User login
Groups release guidelines for CAR T treatment in children
emphasize the need for a flexible approach to detect early signs of serious complications for younger patients treated with this emerging class of medicines.
Researchers at the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, and the Pediatric Acute Lung Injury and Sepsis Investigators Network (PALISI) developed the guidelines, which were published in Nature Reviews Clinical Oncology. The recommendations build on the guidelines for more general use of these medicines from MD Anderson’s CARTOX Program, which Nature Reviews Clinical Oncology published in 2017.
Among the chief concerns with this new class of medicines are cytokine-release syndrome (CRS) and CAR T cell-related encephalopathy syndrome (CRES), according to Kris Michael Mahadeo, MD MPH, of the MD Anderson Cancer Center and his coauthors of the new paper.
Some of the tools used for older patients in screening for complications with CAR T drugs don’t work as well with younger ones, Dr. Mahadeo said in an interview. For instance, at MD Anderson, a handwriting sample is used to monitor patients for CAR T cell-related encephalopathy syndrome, which has symptoms of confusion and delirium. Patients provide a baseline handwriting sample of a single sentence that’s scanned into the medical record, and then they are asked to write this again during their time in the hospital, he said. But this tool may not work for children too young to write well.
The new guidelines suggest using the Cornell Assessment of Pediatric Delirium (CAPD) or to evaluate a child’s mental state, asking questions about eye contact, and level of awareness and mood, Dr. Mahadeo said. An alternative for patients aged 12 years and older with greater cognitive ability is the CARTOX-10 grading system.
“The nurses who spent most of the day with these patients will observe them over their shift and kind of get an idea of what was normal and answer a series of questions” through the CAPD tool, which is already used in ICUs, Dr. Mahadeo said. “It takes into consideration both the nurses’ perception and the parents, or whoever is at the bedside with the child. So that if they have a concern, it gives them a point that actually escalates things upward.”
The newly published recommendations also remind physicians and others caring for young patients to pay attention to these reports.
“Parent and/or caregiver concerns should be addressed because early signs or symptoms of CRS can be subtle and best recognized by those who know the child best,” Dr. Mahadeo and his colleagues wrote in a summary of key recommendations in the paper.
The recommendations also noted a need for close monitoring for complications such as hypotension, hypocalcemia, and catheter-related pain in young patients who require a leukapheresis catheter for cell collection. Infant and younger children “might not verbalize these symptoms,” according to the researchers.
Other recommendations include:
- Obtaining the child’s assent when appropriate, with psychological services often aiding in this goal. Dr. Mahadeo and his colleagues recommend considering “age-appropriate advance directives.”
- Maintaining high vigilance for sinus tachycardia as an early sign of CRS, using age-specific normal range or baseline values.
- Giving pediatric dosing of tocilizumab, with patients weighing less than 30 kg receiving 12 mg/kg, and those weighing 30 kg or greater receiving 8 mg/kg.
- Considering participation with a prospective collaboration with intensive-care registries that could allow accurate data entry of cell-therapy variables into the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research registry by cell-therapy programs.
The Food and Drug Administration approved the first two CAR T-cell therapies in the United States in 2017: Novartis’ tisagenlecleucel (Kymriah) for children and young adults with B-cell precursor acute lymphoblastic leukemia and later for adults with large B-cell lymphoma; and axicabtagene ciloleucel (Yescarta), sold by Gilead, for adults with large B-cell lymphoma. The therapies involve reengineering a patient’s T cells such that they recognize the threat of cancer, and then introducing them back into the body. The European Medicines Agency’s Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use in June recommended granting marketing authorization to these drugs.
In the new pediatric guidelines, Dr. Mahadeo and his colleagues noted the use of CAR T-cell therapies for treatment of solid tumors and other malignancies in children already “is being explored.” “Moreover, consideration of earlier or upfront use of CAR T-cell therapy might spare patients the acute and long-term toxicities associated with traditional chemotherapy and/or radiation regimens,” they wrote.
There’s been great interest in learning how to most safely use the CAR T cell therapies, said Helen Heslop, MD, of Baylor College of Medicine.
She pointed to a 2014 publication in the journal Blood from Daniel W. Lee and his colleagues as an earlier example of this research. By now, cancer centers will have worked out their own procedures for pediatric use of CAR T therapies, hewing to standards set by the Foundation for the Accreditation of Cellular Therapy (FACT), Dr. Heslop said.
Dr. Heslop also stressed the role of the FDA in requiring risk evaluation and management strategy programs for these drugs. All of this, including the new guidelines from Dr. Mahadeo and his colleagues, is part of a growing body of research into safe use of CAR T therapies, Dr. Heslop said.
“It’s an active area of research,” she said. “Most centers will look at all of it and then develop what works best in their own individual center for providing the best care for the patients.”
The newly published guidelines could prove an “important contribution” to managing the risk of CAR T therapies, Phyllis I. Warkentin, MD, chief medical officer for FACT, said in an interview, while stressing that they were not more or less important than other similar efforts. Physicians learning how to use the CAR T therapies may welcome new input, as most of what’s been published has been about adults, she said.
“You don’t have the luxury of a lot of time to be learning on the job, so to speak,” with CAR T therapies, she said. “Many of the toxicities are fairly severe and fairly sudden.”
Dr. Heslop has been on advisory board for Gilead and Novartis. Dr. Warkentin and Dr. Mahadeo each reported having no financial disclosures. Other authors of the guidelines paper reported a patent with applications in the field of gene-modified T cell therapy for cancer, as well as financial ties to Cellectis, NexImmune, Torque Pharma, Kite Pharma (a Gilead company), Poseida Therapeutics, Celgene, Novartis, and Unum Therapeutics.
SOURCE: Mahadeo KM et al. Nat Rev Clin Oncol. 2018 Aug 6. doi: 10.1038/s41571-018-0075-2.
emphasize the need for a flexible approach to detect early signs of serious complications for younger patients treated with this emerging class of medicines.
