-discontinued the prophylaxis” 2 months prior to the infection, Dr. Ryan said.

“The overall prevalence of PJP in patients not on prophylaxis was 3.4%, there were no cases of PJP in patients on prophylaxis, and the incidence rate in patients not on prophylaxis was 1.9 per 100 person-years, with a number needed to treat to prevent 1 case of PJP calculated to be 42 patients,” she said.

In addition to PJP, three cases of proven or probable invasive fungal infections (IFI) occurred, including one case of pulmonary histoplasmosis in the ibrutinib plus FCR trial cohort and two cases of aspergillosis, including a pulmonary case and a brain abscess, in an ibrutinib plus umbralisib trial cohort.

“The overall prevalence of aspergillosis or histoplasmosis in our entire cohort was 1.4%, and notably there were no cases of IFI in the single-agent therapy cohort, but the prevalence in the ibrutinib-combination therapy patients was 4.2%,” Dr. Ryan said.

Patients included in the review were adults with a median age of 64.8 years, and 64% were men. The median duration of BTK inhibitor therapy was 23.2 months.

“We know that CLL patients treated with fludarabine have an increased risk of PJP,” she said. “As such, it is routinely recommended that patients receiving fludarabine-containing chemotherapy regimens are prescribed PJP prophylaxis.”

Additionally, the increasing use of oral BTK inhibitors has raised concerns about the potential risk of PJP or other IFIs in patients on those agents, Dr. Ryan explained, noting that existing case reports and case series looking at PJP have shown varying prevalence rates, and little is known about the effects of prophylaxis.

“At present, there are no international guidelines regarding the use of antimicrobial prophylaxis in CLL patients treated with BTK inhibitors, and prophylaxis practices vary widely across countries and institutions,” she said.

The findings of the current study demonstrate that such variation exists “even within our own institution,” Dr. Ryan added.

The findings also show an overall low PJP prevalence of 3.4% in patients not receiving prophylaxis, which falls below the “commonly accepted threshold of 5%, above which routine prophylaxis becomes recommended,” she said.

“Overall, our data suggest that routine PJP or IFI prophylaxis in patients receiving BTK inhibitors may not be needed, but this is definitely an area that requires further study, ideally with a prospective trial with a larger sample size and multiple institutions, to support the development of consensus guidelines on this issue,” she said.

Dr. Ryan reported having no financial disclosures.

sworcester@mdedge.com

EDINBURGH – Routine empiric prophylaxis against pneumocystis jiroveci pneumonia (PJP) may be unwarranted in chronic lymphocytic leukemia patients initiating Bruton tyrosine kinase (BTK) inhibitor therapy, a retrospective chart review suggests.

Among 212 patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) who were treated with ibrutinib or acalabrutinib either as monotherapy or as part of a combination regimen for at least 30 days between Jan. 1, 2010, and Feb. 1, 2019, at Dana-Farber Cancer Institute and Brigham and Women’s Hospital in Boston, 125 (59%) received PJP prophylaxis, including either trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (74%) or atovaquone (26%), Christine Ryan, MD, reported at the International Workshop on CLL.

Two PJP cases occurred in the 120 patients on single-agent ibrutinib, including one in a previously untreated patient and one in a patient with relapsed/refractory CLL. Neither patient had received PJP prophylaxis, said Dr. Ryan, a senior resident at Brigham and Women’s Hospital.

No PJP cases occurred in the 21 patients who received acalabrutinib monotherapy or in the 14 patients who received acalabrutinib combination therapy, and 1 occurred in a trial cohort of 57 patients receiving frontline ibrutinib plus fludarabine-based chemotherapy (FCR). The latter had been prescribed PJP prophylaxis, but “unfortunately self-discontinued the prophylaxis” 2 months prior to the infection, Dr. Ryan said.

“The overall prevalence of PJP in patients not on prophylaxis was 3.4%, there were no cases of PJP in patients on prophylaxis, and the incidence rate in patients not on prophylaxis was 1.9 per 100 person-years, with a number needed to treat to prevent 1 case of PJP calculated to be 42 patients,” she said.

In addition to PJP, three cases of proven or probable invasive fungal infections (IFI) occurred, including one case of pulmonary histoplasmosis in the ibrutinib plus FCR trial cohort and two cases of aspergillosis, including a pulmonary case and a brain abscess, in an ibrutinib plus umbralisib trial cohort.

“The overall prevalence of aspergillosis or histoplasmosis in our entire cohort was 1.4%, and notably there were no cases of IFI in the single-agent therapy cohort, but the prevalence in the ibrutinib-combination therapy patients was 4.2%,” Dr. Ryan said.

Patients included in the review were adults with a median age of 64.8 years, and 64% were men. The median duration of BTK inhibitor therapy was 23.2 months.

“We know that CLL patients treated with fludarabine have an increased risk of PJP,” she said. “As such, it is routinely recommended that patients receiving fludarabine-containing chemotherapy regimens are prescribed PJP prophylaxis.”

Additionally, the increasing use of oral BTK inhibitors has raised concerns about the potential risk of PJP or other IFIs in patients on those agents, Dr. Ryan explained, noting that existing case reports and case series looking at PJP have shown varying prevalence rates, and little is known about the effects of prophylaxis.

“At present, there are no international guidelines regarding the use of antimicrobial prophylaxis in CLL patients treated with BTK inhibitors, and prophylaxis practices vary widely across countries and institutions,” she said.

The findings of the current study demonstrate that such variation exists “even within our own institution,” Dr. Ryan added.

The findings also show an overall low PJP prevalence of 3.4% in patients not receiving prophylaxis, which falls below the “commonly accepted threshold of 5%, above which routine prophylaxis becomes recommended,” she said.

“Overall, our data suggest that routine PJP or IFI prophylaxis in patients receiving BTK inhibitors may not be needed, but this is definitely an area that requires further study, ideally with a prospective trial with a larger sample size and multiple institutions, to support the development of consensus guidelines on this issue,” she said.

Dr. Ryan reported having no financial disclosures.

sworcester@mdedge.com

EDINBURGH – Routine empiric prophylaxis against pneumocystis jiroveci pneumonia (PJP) may be unwarranted in chronic lymphocytic leukemia patients initiating Bruton tyrosine kinase (BTK) inhibitor therapy, a retrospective chart review suggests.

Among 212 patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) who were treated with ibrutinib or acalabrutinib either as monotherapy or as part of a combination regimen for at least 30 days between Jan. 1, 2010, and Feb. 1, 2019, at Dana-Farber Cancer Institute and Brigham and Women’s Hospital in Boston, 125 (59%) received PJP prophylaxis, including either trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (74%) or atovaquone (26%), Christine Ryan, MD, reported at the International Workshop on CLL.

Two PJP cases occurred in the 120 patients on single-agent ibrutinib, including one in a previously untreated patient and one in a patient with relapsed/refractory CLL. Neither patient had received PJP prophylaxis, said Dr. Ryan, a senior resident at Brigham and Women’s Hospital.