Researchers at the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, and the Pediatric Acute Lung Injury and Sepsis Investigators Network (PALISI) developed the guidelines, which were published in Nature Reviews Clinical Oncology. The recommendations build on the guidelines for more general use of these medicines from MD Anderson’s CARTOX Program, which Nature Reviews Clinical Oncology published in 2017.
Among the chief concerns with this new class of medicines are cytokine-release syndrome (CRS) and CAR T cell-related encephalopathy syndrome (CRES), according to Kris Michael Mahadeo, MD MPH, of the MD Anderson Cancer Center and his coauthors of the new paper.
Some of the tools used for older patients in screening for complications with CAR T drugs don’t work as well with younger ones, Dr. Mahadeo said in an interview. For instance, at MD Anderson, a handwriting sample is used to monitor patients for CAR T cell-related encephalopathy syndrome, which has symptoms of confusion and delirium. Patients provide a baseline handwriting sample of a single sentence that’s scanned into the medical record, and then they are asked to write this again during their time in the hospital, he said. But this tool may not work for children too young to write well.
The new guidelines suggest using the Cornell Assessment of Pediatric Delirium (CAPD) or to evaluate a child’s mental state, asking questions about eye contact, and level of awareness and mood, Dr. Mahadeo said. An alternative for patients aged 12 years and older with greater cognitive ability is the CARTOX-10 grading system.
“The nurses who spent most of the day with these patients will observe them over their shift and kind of get an idea of what was normal and answer a series of questions” through the CAPD tool, which is already used in ICUs, Dr. Mahadeo said. “It takes into consideration both the nurses’ perception and the parents, or whoever is at the bedside with the child. So that if they have a concern, it gives them a point that actually escalates things upward.”
The newly published recommendations also remind physicians and others caring for young patients to pay attention to these reports.
“Parent and/or caregiver concerns should be addressed because early signs or symptoms of CRS can be subtle and best recognized by those who know the child best,” Dr. Mahadeo and his colleagues wrote in a summary of key recommendations in the paper.
The recommendations also noted a need for close monitoring for complications such as hypotension, hypocalcemia, and catheter-related pain in young patients who require a leukapheresis catheter for cell collection. Infant and younger children “might not verbalize these symptoms,” according to the researchers.
Other recommendations include:
- Obtaining the child’s assent when appropriate, with psychological services often aiding in this goal. Dr. Mahadeo and his colleagues recommend considering “age-appropriate advance directives.”
- Maintaining high vigilance for sinus tachycardia as an early sign of CRS, using age-specific normal range or baseline values.
- Giving pediatric dosing of tocilizumab, with patients weighing less than 30 kg receiving 12 mg/kg, and those weighing 30 kg or greater receiving 8 mg/kg.
- Considering participation with a prospective collaboration with intensive-care registries that could allow accurate data entry of cell-therapy variables into the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research registry by cell-therapy programs.
The Food and Drug Administration approved the first two CAR T-cell therapies in the United States in 2017: Novartis’ tisagenlecleucel (Kymriah) for children and young adults with B-cell precursor acute lymphoblastic leukemia and later for adults with large B-cell lymphoma; and axicabtagene ciloleucel (Yescarta), sold by Gilead, for adults with large B-cell lymphoma. The therapies involve reengineering a patient’s T cells such that they recognize the threat of cancer, and then introducing them back into the body. The European Medicines Agency’s Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use in June recommended granting marketing authorization to these drugs.
In the new pediatric guidelines, Dr. Mahadeo and his colleagues noted the use of CAR T-cell therapies for treatment of solid tumors and other malignancies in children already “is being explored.” “Moreover, consideration of earlier or upfront use of CAR T-cell therapy might spare patients the acute and long-term toxicities associated with traditional chemotherapy and/or radiation regimens,” they wrote.
There’s been great interest in learning how to most safely use the CAR T cell therapies, said Helen Heslop, MD, of Baylor College of Medicine.
She pointed to a 2014 publication in the journal Blood from Daniel W. Lee and his colleagues as an earlier example of this research. By now, cancer centers will have worked out their own procedures for pediatric use of CAR T therapies, hewing to standards set by the Foundation for the Accreditation of Cellular Therapy (FACT), Dr. Heslop said.
Dr. Heslop also stressed the role of the FDA in requiring risk evaluation and management strategy programs for these drugs. All of this, including the new guidelines from Dr. Mahadeo and his colleagues, is part of a growing body of research into safe use of CAR T therapies, Dr. Heslop said.
“It’s an active area of research,” she said. “Most centers will look at all of it and then develop what works best in their own individual center for providing the best care for the patients.”
The newly published guidelines could prove an “important contribution” to managing the risk of CAR T therapies, Phyllis I. Warkentin, MD, chief medical officer for FACT, said in an interview, while stressing that they were not more or less important than other similar efforts. Physicians learning how to use the CAR T therapies may welcome new input, as most of what’s been published has been about adults, she said.
“You don’t have the luxury of a lot of time to be learning on the job, so to speak,” with CAR T therapies, she said. “Many of the toxicities are fairly severe and fairly sudden.”
Dr. Heslop has been on advisory board for Gilead and Novartis. Dr. Warkentin and Dr. Mahadeo each reported having no financial disclosures. Other authors of the guidelines paper reported a patent with applications in the field of gene-modified T cell therapy for cancer, as well as financial ties to Cellectis, NexImmune, Torque Pharma, Kite Pharma (a Gilead company), Poseida Therapeutics, Celgene, Novartis, and Unum Therapeutics.
SOURCE: Mahadeo KM et al. Nat Rev Clin Oncol. 2018 Aug 6. doi: 10.1038/s41571-018-0075-2.
emphasize the need for a flexible approach to detect early signs of serious complications for younger patients treated with this emerging class of medicines.
Researchers at the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, and the Pediatric Acute Lung Injury and Sepsis Investigators Network (PALISI) developed the guidelines, which were published in Nature Reviews Clinical Oncology. The recommendations build on the guidelines for more general use of these medicines from MD Anderson’s CARTOX Program, which Nature Reviews Clinical Oncology published in 2017.
Among the chief concerns with this new class of medicines are cytokine-release syndrome (CRS) and CAR T cell-related encephalopathy syndrome (CRES), according to Kris Michael Mahadeo, MD MPH, of the MD Anderson Cancer Center and his coauthors of the new paper.
Some of the tools used for older patients in screening for complications with CAR T drugs don’t work as well with younger ones, Dr. Mahadeo said in an interview. For instance, at MD Anderson, a handwriting sample is used to monitor patients for CAR T cell-related encephalopathy syndrome, which has symptoms of confusion and delirium. Patients provide a baseline handwriting sample of a single sentence that’s scanned into the medical record, and then they are asked to write this again during their time in the hospital, he said. But this tool may not work for children too young to write well.
The new guidelines suggest using the Cornell Assessment of Pediatric Delirium (CAPD) or to evaluate a child’s mental state, asking questions about eye contact, and level of awareness and mood, Dr. Mahadeo said. An alternative for patients aged 12 years and older with greater cognitive ability is the CARTOX-10 grading system.
“The nurses who spent most of the day with these patients will observe them over their shift and kind of get an idea of what was normal and answer a series of questions” through the CAPD tool, which is already used in ICUs, Dr. Mahadeo said. “It takes into consideration both the nurses’ perception and the parents, or whoever is at the bedside with the child. So that if they have a concern, it gives them a point that actually escalates things upward.”
The newly published recommendations also remind physicians and others caring for young patients to pay attention to these reports.
“Parent and/or caregiver concerns should be addressed because early signs or symptoms of CRS can be subtle and best recognized by those who know the child best,” Dr. Mahadeo and his colleagues wrote in a summary of key recommendations in the paper.
The recommendations also noted a need for close monitoring for complications such as hypotension, hypocalcemia, and catheter-related pain in young patients who require a leukapheresis catheter for cell collection. Infant and younger children “might not verbalize these symptoms,” according to the researchers.
Other recommendations include:
- Obtaining the child’s assent when appropriate, with psychological services often aiding in this goal. Dr. Mahadeo and his colleagues recommend considering “age-appropriate advance directives.”
- Maintaining high vigilance for sinus tachycardia as an early sign of CRS, using age-specific normal range or baseline values.
- Giving pediatric dosing of tocilizumab, with patients weighing less than 30 kg receiving 12 mg/kg, and those weighing 30 kg or greater receiving 8 mg/kg.
- Considering participation with a prospective collaboration with intensive-care registries that could allow accurate data entry of cell-therapy variables into the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research registry by cell-therapy programs.
The Food and Drug Administration approved the first two CAR T-cell therapies in the United States in 2017: Novartis’ tisagenlecleucel (Kymriah) for children and young adults with B-cell precursor acute lymphoblastic leukemia and later for adults with large B-cell lymphoma; and axicabtagene ciloleucel (Yescarta), sold by Gilead, for adults with large B-cell lymphoma. The therapies involve reengineering a patient’s T cells such that they recognize the threat of cancer, and then introducing them back into the body. The European Medicines Agency’s Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use in June recommended granting marketing authorization to these drugs.
In the new pediatric guidelines, Dr. Mahadeo and his colleagues noted the use of CAR T-cell therapies for treatment of solid tumors and other malignancies in children already “is being explored.” “Moreover, consideration of earlier or upfront use of CAR T-cell therapy might spare patients the acute and long-term toxicities associated with traditional chemotherapy and/or radiation regimens,” they wrote.
There’s been great interest in learning how to most safely use the CAR T cell therapies, said Helen Heslop, MD, of Baylor College of Medicine.
She pointed to a 2014 publication in the journal Blood from Daniel W. Lee and his colleagues as an earlier example of this research. By now, cancer centers will have worked out their own procedures for pediatric use of CAR T therapies, hewing to standards set by the Foundation for the Accreditation of Cellular Therapy (FACT), Dr. Heslop said.
Dr. Heslop also stressed the role of the FDA in requiring risk evaluation and management strategy programs for these drugs. All of this, including the new guidelines from Dr. Mahadeo and his colleagues, is part of a growing body of research into safe use of CAR T therapies, Dr. Heslop said.
“It’s an active area of research,” she said. “Most centers will look at all of it and then develop what works best in their own individual center for providing the best care for the patients.”
The newly published guidelines could prove an “important contribution” to managing the risk of CAR T therapies, Phyllis I. Warkentin, MD, chief medical officer for FACT, said in an interview, while stressing that they were not more or less important than other similar efforts. Physicians learning how to use the CAR T therapies may welcome new input, as most of what’s been published has been about adults, she said.
“You don’t have the luxury of a lot of time to be learning on the job, so to speak,” with CAR T therapies, she said. “Many of the toxicities are fairly severe and fairly sudden.”
Dr. Heslop has been on advisory board for Gilead and Novartis. Dr. Warkentin and Dr. Mahadeo each reported having no financial disclosures. Other authors of the guidelines paper reported a patent with applications in the field of gene-modified T cell therapy for cancer, as well as financial ties to Cellectis, NexImmune, Torque Pharma, Kite Pharma (a Gilead company), Poseida Therapeutics, Celgene, Novartis, and Unum Therapeutics.
SOURCE: Mahadeo KM et al. Nat Rev Clin Oncol. 2018 Aug 6. doi: 10.1038/s41571-018-0075-2.
FROM NATURE REVIEWS CLINICAL ONCOLOGY
Key clinical point: Multidisciplinary approach aids in managing CAR T-cell therapy’s severe potential toxicities in children.