No PJP cases occurred in the 21 patients who received acalabrutinib monotherapy or in the 14 patients who received acalabrutinib combination therapy, and 1 occurred in a trial cohort of 57 patients receiving frontline ibrutinib plus fludarabine-based chemotherapy (FCR). The latter had been prescribed PJP prophylaxis, but “unfortunately self-discontinued the prophylaxis” 2 months prior to the infection, Dr. Ryan said.

“The overall prevalence of PJP in patients not on prophylaxis was 3.4%, there were no cases of PJP in patients on prophylaxis, and the incidence rate in patients not on prophylaxis was 1.9 per 100 person-years, with a number needed to treat to prevent 1 case of PJP calculated to be 42 patients,” she said.

In addition to PJP, three cases of proven or probable invasive fungal infections (IFI) occurred, including one case of pulmonary histoplasmosis in the ibrutinib plus FCR trial cohort and two cases of aspergillosis, including a pulmonary case and a brain abscess, in an ibrutinib plus umbralisib trial cohort.

“The overall prevalence of aspergillosis or histoplasmosis in our entire cohort was 1.4%, and notably there were no cases of IFI in the single-agent therapy cohort, but the prevalence in the ibrutinib-combination therapy patients was 4.2%,” Dr. Ryan said.

Patients included in the review were adults with a median age of 64.8 years, and 64% were men. The median duration of BTK inhibitor therapy was 23.2 months.

“We know that CLL patients treated with fludarabine have an increased risk of PJP,” she said. “As such, it is routinely recommended that patients receiving fludarabine-containing chemotherapy regimens are prescribed PJP prophylaxis.”

Additionally, the increasing use of oral BTK inhibitors has raised concerns about the potential risk of PJP or other IFIs in patients on those agents, Dr. Ryan explained, noting that existing case reports and case series looking at PJP have shown varying prevalence rates, and little is known about the effects of prophylaxis.

“At present, there are no international guidelines regarding the use of antimicrobial prophylaxis in CLL patients treated with BTK inhibitors, and prophylaxis practices vary widely across countries and institutions,” she said.

The findings of the current study demonstrate that such variation exists “even within our own institution,” Dr. Ryan added.

The findings also show an overall low PJP prevalence of 3.4% in patients not receiving prophylaxis, which falls below the “commonly accepted threshold of 5%, above which routine prophylaxis becomes recommended,” she said.

“Overall, our data suggest that routine PJP or IFI prophylaxis in patients receiving BTK inhibitors may not be needed, but this is definitely an area that requires further study, ideally with a prospective trial with a larger sample size and multiple institutions, to support the development of consensus guidelines on this issue,” she said.

Dr. Ryan reported having no financial disclosures.

sworcester@mdedge.com

The incidence and severity of hypertension was considerably higher in patients with B-cell malignancies treated with ibrutinib, according to a retrospective analysis.

Additionally, new or worsening hypertension was associated with a greater risk of major adverse cardiac events (MACE), including stroke, myocardial infarction, and cardiovascular-related death (hazard ratio, 2.17; 95% confidence interval, 1.08-4.38; P = .03).

“Despite ibrutinib’s benefits, cardiotoxicity has emerged as an increasingly important complication of this life-saving therapy,” Tyler Dickerson, PhD, of the Ohio State University, Columbus, and colleagues wrote in Blood.

The researchers retrospectively studied 562 consecutive patients with a lymphoid malignancy who received ibrutinib. Data was collected from patients treated at The Ohio State University’s Comprehensive Cancer Center during 2009-2016.

The mean age of study participants was 63.8 years, with a mean body mass index of 28.0 kg/m². Most of the patients included in the analysis were men.

The team assessed rates of new or worsening hypertension, as well as rates of other MACE. The observed rates were compared with Framingham Heart Study–predicted incident-hypertension rates. The effects of various antihypertensive drugs on ibrutinib-linked hypertension were also evaluated.

After a median follow-up of 30 months, 78.3% of patients who received ibrutinib had new or worsening hypertension using a systolic blood pressure cutoff of 130 mm Hg. Of these, 84.8% of cases had an “at least probable association with ibrutinib,” they reported.

Among the 215 patients with no baseline hypertension, 71.6% developed hypertension while on ibrutinib, with a mean increase in systolic blood pressure of 13.4 mm Hg. Among the 347 patients with baseline hypertension, 82.4% experienced a worsening of their hypertension.

“This relationship remained even after accounting for ibrutinib dose, and was not attenuated by the use of any specific anti-hypertensive class,” the researchers wrote.

The researchers observed MACE among 93 patients. This included 84 patients with new or worsening hypertension and 9 patients with stable or no hypertension. Most MACE events were of at least probable ibrutinib association, the researchers reported.

Overall, the cumulative incidence of new hypertension at 1 year was 442 per 1,000 person-years in the current study. This value is 12.9-fold higher than the Framingham Heart Study risk–predicted rate of 34 per 1,000 person-years.

“Given the expected continued increase in ibrutinib use, further studies characterizing the mechanisms, treatment, and implications of [hypertension] during ibrutinib use are needed,” the researchers wrote.

The study was funded by the National Institutes of Health, the D. Warren Brown Family Foundation, the Four Winds Foundation, and the Connie Brown CLL Research Fund. The authors reported financial affiliations with Janssen, Pharmacyclics, and other companies.

SOURCE: Dickerson T et al. Blood. 2019 Oct 3. doi: 10.1182/blood.2019000840.

The incidence and severity of hypertension was considerably higher in patients with B-cell malignancies treated with ibrutinib, according to a retrospective analysis.

Additionally, new or worsening hypertension was associated with a greater risk of major adverse cardiac events (MACE), including stroke, myocardial infarction, and cardiovascular-related death (hazard ratio, 2.17; 95% confidence interval, 1.08-4.38; P = .03).

“Despite ibrutinib’s benefits, cardiotoxicity has emerged as an increasingly important complication of this life-saving therapy,” Tyler Dickerson, PhD, of the Ohio State University, Columbus, and colleagues wrote in Blood.

The researchers retrospectively studied 562 consecutive patients with a lymphoid malignancy who received ibrutinib. Data was collected from patients treated at The Ohio State University’s Comprehensive Cancer Center during 2009-2016.

The mean age of study participants was 63.8 years, with a mean body mass index of 28.0 kg/m². Most of the patients included in the analysis were men.

The team assessed rates of new or worsening hypertension, as well as rates of other MACE. The observed rates were compared with Framingham Heart Study–predicted incident-hypertension rates. The effects of various antihypertensive drugs on ibrutinib-linked hypertension were also evaluated.

After a median follow-up of 30 months, 78.3% of patients who received ibrutinib had new or worsening hypertension using a systolic blood pressure cutoff of 130 mm Hg. Of these, 84.8% of cases had an “at least probable association with ibrutinib,” they reported.