Major finding: The guideline calls for pediatric dosing of tocilizumab, with patients weighing less than 30 kg receiving 12 mg/kg, and those weighing 30 kg or greater receiving 8 mg/kg.
Study details: Consensus guidelines on the care of children receiving CAR T-cell therapy from the Pediatric Acute Lung Injury and Sepsis Investigators and the MD Anderson Cancer Center CARTOX program.
Disclosures: Dr. Mahadeo reported having no financial disclosures. Other coauthors reported a patent with applications in the field of gene-modified T cell therapy for cancer, as well as financial ties to Cellectis, NexImmune, Torque Pharma, Kite Pharma (a Gilead company), Poseida Therapeutics, Celgene, Novartis, and Unum Therapeutics.
Source: Mahadeo KM et al. Nat Rev Clin Oncol. 2018 Aug 6. doi: 10.1038/s41571-018-0075-2.
Broad genomic testing of NSCLC in community oncology disappoints
results of a retrospective cohort study reported in JAMA suggest.
Investigators led by Carolyn J. Presley, MD, a thoracic and geriatric medical oncologist at the Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, assessed outcomes among more than 5,500 patients with advanced nonsquamous NSCLC treated mainly in U.S. community practices. Overall, 15% had broad-based genomic testing (next-generation sequencing evaluating more than 30 cancer genes).
Main results showed that, among the patients having broad testing, less than 5% received a targeted treatment based on results that were not attainable with routine testing for common alterations in EGFR and ALK genes. Moreover, survival after broad testing was not better than that after routine testing.
“This study highlights how broad-based genomic sequencing has disseminated beyond traditional research settings ahead of a demonstrated association with better survival,” Dr. Presley and her coinvestigators write. They speculate that community uptake is being driven by the ease and cost of ordering a single comprehensive test, perceived benefit, attempts to conserve tissue, and hopes of improved survival if a targeted treatment is available.
“The lack of an association between broad-based genomic sequencing and survival is likely multifactorial,” the investigators maintain. “First, there were few genetic alterations identified with available targeted treatments. Second, even among those patients for whom targeted treatments were available, the treatments may not yield a substantial survival benefit or patients may not have had access to targeted agents due to financial barriers. Decision support for clinicians once they receive broad-based genomic sequencing results may also be needed.”
Study details
Dr. Presley and colleagues used the Flatiron Health Database to identify patients with advanced NSCLC who received care at 191 oncology practices across the United States during 2011-2016. The 5,688 patients studied had stage IIIB, stage IV, or unresectable nonsquamous NSCLC and received at least one line of treatment.
Overall, 15.4% received broad-based genomic sequencing of their tumor, while the rest received routine testing for EGFR and/or ALK alterations only, according to the results reported.
In the broadly tested group, merely 4.5% were given targeted treatment based on testing results. Another 9.8% received routine EGFR/ALK-targeted treatment, and 85.1% did not receive any targeted treatment.
The 12-month unadjusted mortality rate was 49.2% for patients undergoing broad testing, compared with 35.9% for patients undergoing routine testing.
In an instrumental variable analysis done to account for confounding, the 12-month predicted probability of death was 41.1% after broad testing and 44.4% after routine testing (P = .63).
Findings were similar in a propensity score–matched survival analysis (42.0% vs. 45.1%; hazard ratio, 0.92; P = .40), although there was some suggestion of a benefit of broad testing over routine testing in a Kaplan-Meier analysis among the entire unmatched cohort (HR, 0.69; P less than .001).
“Improved access to research clinical trials in the community setting may improve use of mutational data,” the investigators speculate. “Given the paucity of targeted agents, efforts to increase access to broad-based genomic sequencing should be paired with efforts to facilitate clinical trial enrollment.”
Dr. Presley disclosed that she receives grants from the Yale Lung SPORE Career Development Award, the Robert Wood Johnson/Veterans Affairs Clinical Scholars Program, and The Ohio State University K12 Training Grant for clinical faculty investigators. The study was funded by the Veterans Affairs Robert Wood Johnson Clinical Scholar Program and the Yale Lung SPORE Career Development Award.
SOURCE: Presley CJ et al. JAMA. 2018 Aug 7. doi: 10.1001/jama.2018.9824.
There still may be a role for broad-based genomic testing in patients with NSCLC treated in community oncology practices, according to editorialists Paul A. Bunn Jr., MD, and Dara L. Aisner, MD, PhD. They discussed several study limitations that leave the matter unsettled.
Importantly, the majority of patients in whom this testing identified a potentially treatable alteration did not receive the treatment. “This gap between finding and treating molecular alterations in the community-based clinical setting highlights the reality that obtaining more tumor genomic information must be complemented with clinician education and decision support to understand the importance of matched therapy, and demonstrates a strength of harnessing EMR data to identify potential gaps in practice,” they maintain.
The study did not assess important outcomes other than survival, such as progression-free survival and response rate, Dr. Bunn and Dr. Aisner further note. Previous research has shown that tyrosine kinase inhibitors, for example, improve some of these outcomes without altering survival.
Another limitation was that the study period predated regulatory approval of some relevant targeted therapies and came shortly on the heels of approval of a targeted therapy for ALK rearrangements. And additional therapies are in the pipeline.
“[T]he incremental value of a cutoff of 30 genes analyzed may place the bar too high to appreciate a survival advantage and the tissue, time, and cost savings due to next-generation sequencing were not considered,” the editorialists point out. The optimal number of genes is unclear and likely to change over time.
Finally, the reports oncologists receive from broad-based genomic sequencing may be long and complex, which may deter them from pursuing appropriate therapy, Dr. Bunn and Dr. Aisner propose.
“The study… provides important insights into how broad-based genomic sequencing is used in the community oncology setting, where the majority of patients with advanced NSCLC in the United States receive care,” they conclude. “However, the limitations of this investigation suggest that the authors’ conclusion that broad testing is not warranted should be tempered to ensure that patients receive the right therapy for the right alteration at the right time.”
Paul A. Bunn Jr., MD, is with the University of Colorado Cancer Center and department of medical oncology, University of Colorado, Denver and Dara L. Aisner, MD, PhD, is with the University of Colorado Cancer Center and department of pathology, University of Colorado, Aurora. These comments were excerpted from an accompanying editorial .
There still may be a role for broad-based genomic testing in patients with NSCLC treated in community oncology practices, according to editorialists Paul A. Bunn Jr., MD, and Dara L. Aisner, MD, PhD. They discussed several study limitations that leave the matter unsettled.
Importantly, the majority of patients in whom this testing identified a potentially treatable alteration did not receive the treatment. “This gap between finding and treating molecular alterations in the community-based clinical setting highlights the reality that obtaining more tumor genomic information must be complemented with clinician education and decision support to understand the importance of matched therapy, and demonstrates a strength of harnessing EMR data to identify potential gaps in practice,” they maintain.
The study did not assess important outcomes other than survival, such as progression-free survival and response rate, Dr. Bunn and Dr. Aisner further note. Previous research has shown that tyrosine kinase inhibitors, for example, improve some of these outcomes without altering survival.
Another limitation was that the study period predated regulatory approval of some relevant targeted therapies and came shortly on the heels of approval of a targeted therapy for ALK rearrangements. And additional therapies are in the pipeline.
“[T]he incremental value of a cutoff of 30 genes analyzed may place the bar too high to appreciate a survival advantage and the tissue, time, and cost savings due to next-generation sequencing were not considered,” the editorialists point out. The optimal number of genes is unclear and likely to change over time.
Finally, the reports oncologists receive from broad-based genomic sequencing may be long and complex, which may deter them from pursuing appropriate therapy, Dr. Bunn and Dr. Aisner propose.
“The study… provides important insights into how broad-based genomic sequencing is used in the community oncology setting, where the majority of patients with advanced NSCLC in the United States receive care,” they conclude. “However, the limitations of this investigation suggest that the authors’ conclusion that broad testing is not warranted should be tempered to ensure that patients receive the right therapy for the right alteration at the right time.”
Paul A. Bunn Jr., MD, is with the University of Colorado Cancer Center and department of medical oncology, University of Colorado, Denver and Dara L. Aisner, MD, PhD, is with the University of Colorado Cancer Center and department of pathology, University of Colorado, Aurora. These comments were excerpted from an accompanying editorial .
There still may be a role for broad-based genomic testing in patients with NSCLC treated in community oncology practices, according to editorialists Paul A. Bunn Jr., MD, and Dara L. Aisner, MD, PhD. They discussed several study limitations that leave the matter unsettled.
Importantly, the majority of patients in whom this testing identified a potentially treatable alteration did not receive the treatment. “This gap between finding and treating molecular alterations in the community-based clinical setting highlights the reality that obtaining more tumor genomic information must be complemented with clinician education and decision support to understand the importance of matched therapy, and demonstrates a strength of harnessing EMR data to identify potential gaps in practice,” they maintain.
The study did not assess important outcomes other than survival, such as progression-free survival and response rate, Dr. Bunn and Dr. Aisner further note. Previous research has shown that tyrosine kinase inhibitors, for example, improve some of these outcomes without altering survival.
Another limitation was that the study period predated regulatory approval of some relevant targeted therapies and came shortly on the heels of approval of a targeted therapy for ALK rearrangements. And additional therapies are in the pipeline.
“[T]he incremental value of a cutoff of 30 genes analyzed may place the bar too high to appreciate a survival advantage and the tissue, time, and cost savings due to next-generation sequencing were not considered,” the editorialists point out. The optimal number of genes is unclear and likely to change over time.
Finally, the reports oncologists receive from broad-based genomic sequencing may be long and complex, which may deter them from pursuing appropriate therapy, Dr. Bunn and Dr. Aisner propose.
“The study… provides important insights into how broad-based genomic sequencing is used in the community oncology setting, where the majority of patients with advanced NSCLC in the United States receive care,” they conclude. “However, the limitations of this investigation suggest that the authors’ conclusion that broad testing is not warranted should be tempered to ensure that patients receive the right therapy for the right alteration at the right time.”
Paul A. Bunn Jr., MD, is with the University of Colorado Cancer Center and department of medical oncology, University of Colorado, Denver and Dara L. Aisner, MD, PhD, is with the University of Colorado Cancer Center and department of pathology, University of Colorado, Aurora. These comments were excerpted from an accompanying editorial .
results of a retrospective cohort study reported in JAMA suggest.
Investigators led by Carolyn J. Presley, MD, a thoracic and geriatric medical oncologist at the Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, assessed outcomes among more than 5,500 patients with advanced nonsquamous NSCLC treated mainly in U.S. community practices. Overall, 15% had broad-based genomic testing (next-generation sequencing evaluating more than 30 cancer genes).
Main results showed that, among the patients having broad testing, less than 5% received a targeted treatment based on results that were not attainable with routine testing for common alterations in EGFR and ALK genes. Moreover, survival after broad testing was not better than that after routine testing.
“This study highlights how broad-based genomic sequencing has disseminated beyond traditional research settings ahead of a demonstrated association with better survival,” Dr. Presley and her coinvestigators write. They speculate that community uptake is being driven by the ease and cost of ordering a single comprehensive test, perceived benefit, attempts to conserve tissue, and hopes of improved survival if a targeted treatment is available.
“The lack of an association between broad-based genomic sequencing and survival is likely multifactorial,” the investigators maintain. “First, there were few genetic alterations identified with available targeted treatments. Second, even among those patients for whom targeted treatments were available, the treatments may not yield a substantial survival benefit or patients may not have had access to targeted agents due to financial barriers. Decision support for clinicians once they receive broad-based genomic sequencing results may also be needed.”