Among the 215 patients with no baseline hypertension, 71.6% developed hypertension while on ibrutinib, with a mean increase in systolic blood pressure of 13.4 mm Hg. Among the 347 patients with baseline hypertension, 82.4% experienced a worsening of their hypertension.

“This relationship remained even after accounting for ibrutinib dose, and was not attenuated by the use of any specific anti-hypertensive class,” the researchers wrote.

The researchers observed MACE among 93 patients. This included 84 patients with new or worsening hypertension and 9 patients with stable or no hypertension. Most MACE events were of at least probable ibrutinib association, the researchers reported.

Overall, the cumulative incidence of new hypertension at 1 year was 442 per 1,000 person-years in the current study. This value is 12.9-fold higher than the Framingham Heart Study risk–predicted rate of 34 per 1,000 person-years.

“Given the expected continued increase in ibrutinib use, further studies characterizing the mechanisms, treatment, and implications of [hypertension] during ibrutinib use are needed,” the researchers wrote.

The study was funded by the National Institutes of Health, the D. Warren Brown Family Foundation, the Four Winds Foundation, and the Connie Brown CLL Research Fund. The authors reported financial affiliations with Janssen, Pharmacyclics, and other companies.

SOURCE: Dickerson T et al. Blood. 2019 Oct 3. doi: 10.1182/blood.2019000840.

The incidence and severity of hypertension was considerably higher in patients with B-cell malignancies treated with ibrutinib, according to a retrospective analysis.

Additionally, new or worsening hypertension was associated with a greater risk of major adverse cardiac events (MACE), including stroke, myocardial infarction, and cardiovascular-related death (hazard ratio, 2.17; 95% confidence interval, 1.08-4.38; P = .03).

“Despite ibrutinib’s benefits, cardiotoxicity has emerged as an increasingly important complication of this life-saving therapy,” Tyler Dickerson, PhD, of the Ohio State University, Columbus, and colleagues wrote in Blood.

The researchers retrospectively studied 562 consecutive patients with a lymphoid malignancy who received ibrutinib. Data was collected from patients treated at The Ohio State University’s Comprehensive Cancer Center during 2009-2016.

The mean age of study participants was 63.8 years, with a mean body mass index of 28.0 kg/m². Most of the patients included in the analysis were men.

The team assessed rates of new or worsening hypertension, as well as rates of other MACE. The observed rates were compared with Framingham Heart Study–predicted incident-hypertension rates. The effects of various antihypertensive drugs on ibrutinib-linked hypertension were also evaluated.

After a median follow-up of 30 months, 78.3% of patients who received ibrutinib had new or worsening hypertension using a systolic blood pressure cutoff of 130 mm Hg. Of these, 84.8% of cases had an “at least probable association with ibrutinib,” they reported.

Among the 215 patients with no baseline hypertension, 71.6% developed hypertension while on ibrutinib, with a mean increase in systolic blood pressure of 13.4 mm Hg. Among the 347 patients with baseline hypertension, 82.4% experienced a worsening of their hypertension.

“This relationship remained even after accounting for ibrutinib dose, and was not attenuated by the use of any specific anti-hypertensive class,” the researchers wrote.

The researchers observed MACE among 93 patients. This included 84 patients with new or worsening hypertension and 9 patients with stable or no hypertension. Most MACE events were of at least probable ibrutinib association, the researchers reported.

Overall, the cumulative incidence of new hypertension at 1 year was 442 per 1,000 person-years in the current study. This value is 12.9-fold higher than the Framingham Heart Study risk–predicted rate of 34 per 1,000 person-years.

“Given the expected continued increase in ibrutinib use, further studies characterizing the mechanisms, treatment, and implications of [hypertension] during ibrutinib use are needed,” the researchers wrote.

The study was funded by the National Institutes of Health, the D. Warren Brown Family Foundation, the Four Winds Foundation, and the Connie Brown CLL Research Fund. The authors reported financial affiliations with Janssen, Pharmacyclics, and other companies.

SOURCE: Dickerson T et al. Blood. 2019 Oct 3. doi: 10.1182/blood.2019000840.

A pooled analysis suggests adverse cytogenetics are a key factor negatively impacting outcomes in patients with NPM1^mut/FLT3-ITD^neg/low acute myeloid leukemia (AML).

National Institutes of Health/Wikimedia Commons/Public Domain

In patients with adverse chromosomal abnormalities, NPM1 mutational status was found not to confer a favorable outcome. The findings suggest cytogenetic risk outweighs molecular risk in patients with NPM1 mutations and the FLT3-ITD^neg/low genotype.

“Patients carrying adverse-risk cytogenetics shared a virtually identical unfavorable outcome, regardless of whether the otherwise beneficial NPM1^mut/FLT3-ITD^neg/low status was present. The type of the adverse chromosomal abnormality did not seem to influence this effect, although low numbers might obscure detection of heterogeneity among individual aberrations,” Linus Angenendt, MD, of University Hospital Munster (Germany) and colleagues, wrote in the Journal of Clinical Oncology.

The researchers retrospectively analyzed 2,426 patients with NPM1^mut/FLT3-ITD^neg/low AML. Of these, 17.6% had an abnormal karyotype, and 3.4% had adverse-risk chromosomal aberrations.

Prior to analysis, individual patient data were pooled from nine international AML study group registries or treatment centers.

After analysis, the researchers found that adverse cytogenetics were associated with inferior complete remission rates (66.3%), compared with in patients with normal karyotype or intermediate-risk cytogenetic abnormalities (87.7% and 86.0%, respectively; P less than .001). The complete remission rates for the NPM1^mut/FLT3-ITD^neg/low AML adverse cytogenetics group was similar to patients with NPM1^wt/FLT3-ITD^neg/low and adverse cytogenetic abnormalities (66.3% vs. 57.5%).

Five-year event-free survival rates and overall survival rates were also lower in patients with NPM1^mut/FLT3-ITD^neg/low AML and adverse cytogenetics, compared with patients with normal karyotype or intermediate-risk cytogenetic abnormalities (P less than .001).

“Even though the combination of an NPM1 mutation with these abnormalities is rare, the prognostic effect of adverse cytogenetics in NPM1^mut AML has important implications for postremission treatment decisions, in particular, the current recommendation that patients who are NPM1^mut/FLT3-ITD^neg/low not receive allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT), given their presumed low risk of relapse might be altered if the adverse karyotype increased the risk,” they wrote.

The type of chromosomal aberration did not appear to impact this effect, but the small sample size may have hindered the ability to detect a difference between different abnormalities, the researchers noted.

One key limitation of the study was the retrospective design. As a result, in patients with an abnormal karyotype, some genetic analyses could have been underutilized.

“These results demand additional validation within prospective trials,” the researchers concluded.

The study was funded by the University of Munster Medical School, the German Research Foundation, the French government, the Ministry of Health of the Czech Republic, and others. The authors reported financial affiliations with numerous pharmaceutical companies.

SOURCE: Angenendt L et al. J Clin Oncol. 2019 Oct 10;37(29):2632-42.