Study details
Dr. Presley and colleagues used the Flatiron Health Database to identify patients with advanced NSCLC who received care at 191 oncology practices across the United States during 2011-2016. The 5,688 patients studied had stage IIIB, stage IV, or unresectable nonsquamous NSCLC and received at least one line of treatment.
Overall, 15.4% received broad-based genomic sequencing of their tumor, while the rest received routine testing for EGFR and/or ALK alterations only, according to the results reported.
In the broadly tested group, merely 4.5% were given targeted treatment based on testing results. Another 9.8% received routine EGFR/ALK-targeted treatment, and 85.1% did not receive any targeted treatment.
The 12-month unadjusted mortality rate was 49.2% for patients undergoing broad testing, compared with 35.9% for patients undergoing routine testing.
In an instrumental variable analysis done to account for confounding, the 12-month predicted probability of death was 41.1% after broad testing and 44.4% after routine testing (P = .63).
Findings were similar in a propensity score–matched survival analysis (42.0% vs. 45.1%; hazard ratio, 0.92; P = .40), although there was some suggestion of a benefit of broad testing over routine testing in a Kaplan-Meier analysis among the entire unmatched cohort (HR, 0.69; P less than .001).
“Improved access to research clinical trials in the community setting may improve use of mutational data,” the investigators speculate. “Given the paucity of targeted agents, efforts to increase access to broad-based genomic sequencing should be paired with efforts to facilitate clinical trial enrollment.”
Dr. Presley disclosed that she receives grants from the Yale Lung SPORE Career Development Award, the Robert Wood Johnson/Veterans Affairs Clinical Scholars Program, and The Ohio State University K12 Training Grant for clinical faculty investigators. The study was funded by the Veterans Affairs Robert Wood Johnson Clinical Scholar Program and the Yale Lung SPORE Career Development Award.
SOURCE: Presley CJ et al. JAMA. 2018 Aug 7. doi: 10.1001/jama.2018.9824.
results of a retrospective cohort study reported in JAMA suggest.
Investigators led by Carolyn J. Presley, MD, a thoracic and geriatric medical oncologist at the Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, assessed outcomes among more than 5,500 patients with advanced nonsquamous NSCLC treated mainly in U.S. community practices. Overall, 15% had broad-based genomic testing (next-generation sequencing evaluating more than 30 cancer genes).
Main results showed that, among the patients having broad testing, less than 5% received a targeted treatment based on results that were not attainable with routine testing for common alterations in EGFR and ALK genes. Moreover, survival after broad testing was not better than that after routine testing.
“This study highlights how broad-based genomic sequencing has disseminated beyond traditional research settings ahead of a demonstrated association with better survival,” Dr. Presley and her coinvestigators write. They speculate that community uptake is being driven by the ease and cost of ordering a single comprehensive test, perceived benefit, attempts to conserve tissue, and hopes of improved survival if a targeted treatment is available.
“The lack of an association between broad-based genomic sequencing and survival is likely multifactorial,” the investigators maintain. “First, there were few genetic alterations identified with available targeted treatments. Second, even among those patients for whom targeted treatments were available, the treatments may not yield a substantial survival benefit or patients may not have had access to targeted agents due to financial barriers. Decision support for clinicians once they receive broad-based genomic sequencing results may also be needed.”
Study details
Dr. Presley and colleagues used the Flatiron Health Database to identify patients with advanced NSCLC who received care at 191 oncology practices across the United States during 2011-2016. The 5,688 patients studied had stage IIIB, stage IV, or unresectable nonsquamous NSCLC and received at least one line of treatment.
Overall, 15.4% received broad-based genomic sequencing of their tumor, while the rest received routine testing for EGFR and/or ALK alterations only, according to the results reported.
In the broadly tested group, merely 4.5% were given targeted treatment based on testing results. Another 9.8% received routine EGFR/ALK-targeted treatment, and 85.1% did not receive any targeted treatment.
The 12-month unadjusted mortality rate was 49.2% for patients undergoing broad testing, compared with 35.9% for patients undergoing routine testing.
In an instrumental variable analysis done to account for confounding, the 12-month predicted probability of death was 41.1% after broad testing and 44.4% after routine testing (P = .63).
Findings were similar in a propensity score–matched survival analysis (42.0% vs. 45.1%; hazard ratio, 0.92; P = .40), although there was some suggestion of a benefit of broad testing over routine testing in a Kaplan-Meier analysis among the entire unmatched cohort (HR, 0.69; P less than .001).
“Improved access to research clinical trials in the community setting may improve use of mutational data,” the investigators speculate. “Given the paucity of targeted agents, efforts to increase access to broad-based genomic sequencing should be paired with efforts to facilitate clinical trial enrollment.”
Dr. Presley disclosed that she receives grants from the Yale Lung SPORE Career Development Award, the Robert Wood Johnson/Veterans Affairs Clinical Scholars Program, and The Ohio State University K12 Training Grant for clinical faculty investigators. The study was funded by the Veterans Affairs Robert Wood Johnson Clinical Scholar Program and the Yale Lung SPORE Career Development Award.
SOURCE: Presley CJ et al. JAMA. 2018 Aug 7. doi: 10.1001/jama.2018.9824.
FROM JAMA
Key clinical point: In community oncology, broad-based genomic sequencing of NSCLC does not improve survival when compared with routine testing.
Major finding: The 12-month mortality rate was 49.2% for patients undergoing broad-based genomic sequencing and 35.9% for patients undergoing routine testing solely for EGFR and/or ALK alterations.
Study details: A retrospective cohort study of 5,688 patients with advanced nonsquamous NSCLC treated in 191 U.S. community practices.
Disclosures: Dr. Presley disclosed that she receives grants from the Yale Lung SPORE Career Development Award, the Robert Wood Johnson/Veterans Affairs Clinical Scholars Program, and The Ohio State University K12 Training Grant for clinical faculty investigators. The study was funded by the Veterans Affairs Robert Wood Johnson Clinical Scholar Program and the Yale Lung SPORE Career Development Award.
Source: Presley CJ et al. JAMA. 2018 Aug 7. doi: 10.1001/jama.2018.9824.
New chronic lymphocytic leukemia guidelines from the UK
Fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, and rituximab are recommended as initial therapy for patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia who do not have TP53 disruption, according to new guidelines from the British Society for Haematology.
The guidelines update the 2012 recommendations on chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) to include “significant” developments in treatment. They were published in the British Journal of Haematology.
Anna H. Schuh, MD, of the department of oncology at the University of Oxford (England), and her coauthors noted that, while these guidelines apply to treatments available outside clinical trials, wherever possible patients with CLL should be treated within the clinical trial setting.
While recommending fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, and rituximab as first-line therapy, the guideline authors acknowledged that the combination of bendamustine and rituximab is an acceptable alternative for patients who could not take the triple therapy because of comorbidities such as advanced age, renal impairment, or issues with marrow capacity.
Similarly, less-fit patients could also be considered for chlorambucil-obinutuzumab or chlorambucil-ofatumumab combinations.
All patients diagnosed with CLL should be tested for TP53 deletions and mutations before each line of therapy, the guideline committee recommended. TP53 disruption makes chemoimmunotherapy ineffective because of either a deletion of chromosome 17p or a mutation in the TP53 gene. However, there is compelling evidence for the efficacy of ibrutinib in these patients, or idelalisib and rituximab for those with cardiac disease or receiving vitamin K antagonists.
With respect to maintenance therapy, the guidelines noted that this was not routinely recommended in CLL as “it is unclear to what extent the progression-free survival benefit is offset by long-term toxicity.”
Patients who are refractory to chemoimmunotherapy, who have relapsed, or who cannot be retreated with chemoimmunotherapy should be treated with idelalisib with rituximab or ibrutinib monotherapy, the guidelines suggested.
“Deciding whether ibrutinib or idelalisib with rituximab is most appropriate for an individual patient depends on a range of factors, including toxicity profile and convenience of delivery,” the authors wrote. However, they noted that the value of adding bendamustine to either option was unclear as research had not shown significant, associated gains in median progression-free survival.
Allogeneic stem cell transplantation should be considered as a treatment option for patients who have either failed chemotherapy, have a TP53 disruption and have not responded to B-cell receptor signaling pathway inhibitors such as ibrutinib, or have a Richter transformation.
The guidelines also addressed the issue of autoimmune cytopenias, which occur in 5%-10% of patients with CLL and can actually precede the diagnosis of CLL in about 9% of cases.
In patients where autoimmune cytopenia is the dominant clinical feature, they should be treated with corticosteroids, intravenous immunoglobulin, or rituximab. However, for patients where the cytopenia is triggered by CLL therapy, the guidelines recommended halting treatment and beginning immunosuppression.
The guideline development was supported by the British Society for Haematology. The UK CLL Forum is a registered charity that receives funding from a number of pharmaceutical companies.
SOURCE: Schuh AH et al. Br J Haematol. 2018 Jul 15. doi: 10.1111/bjh.15460.
Fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, and rituximab are recommended as initial therapy for patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia who do not have TP53 disruption, according to new guidelines from the British Society for Haematology.
The guidelines update the 2012 recommendations on chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) to include “significant” developments in treatment. They were published in the British Journal of Haematology.
Anna H. Schuh, MD, of the department of oncology at the University of Oxford (England), and her coauthors noted that, while these guidelines apply to treatments available outside clinical trials, wherever possible patients with CLL should be treated within the clinical trial setting.
While recommending fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, and rituximab as first-line therapy, the guideline authors acknowledged that the combination of bendamustine and rituximab is an acceptable alternative for patients who could not take the triple therapy because of comorbidities such as advanced age, renal impairment, or issues with marrow capacity.
Similarly, less-fit patients could also be considered for chlorambucil-obinutuzumab or chlorambucil-ofatumumab combinations.
All patients diagnosed with CLL should be tested for TP53 deletions and mutations before each line of therapy, the guideline committee recommended. TP53 disruption makes chemoimmunotherapy ineffective because of either a deletion of chromosome 17p or a mutation in the TP53 gene. However, there is compelling evidence for the efficacy of ibrutinib in these patients, or idelalisib and rituximab for those with cardiac disease or receiving vitamin K antagonists.
With respect to maintenance therapy, the guidelines noted that this was not routinely recommended in CLL as “it is unclear to what extent the progression-free survival benefit is offset by long-term toxicity.”
Patients who are refractory to chemoimmunotherapy, who have relapsed, or who cannot be retreated with chemoimmunotherapy should be treated with idelalisib with rituximab or ibrutinib monotherapy, the guidelines suggested.
“Deciding whether ibrutinib or idelalisib with rituximab is most appropriate for an individual patient depends on a range of factors, including toxicity profile and convenience of delivery,” the authors wrote. However, they noted that the value of adding bendamustine to either option was unclear as research had not shown significant, associated gains in median progression-free survival.
Allogeneic stem cell transplantation should be considered as a treatment option for patients who have either failed chemotherapy, have a TP53 disruption and have not responded to B-cell receptor signaling pathway inhibitors such as ibrutinib, or have a Richter transformation.
The guidelines also addressed the issue of autoimmune cytopenias, which occur in 5%-10% of patients with CLL and can actually precede the diagnosis of CLL in about 9% of cases.
In patients where autoimmune cytopenia is the dominant clinical feature, they should be treated with corticosteroids, intravenous immunoglobulin, or rituximab. However, for patients where the cytopenia is triggered by CLL therapy, the guidelines recommended halting treatment and beginning immunosuppression.
The guideline development was supported by the British Society for Haematology. The UK CLL Forum is a registered charity that receives funding from a number of pharmaceutical companies.