A pooled analysis suggests adverse cytogenetics are a key factor negatively impacting outcomes in patients with NPM1^mut/FLT3-ITD^neg/low acute myeloid leukemia (AML).

National Institutes of Health/Wikimedia Commons/Public Domain

In patients with adverse chromosomal abnormalities, NPM1 mutational status was found not to confer a favorable outcome. The findings suggest cytogenetic risk outweighs molecular risk in patients with NPM1 mutations and the FLT3-ITD^neg/low genotype.

“Patients carrying adverse-risk cytogenetics shared a virtually identical unfavorable outcome, regardless of whether the otherwise beneficial NPM1^mut/FLT3-ITD^neg/low status was present. The type of the adverse chromosomal abnormality did not seem to influence this effect, although low numbers might obscure detection of heterogeneity among individual aberrations,” Linus Angenendt, MD, of University Hospital Munster (Germany) and colleagues, wrote in the Journal of Clinical Oncology.

The researchers retrospectively analyzed 2,426 patients with NPM1^mut/FLT3-ITD^neg/low AML. Of these, 17.6% had an abnormal karyotype, and 3.4% had adverse-risk chromosomal aberrations.

Prior to analysis, individual patient data were pooled from nine international AML study group registries or treatment centers.

After analysis, the researchers found that adverse cytogenetics were associated with inferior complete remission rates (66.3%), compared with in patients with normal karyotype or intermediate-risk cytogenetic abnormalities (87.7% and 86.0%, respectively; P less than .001). The complete remission rates for the NPM1^mut/FLT3-ITD^neg/low AML adverse cytogenetics group was similar to patients with NPM1^wt/FLT3-ITD^neg/low and adverse cytogenetic abnormalities (66.3% vs. 57.5%).

Five-year event-free survival rates and overall survival rates were also lower in patients with NPM1^mut/FLT3-ITD^neg/low AML and adverse cytogenetics, compared with patients with normal karyotype or intermediate-risk cytogenetic abnormalities (P less than .001).

“Even though the combination of an NPM1 mutation with these abnormalities is rare, the prognostic effect of adverse cytogenetics in NPM1^mut AML has important implications for postremission treatment decisions, in particular, the current recommendation that patients who are NPM1^mut/FLT3-ITD^neg/low not receive allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT), given their presumed low risk of relapse might be altered if the adverse karyotype increased the risk,” they wrote.

The type of chromosomal aberration did not appear to impact this effect, but the small sample size may have hindered the ability to detect a difference between different abnormalities, the researchers noted.

One key limitation of the study was the retrospective design. As a result, in patients with an abnormal karyotype, some genetic analyses could have been underutilized.

“These results demand additional validation within prospective trials,” the researchers concluded.

The study was funded by the University of Munster Medical School, the German Research Foundation, the French government, the Ministry of Health of the Czech Republic, and others. The authors reported financial affiliations with numerous pharmaceutical companies.

SOURCE: Angenendt L et al. J Clin Oncol. 2019 Oct 10;37(29):2632-42.

A pooled analysis suggests adverse cytogenetics are a key factor negatively impacting outcomes in patients with NPM1^mut/FLT3-ITD^neg/low acute myeloid leukemia (AML).

National Institutes of Health/Wikimedia Commons/Public Domain

In patients with adverse chromosomal abnormalities, NPM1 mutational status was found not to confer a favorable outcome. The findings suggest cytogenetic risk outweighs molecular risk in patients with NPM1 mutations and the FLT3-ITD^neg/low genotype.

“Patients carrying adverse-risk cytogenetics shared a virtually identical unfavorable outcome, regardless of whether the otherwise beneficial NPM1^mut/FLT3-ITD^neg/low status was present. The type of the adverse chromosomal abnormality did not seem to influence this effect, although low numbers might obscure detection of heterogeneity among individual aberrations,” Linus Angenendt, MD, of University Hospital Munster (Germany) and colleagues, wrote in the Journal of Clinical Oncology.

The researchers retrospectively analyzed 2,426 patients with NPM1^mut/FLT3-ITD^neg/low AML. Of these, 17.6% had an abnormal karyotype, and 3.4% had adverse-risk chromosomal aberrations.

Prior to analysis, individual patient data were pooled from nine international AML study group registries or treatment centers.

After analysis, the researchers found that adverse cytogenetics were associated with inferior complete remission rates (66.3%), compared with in patients with normal karyotype or intermediate-risk cytogenetic abnormalities (87.7% and 86.0%, respectively; P less than .001). The complete remission rates for the NPM1^mut/FLT3-ITD^neg/low AML adverse cytogenetics group was similar to patients with NPM1^wt/FLT3-ITD^neg/low and adverse cytogenetic abnormalities (66.3% vs. 57.5%).

Five-year event-free survival rates and overall survival rates were also lower in patients with NPM1^mut/FLT3-ITD^neg/low AML and adverse cytogenetics, compared with patients with normal karyotype or intermediate-risk cytogenetic abnormalities (P less than .001).

“Even though the combination of an NPM1 mutation with these abnormalities is rare, the prognostic effect of adverse cytogenetics in NPM1^mut AML has important implications for postremission treatment decisions, in particular, the current recommendation that patients who are NPM1^mut/FLT3-ITD^neg/low not receive allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT), given their presumed low risk of relapse might be altered if the adverse karyotype increased the risk,” they wrote.

The type of chromosomal aberration did not appear to impact this effect, but the small sample size may have hindered the ability to detect a difference between different abnormalities, the researchers noted.

One key limitation of the study was the retrospective design. As a result, in patients with an abnormal karyotype, some genetic analyses could have been underutilized.

“These results demand additional validation within prospective trials,” the researchers concluded.

The study was funded by the University of Munster Medical School, the German Research Foundation, the French government, the Ministry of Health of the Czech Republic, and others. The authors reported financial affiliations with numerous pharmaceutical companies.

SOURCE: Angenendt L et al. J Clin Oncol. 2019 Oct 10;37(29):2632-42.

The Food and Drug Administration has approved rivaroxaban (Xarelto) for the prevention of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in hospitalized, acutely ill patients at risk for thromboembolic complications who do not have a high bleeding risk, according to a release from Janssen.

FDA approval for the new indication is based on results from the phase 3 MAGELLAN and MARINER trials, which included more than 20,000 hospitalized, acutely ill patients. In MAGELLAN, rivaroxaban demonstrated noninferiority to enoxaparin, a low-molecular-weight heparin, in short-term usage, and it was superior over the long term, compared with short-term enoxaparin followed by placebo.

While VTE and VTE-related deaths were not reduced in MARINER, compared with placebo, patients who received rivaroxaban did see a significantly reduction in symptomatic VTE with a favorable safety profile.

According to the indication, rivaroxaban can be administered to patients during hospitalization and can be continued after discharge for 31-39 days. The safety profile in MAGELLAN and MARINER was consistent with that already seen, with the most common adverse event being bleeding.

The new indication is the eighth for rivaroxaban, the most of any direct oral anticoagulant; six of these are specifically for the treatment, prevention, and reduction in the risk of VTE recurrence.

“With this new approval, Xarelto as an oral-only option now has the potential to change how acutely ill medical patients are managed for the prevention of blood clots, both in the hospital and for an extended period after discharge,” said Alex C. Spyropoulos, MD, of Northwell Health at Lenox Hill Hospital, New York, and a member of the steering committee of the MAGELLAN trial.

Find the full press release on the Janssen website.

lfranki@mdedge.com

The Food and Drug Administration has approved rivaroxaban (Xarelto) for the prevention of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in hospitalized, acutely ill patients at risk for thromboembolic complications who do not have a high bleeding risk, according to a release from Janssen.

FDA approval for the new indication is based on results from the phase 3 MAGELLAN and MARINER trials, which included more than 20,000 hospitalized, acutely ill patients. In MAGELLAN, rivaroxaban demonstrated noninferiority to enoxaparin, a low-molecular-weight heparin, in short-term usage, and it was superior over the long term, compared with short-term enoxaparin followed by placebo.

While VTE and VTE-related deaths were not reduced in MARINER, compared with placebo, patients who received rivaroxaban did see a significantly reduction in symptomatic VTE with a favorable safety profile.

According to the indication, rivaroxaban can be administered to patients during hospitalization and can be continued after discharge for 31-39 days. The safety profile in MAGELLAN and MARINER was consistent with that already seen, with the most common adverse event being bleeding.

The new indication is the eighth for rivaroxaban, the most of any direct oral anticoagulant; six of these are specifically for the treatment, prevention, and reduction in the risk of VTE recurrence.

“With this new approval, Xarelto as an oral-only option now has the potential to change how acutely ill medical patients are managed for the prevention of blood clots, both in the hospital and for an extended period after discharge,” said Alex C. Spyropoulos, MD, of Northwell Health at Lenox Hill Hospital, New York, and a member of the steering committee of the MAGELLAN trial.

Find the full press release on the Janssen website.

lfranki@mdedge.com

The Food and Drug Administration has approved rivaroxaban (Xarelto) for the prevention of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in hospitalized, acutely ill patients at risk for thromboembolic complications who do not have a high bleeding risk, according to a release from Janssen.

FDA approval for the new indication is based on results from the phase 3 MAGELLAN and MARINER trials, which included more than 20,000 hospitalized, acutely ill patients. In MAGELLAN, rivaroxaban demonstrated noninferiority to enoxaparin, a low-molecular-weight heparin, in short-term usage, and it was superior over the long term, compared with short-term enoxaparin followed by placebo.

While VTE and VTE-related deaths were not reduced in MARINER, compared with placebo, patients who received rivaroxaban did see a significantly reduction in symptomatic VTE with a favorable safety profile.

According to the indication, rivaroxaban can be administered to patients during hospitalization and can be continued after discharge for 31-39 days. The safety profile in MAGELLAN and MARINER was consistent with that already seen, with the most common adverse event being bleeding.

The new indication is the eighth for rivaroxaban, the most of any direct oral anticoagulant; six of these are specifically for the treatment, prevention, and reduction in the risk of VTE recurrence.

“With this new approval, Xarelto as an oral-only option now has the potential to change how acutely ill medical patients are managed for the prevention of blood clots, both in the hospital and for an extended period after discharge,” said Alex C. Spyropoulos, MD, of Northwell Health at Lenox Hill Hospital, New York, and a member of the steering committee of the MAGELLAN trial.

Find the full press release on the Janssen website.

lfranki@mdedge.com

Genentech has identified translucent particles in its hemophilia A product Hemlibra (emicizumab-kxwh) that are outside the prespecified particle specification. But toxicology and safety assessments conducted by the company found that the benefit-risk profile of the product remains unchanged.

Severin Schweiger/ThinkStock

Hemlibra is a bispecific factor IXa– and factor X–directed antibody that has been approved in the United States and other countries for routine prophylaxis in adult and pediatric patients with hemophilia A, with or without factor VIII inhibitors. It is administered as a subcutaneous injection.

The particles were first identified in March 2019 during a routine examination of drug product batches by Genentech. At the time, the company informed the U.S. Food and Drug Administration; the European Medicines Agency; Swissmedic; Health Canada; and the Ministry for Health, Labour, and Welfare in Japan. An initial company assessment found that the particles consisted of protein (Hemlibra drug substance) and silicone oil (polydimethylsiloxane), an organic polymer included in all parenteral medicines, according to Genentech.

Since the health authorities all agreed with the company’s initial conclusion that the product’s safety remained unchanged, no further action was taken.

The presence of the particles became more widely known in early October 2019, when Genentech notified the National Hemophilia Foundation, the NHF’s Medical and Scientific Advisory Council (MASAC), and the Hemophilia Federation of America. Genentech officials reached out to these groups after finishing a root cause investigation and issuing a final report to health authorities concluding that there was no change in the benefit-risk profile, according to a company spokesman.

MASAC issued its own statement recommending no change in prescribing or interruption in the use of Hemlibra. This is an “interim recommendation pending our assessment of the full review by Roche/Genentech of their manufacturing and quality control,” MASAC said. The council noted that it had been informed by representatives from Roche/Genentech that there have been no reports of adverse events linked to the particulate matter. Additionally, the problem had been present since the initial clinical trials of the product, but was only recently identified.

But at least one patient advocate is raising concerns about the timing of this notification. Jesse Clark, president and CEO of HemoAware, wants to know why patients were not informed of the particle issue for more than 6 months.

“The bleeding disorder community was never notified by either Genentech or any other agency,” Mr. Clark said in an interview. “The lack of transparency and communication is extremely concerning.”

A spokesman for Genentech said the company had not alerted patients earlier because there was no indication of an impact on the safety of the product. “We take inquiries from the community very seriously and are providing context and additional details in response to requests from patient organizations,” he said in an interview.

The company does not expect this issue to impact any patients in the United States and the availability of Hemlibra will not be affected, he added.

mschneider@mdedge.com

Genentech has identified translucent particles in its hemophilia A product Hemlibra (emicizumab-kxwh) that are outside the prespecified particle specification. But toxicology and safety assessments conducted by the company found that the benefit-risk profile of the product remains unchanged.

Severin Schweiger/ThinkStock

Hemlibra is a bispecific factor IXa– and factor X–directed antibody that has been approved in the United States and other countries for routine prophylaxis in adult and pediatric patients with hemophilia A, with or without factor VIII inhibitors. It is administered as a subcutaneous injection.

The particles were first identified in March 2019 during a routine examination of drug product batches by Genentech. At the time, the company informed the U.S. Food and Drug Administration; the European Medicines Agency; Swissmedic; Health Canada; and the Ministry for Health, Labour, and Welfare in Japan. An initial company assessment found that the particles consisted of protein (Hemlibra drug substance) and silicone oil (polydimethylsiloxane), an organic polymer included in all parenteral medicines, according to Genentech.

Since the health authorities all agreed with the company’s initial conclusion that the product’s safety remained unchanged, no further action was taken.

The presence of the particles became more widely known in early October 2019, when Genentech notified the National Hemophilia Foundation, the NHF’s Medical and Scientific Advisory Council (MASAC), and the Hemophilia Federation of America. Genentech officials reached out to these groups after finishing a root cause investigation and issuing a final report to health authorities concluding that there was no change in the benefit-risk profile, according to a company spokesman.

MASAC issued its own statement recommending no change in prescribing or interruption in the use of Hemlibra. This is an “interim recommendation pending our assessment of the full review by Roche/Genentech of their manufacturing and quality control,” MASAC said. The council noted that it had been informed by representatives from Roche/Genentech that there have been no reports of adverse events linked to the particulate matter. Additionally, the problem had been present since the initial clinical trials of the product, but was only recently identified.

But at least one patient advocate is raising concerns about the timing of this notification. Jesse Clark, president and CEO of HemoAware, wants to know why patients were not informed of the particle issue for more than 6 months.

“The bleeding disorder community was never notified by either Genentech or any other agency,” Mr. Clark said in an interview. “The lack of transparency and communication is extremely concerning.”

A spokesman for Genentech said the company had not alerted patients earlier because there was no indication of an impact on the safety of the product. “We take inquiries from the community very seriously and are providing context and additional details in response to requests from patient organizations,” he said in an interview.

The company does not expect this issue to impact any patients in the United States and the availability of Hemlibra will not be affected, he added.

mschneider@mdedge.com

Genentech has identified translucent particles in its hemophilia A product Hemlibra (emicizumab-kxwh) that are outside the prespecified particle specification. But toxicology and safety assessments conducted by the company found that the benefit-risk profile of the product remains unchanged.

Severin Schweiger/ThinkStock

Hemlibra is a bispecific factor IXa– and factor X–directed antibody that has been approved in the United States and other countries for routine prophylaxis in adult and pediatric patients with hemophilia A, with or without factor VIII inhibitors. It is administered as a subcutaneous injection.

The particles were first identified in March 2019 during a routine examination of drug product batches by Genentech. At the time, the company informed the U.S. Food and Drug Administration; the European Medicines Agency; Swissmedic; Health Canada; and the Ministry for Health, Labour, and Welfare in Japan. An initial company assessment found that the particles consisted of protein (Hemlibra drug substance) and silicone oil (polydimethylsiloxane), an organic polymer included in all parenteral medicines, according to Genentech.

Since the health authorities all agreed with the company’s initial conclusion that the product’s safety remained unchanged, no further action was taken.

The presence of the particles became more widely known in early October 2019, when Genentech notified the National Hemophilia Foundation, the NHF’s Medical and Scientific Advisory Council (MASAC), and the Hemophilia Federation of America. Genentech officials reached out to these groups after finishing a root cause investigation and issuing a final report to health authorities concluding that there was no change in the benefit-risk profile, according to a company spokesman.

MASAC issued its own statement recommending no change in prescribing or interruption in the use of Hemlibra. This is an “interim recommendation pending our assessment of the full review by Roche/Genentech of their manufacturing and quality control,” MASAC said. The council noted that it had been informed by representatives from Roche/Genentech that there have been no reports of adverse events linked to the particulate matter. Additionally, the problem had been present since the initial clinical trials of the product, but was only recently identified.

But at least one patient advocate is raising concerns about the timing of this notification. Jesse Clark, president and CEO of HemoAware, wants to know why patients were not informed of the particle issue for more than 6 months.

“The bleeding disorder community was never notified by either Genentech or any other agency,” Mr. Clark said in an interview. “The lack of transparency and communication is extremely concerning.”

A spokesman for Genentech said the company had not alerted patients earlier because there was no indication of an impact on the safety of the product. “We take inquiries from the community very seriously and are providing context and additional details in response to requests from patient organizations,” he said in an interview.

The company does not expect this issue to impact any patients in the United States and the availability of Hemlibra will not be affected, he added.

mschneider@mdedge.com

New consensus statements, released by a group of 36 experts, provide specific recommendations related to monitoring bleeding and assessing efficacy of treatment in patients with acquired hemophilia.

Svisio/Thinkstock

A global survey was developed by a nine-member steering committee with expertise in the hemostatic management of patients with acquired hemophilia. The Delphi methodology was used to obtain consensus on a list of statements on the location-specific treatment of bleeding in acquired hemophilia.

“The initial survey was circulated via email for refinement and was formally corroborated at a face-to-face meeting,” wrote Andreas Tiede, MD, PhD, of Hannover (Germany) Medical School and fellow experts. The report is published in Haemophilia.

The key areas outlined include the initial management of bleeding, and management of location-specific bleeding, including urological, gastrointestinal, muscle, and pharyngeal bleeds, as well as intracranial and postpartum hemorrhage.

If an expert hematologist is not available, and the bleeding event is life‐threatening, the emergency physician should initiate treatment in accordance with local or national recommendations, according to the initial management guidelines.

With respect to urological bleeds, the best interval for evaluating successful achievement of hemostasis is every 6-12 hours. The experts also reported that, if first-line hemostatic therapy is not effective, more intensive treatment should be considered every 6-12 hours.

In the management of intracranial hemorrhage, the frequency of clinical evaluation is subject to the particular scenario, and it can vary from every 2 hours (for clinical assessment) to every 24 hours (for imaging studies), they wrote.

If initial hemostatic treatment is not effective, more intensive therapy should be considered every 6 hours, they recommended.

“The statement addressing optimal frequency for assessing hemostasis in intracranial bleeds was the subject of much deliberation among the steering committee regarding timing of assessment,” the experts acknowledged.

The geographic diversity and global representation of expert participants were major strengths of these recommendations. However, these statements did not consider socioeconomic parameters or geopolitical differences that could affect patient care. As a result, they may not be applicable to all patient populations.

The manuscript was funded by Novo Nordisk AG. The authors reported having financial affiliations with Novo Nordisk and several other companies.

SOURCE: Tiede A et al. Haemophilia. 2019 Sep 13. doi: 10.1111/hae.13844.

New consensus statements, released by a group of 36 experts, provide specific recommendations related to monitoring bleeding and assessing efficacy of treatment in patients with acquired hemophilia.

Svisio/Thinkstock

A global survey was developed by a nine-member steering committee with expertise in the hemostatic management of patients with acquired hemophilia. The Delphi methodology was used to obtain consensus on a list of statements on the location-specific treatment of bleeding in acquired hemophilia.

“The initial survey was circulated via email for refinement and was formally corroborated at a face-to-face meeting,” wrote Andreas Tiede, MD, PhD, of Hannover (Germany) Medical School and fellow experts. The report is published in Haemophilia.

The key areas outlined include the initial management of bleeding, and management of location-specific bleeding, including urological, gastrointestinal, muscle, and pharyngeal bleeds, as well as intracranial and postpartum hemorrhage.

If an expert hematologist is not available, and the bleeding event is life‐threatening, the emergency physician should initiate treatment in accordance with local or national recommendations, according to the initial management guidelines.

With respect to urological bleeds, the best interval for evaluating successful achievement of hemostasis is every 6-12 hours. The experts also reported that, if first-line hemostatic therapy is not effective, more intensive treatment should be considered every 6-12 hours.

In the management of intracranial hemorrhage, the frequency of clinical evaluation is subject to the particular scenario, and it can vary from every 2 hours (for clinical assessment) to every 24 hours (for imaging studies), they wrote.

If initial hemostatic treatment is not effective, more intensive therapy should be considered every 6 hours, they recommended.

“The statement addressing optimal frequency for assessing hemostasis in intracranial bleeds was the subject of much deliberation among the steering committee regarding timing of assessment,” the experts acknowledged.

The geographic diversity and global representation of expert participants were major strengths of these recommendations. However, these statements did not consider socioeconomic parameters or geopolitical differences that could affect patient care. As a result, they may not be applicable to all patient populations.

The manuscript was funded by Novo Nordisk AG. The authors reported having financial affiliations with Novo Nordisk and several other companies.

SOURCE: Tiede A et al. Haemophilia. 2019 Sep 13. doi: 10.1111/hae.13844.

New consensus statements, released by a group of 36 experts, provide specific recommendations related to monitoring bleeding and assessing efficacy of treatment in patients with acquired hemophilia.

Svisio/Thinkstock

A global survey was developed by a nine-member steering committee with expertise in the hemostatic management of patients with acquired hemophilia. The Delphi methodology was used to obtain consensus on a list of statements on the location-specific treatment of bleeding in acquired hemophilia.

“The initial survey was circulated via email for refinement and was formally corroborated at a face-to-face meeting,” wrote Andreas Tiede, MD, PhD, of Hannover (Germany) Medical School and fellow experts. The report is published in Haemophilia.

The key areas outlined include the initial management of bleeding, and management of location-specific bleeding, including urological, gastrointestinal, muscle, and pharyngeal bleeds, as well as intracranial and postpartum hemorrhage.

If an expert hematologist is not available, and the bleeding event is life‐threatening, the emergency physician should initiate treatment in accordance with local or national recommendations, according to the initial management guidelines.

With respect to urological bleeds, the best interval for evaluating successful achievement of hemostasis is every 6-12 hours. The experts also reported that, if first-line hemostatic therapy is not effective, more intensive treatment should be considered every 6-12 hours.

In the management of intracranial hemorrhage, the frequency of clinical evaluation is subject to the particular scenario, and it can vary from every 2 hours (for clinical assessment) to every 24 hours (for imaging studies), they wrote.

If initial hemostatic treatment is not effective, more intensive therapy should be considered every 6 hours, they recommended.

“The statement addressing optimal frequency for assessing hemostasis in intracranial bleeds was the subject of much deliberation among the steering committee regarding timing of assessment,” the experts acknowledged.

The geographic diversity and global representation of expert participants were major strengths of these recommendations. However, these statements did not consider socioeconomic parameters or geopolitical differences that could affect patient care. As a result, they may not be applicable to all patient populations.

The manuscript was funded by Novo Nordisk AG. The authors reported having financial affiliations with Novo Nordisk and several other companies.

SOURCE: Tiede A et al. Haemophilia. 2019 Sep 13. doi: 10.1111/hae.13844.

Randomized trials are needed to determine the optimal treatment approach for early stage follicular lymphoma (FL), according to researchers.

Patho/Wikimedia Commons/CC BY-SA 3.0(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0)], via Wikimedia Commons

A retrospective study showed similar outcomes among patients who received radiotherapy, immunochemotherapy, combined modality treatment (CMT), and watchful waiting (WW).

There were some differences in progression-free survival (PFS) according to treatment approach. However, there were no significant differences in overall survival (OS) between any of the active treatments or between patients who received active treatment and those managed with WW.

Joshua W. D. Tobin, MD, of Princess Alexandra Hospital in Brisbane, Queensland, Australia, and colleagues conducted this research and reported the results in Blood Advances.

The researchers analyzed 365 patients with newly diagnosed, stage I/II FL. The patients had a median age of 63 years and more than half were men. They were diagnosed between 2005 and 2017, and the median follow-up was 45 months.

Most patients (n = 280) received active treatment, but 85 were managed with WW. The WW patients were older and had more extranodal involvement.

Types of active treatment included radiotherapy alone (n = 171), immunochemotherapy alone (n = 63), and CMT (n = 46). Compared with the other groups, patients who received radiotherapy alone had less bulk, fewer nodal sites, and fewer B symptoms, and were more likely to have stage I disease. Patients who received CMT had fewer B symptoms and lower FLIPI scores compared with patients who received immunochemotherapy.

The immunochemotherapy regimens used were largely rituximab based. In all, 106 patients received rituximab (alone or in combination) for induction, and 49 received maintenance rituximab (37 in the immunochemotherapy group and 12 in the CMT group).

Results

Response rates were similar among the active treatment groups. The overall response rate was 95% in the radiotherapy group, 96% in the immunochemotherapy group, and 95% in the CMT group (P = .87).

There was a significant difference in PFS between the radiotherapy, immunochemotherapy, and CMT groups (P = .023), but there was no difference in OS between these groups (P = .38).

There was no significant difference in PFS between the immunochemotherapy and CMT groups (hazard ratio [HR], 1.78; P = .24), so the researchers combined these groups into a single group called “systemic therapy.” The patients treated with systemic therapy had PFS (HR, 1.32; P = .96) and OS (HR, 0.46; P = .21) similar to that of patients treated with radiotherapy alone.

Maintenance rituximab was associated with prolonged PFS among patients treated with systemic therapy (HR, 0.24; P = .017). However, there was no significant difference in OS between patients who received maintenance and those who did not (HR, 0.89; P = .90).

Relapse was less common among patients who received maintenance, and there were no cases of transformation in that group. Relapse occurred in 24.6% of the radiotherapy group, 18.3% of the systemic therapy group, and 4.1% of the group that received systemic therapy plus maintenance (P = .006). Transformation was less likely in the systemic therapy group (1.8%) than in the radiotherapy (6.4%) and WW (9.4%) groups (HR, 0.20; P = .034).

Overall, the active treatment group had better PFS than the WW group (HR, 0.52; P = .002), but there was no significant difference in OS between the groups (HR, 0.94; P = .90).

“Based on our comparable OS between WW and actively treated patients, WW could be considered as an initial management strategy in early stage FL,” Dr. Tobin and colleagues wrote. “However, long-term follow-up is required to determine if a survival benefit exists favoring active treatment.”

The researchers reported relationships with many pharmaceutical companies.

jensmith@mdedge.com

SOURCE: Tobin JWD et al. Blood Adv. 2019 Oct 8;3(19):2804-11.

Randomized trials are needed to determine the optimal treatment approach for early stage follicular lymphoma (FL), according to researchers.

Patho/Wikimedia Commons/CC BY-SA 3.0(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0)], via Wikimedia Commons

A retrospective study showed similar outcomes among patients who received radiotherapy, immunochemotherapy, combined modality treatment (CMT), and watchful waiting (WW).

There were some differences in progression-free survival (PFS) according to treatment approach. However, there were no significant differences in overall survival (OS) between any of the active treatments or between patients who received active treatment and those managed with WW.

Joshua W. D. Tobin, MD, of Princess Alexandra Hospital in Brisbane, Queensland, Australia, and colleagues conducted this research and reported the results in Blood Advances.

The researchers analyzed 365 patients with newly diagnosed, stage I/II FL. The patients had a median age of 63 years and more than half were men. They were diagnosed between 2005 and 2017, and the median follow-up was 45 months.

Most patients (n = 280) received active treatment, but 85 were managed with WW. The WW patients were older and had more extranodal involvement.

Types of active treatment included radiotherapy alone (n = 171), immunochemotherapy alone (n = 63), and CMT (n = 46). Compared with the other groups, patients who received radiotherapy alone had less bulk, fewer nodal sites, and fewer B symptoms, and were more likely to have stage I disease. Patients who received CMT had fewer B symptoms and lower FLIPI scores compared with patients who received immunochemotherapy.

The immunochemotherapy regimens used were largely rituximab based. In all, 106 patients received rituximab (alone or in combination) for induction, and 49 received maintenance rituximab (37 in the immunochemotherapy group and 12 in the CMT group).

Results

Response rates were similar among the active treatment groups. The overall response rate was 95% in the radiotherapy group, 96% in the immunochemotherapy group, and 95% in the CMT group (P = .87).

There was a significant difference in PFS between the radiotherapy, immunochemotherapy, and CMT groups (P = .023), but there was no difference in OS between these groups (P = .38).

There was no significant difference in PFS between the immunochemotherapy and CMT groups (hazard ratio [HR], 1.78; P = .24), so the researchers combined these groups into a single group called “systemic therapy.” The patients treated with systemic therapy had PFS (HR, 1.32; P = .96) and OS (HR, 0.46; P = .21) similar to that of patients treated with radiotherapy alone.

Maintenance rituximab was associated with prolonged PFS among patients treated with systemic therapy (HR, 0.24; P = .017). However, there was no significant difference in OS between patients who received maintenance and those who did not (HR, 0.89; P = .90).

Relapse was less common among patients who received maintenance, and there were no cases of transformation in that group. Relapse occurred in 24.6% of the radiotherapy group, 18.3% of the systemic therapy group, and 4.1% of the group that received systemic therapy plus maintenance (P = .006). Transformation was less likely in the systemic therapy group (1.8%) than in the radiotherapy (6.4%) and WW (9.4%) groups (HR, 0.20; P = .034).

Overall, the active treatment group had better PFS than the WW group (HR, 0.52; P = .002), but there was no significant difference in OS between the groups (HR, 0.94; P = .90).

“Based on our comparable OS between WW and actively treated patients, WW could be considered as an initial management strategy in early stage FL,” Dr. Tobin and colleagues wrote. “However, long-term follow-up is required to determine if a survival benefit exists favoring active treatment.”

The researchers reported relationships with many pharmaceutical companies.

jensmith@mdedge.com

SOURCE: Tobin JWD et al. Blood Adv. 2019 Oct 8;3(19):2804-11.

Randomized trials are needed to determine the optimal treatment approach for early stage follicular lymphoma (FL), according to researchers.

Patho/Wikimedia Commons/CC BY-SA 3.0(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0)], via Wikimedia Commons

A retrospective study showed similar outcomes among patients who received radiotherapy, immunochemotherapy, combined modality treatment (CMT), and watchful waiting (WW).

There were some differences in progression-free survival (PFS) according to treatment approach. However, there were no significant differences in overall survival (OS) between any of the active treatments or between patients who received active treatment and those managed with WW.

Joshua W. D. Tobin, MD, of Princess Alexandra Hospital in Brisbane, Queensland, Australia, and colleagues conducted this research and reported the results in Blood Advances.

The researchers analyzed 365 patients with newly diagnosed, stage I/II FL. The patients had a median age of 63 years and more than half were men. They were diagnosed between 2005 and 2017, and the median follow-up was 45 months.

Most patients (n = 280) received active treatment, but 85 were managed with WW. The WW patients were older and had more extranodal involvement.

Types of active treatment included radiotherapy alone (n = 171), immunochemotherapy alone (n = 63), and CMT (n = 46). Compared with the other groups, patients who received radiotherapy alone had less bulk, fewer nodal sites, and fewer B symptoms, and were more likely to have stage I disease. Patients who received CMT had fewer B symptoms and lower FLIPI scores compared with patients who received immunochemotherapy.

The immunochemotherapy regimens used were largely rituximab based. In all, 106 patients received rituximab (alone or in combination) for induction, and 49 received maintenance rituximab (37 in the immunochemotherapy group and 12 in the CMT group).

Results

Response rates were similar among the active treatment groups. The overall response rate was 95% in the radiotherapy group, 96% in the immunochemotherapy group, and 95% in the CMT group (P = .87).

There was a significant difference in PFS between the radiotherapy, immunochemotherapy, and CMT groups (P = .023), but there was no difference in OS between these groups (P = .38).

There was no significant difference in PFS between the immunochemotherapy and CMT groups (hazard ratio [HR], 1.78; P = .24), so the researchers combined these groups into a single group called “systemic therapy.” The patients treated with systemic therapy had PFS (HR, 1.32; P = .96) and OS (HR, 0.46; P = .21) similar to that of patients treated with radiotherapy alone.

Maintenance rituximab was associated with prolonged PFS among patients treated with systemic therapy (HR, 0.24; P = .017). However, there was no significant difference in OS between patients who received maintenance and those who did not (HR, 0.89; P = .90).

Relapse was less common among patients who received maintenance, and there were no cases of transformation in that group. Relapse occurred in 24.6% of the radiotherapy group, 18.3% of the systemic therapy group, and 4.1% of the group that received systemic therapy plus maintenance (P = .006). Transformation was less likely in the systemic therapy group (1.8%) than in the radiotherapy (6.4%) and WW (9.4%) groups (HR, 0.20; P = .034).

Overall, the active treatment group had better PFS than the WW group (HR, 0.52; P = .002), but there was no significant difference in OS between the groups (HR, 0.94; P = .90).

“Based on our comparable OS between WW and actively treated patients, WW could be considered as an initial management strategy in early stage FL,” Dr. Tobin and colleagues wrote. “However, long-term follow-up is required to determine if a survival benefit exists favoring active treatment.”

The researchers reported relationships with many pharmaceutical companies.

jensmith@mdedge.com

SOURCE: Tobin JWD et al. Blood Adv. 2019 Oct 8;3(19):2804-11.