SOURCE: Schuh AH et al. Br J Haematol. 2018 Jul 15. doi: 10.1111/bjh.15460.
Fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, and rituximab are recommended as initial therapy for patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia who do not have TP53 disruption, according to new guidelines from the British Society for Haematology.
The guidelines update the 2012 recommendations on chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) to include “significant” developments in treatment. They were published in the British Journal of Haematology.
Anna H. Schuh, MD, of the department of oncology at the University of Oxford (England), and her coauthors noted that, while these guidelines apply to treatments available outside clinical trials, wherever possible patients with CLL should be treated within the clinical trial setting.
While recommending fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, and rituximab as first-line therapy, the guideline authors acknowledged that the combination of bendamustine and rituximab is an acceptable alternative for patients who could not take the triple therapy because of comorbidities such as advanced age, renal impairment, or issues with marrow capacity.
Similarly, less-fit patients could also be considered for chlorambucil-obinutuzumab or chlorambucil-ofatumumab combinations.
All patients diagnosed with CLL should be tested for TP53 deletions and mutations before each line of therapy, the guideline committee recommended. TP53 disruption makes chemoimmunotherapy ineffective because of either a deletion of chromosome 17p or a mutation in the TP53 gene. However, there is compelling evidence for the efficacy of ibrutinib in these patients, or idelalisib and rituximab for those with cardiac disease or receiving vitamin K antagonists.
With respect to maintenance therapy, the guidelines noted that this was not routinely recommended in CLL as “it is unclear to what extent the progression-free survival benefit is offset by long-term toxicity.”
Patients who are refractory to chemoimmunotherapy, who have relapsed, or who cannot be retreated with chemoimmunotherapy should be treated with idelalisib with rituximab or ibrutinib monotherapy, the guidelines suggested.
“Deciding whether ibrutinib or idelalisib with rituximab is most appropriate for an individual patient depends on a range of factors, including toxicity profile and convenience of delivery,” the authors wrote. However, they noted that the value of adding bendamustine to either option was unclear as research had not shown significant, associated gains in median progression-free survival.
Allogeneic stem cell transplantation should be considered as a treatment option for patients who have either failed chemotherapy, have a TP53 disruption and have not responded to B-cell receptor signaling pathway inhibitors such as ibrutinib, or have a Richter transformation.
The guidelines also addressed the issue of autoimmune cytopenias, which occur in 5%-10% of patients with CLL and can actually precede the diagnosis of CLL in about 9% of cases.
In patients where autoimmune cytopenia is the dominant clinical feature, they should be treated with corticosteroids, intravenous immunoglobulin, or rituximab. However, for patients where the cytopenia is triggered by CLL therapy, the guidelines recommended halting treatment and beginning immunosuppression.
The guideline development was supported by the British Society for Haematology. The UK CLL Forum is a registered charity that receives funding from a number of pharmaceutical companies.
SOURCE: Schuh AH et al. Br J Haematol. 2018 Jul 15. doi: 10.1111/bjh.15460.
FROM THE BRITISH JOURNAL OF HAEMATOLOGY
Key clinical point:
Major finding: All patients diagnosed with CLL should be tested for TP53 disruption.
Study details: A guideline developed by the British Society for Haematology offering recommendations for CLL treatment outside clinical trials.
Disclosures: The guideline development was supported by the British Society for Haematology. The UK CLL Forum is a registered charity that receives funding from a number of pharmaceutical companies.
Source: Schuh AH et al. Br J Haematol. 2018 Jul 15. doi: 10.1111/bjh.15460.
Open Clinical Trials for Patients With Renal Cell Carcinoma (FULL)
Providing access to clinical trials for veteran and active-duty military patients can be a challenge, but a significant number of trials are now recruiting from those populations. Many trials explicitly recruit patients from the VA, the military, and IHS. The VA Office of Research and Development alone sponsors more than 430 research initiatives, and many more are sponsored by Walter Reed National Medical Center and other major defense and VA facilities. The clinical trials listed below are all open as of July 24, 2017; have at least 1 VA, DoD, or IHS location recruiting patients; and are focused on treatment for kidney cancer/renal cell carninoma. For additional information and full inclusion/exclusion criteria, please consult clinicaltrials.gov.
NCI-MATCH: Targeted Therapy Directed by Genetic Testing in Treating Patients With Advanced Refractory Solid Tumors, Lymphomas, or Multiple Myeloma
This phase II trial studies how well treatment that is directed by genetic testing works in patients with solid tumors or lymphomas that have progressed following at least 1 line of standard treatment or for which no agreed upon treatment approach exists. Genetic tests look at the unique genetic material (genes) of patients’ tumor cells. Patients with genetic abnormalities (such as mutations, amplifications, or translocations) may benefit more from treatment that targets their tumor’s particular genetic abnormality. Identifying these genetic abnormalities first may help doctors plan better treatment for patients with solid tumors, lymphomas, or multiple myeloma.
ID: NCT02465060
Sponsor: National Cancer Institute
Locations (contact): Naval Medical Center-San Diego, California (Preston S. Gable); VA Connecticut Healthcare System-West Haven Campus (Herta H. Chao); Durham VAMC, North Carolina (Michael J. Kelley); Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, Bethesda, Maryland (Jeremy G. Perkins)
Bevacizumab, Sorafenib Tosylate, and Temsirolimus in Treating Patients With Metastatic Kidney Cancer
This randomized phase II trial studies different combinations of bevacizumab, temsirolimus, and sorafenib tosylate to see how well they work compared with bevacizumab alone in treating patients with kidney cancer that has spread to other places in the body. Monoclonal antibodies, such as bevacizumab, may interfere with the ability of tumor cells to grow and spread. Bevacizumab and sorafenib tosylate may stop the growth of tumor cells by blocking blood flow to the tumor. Temsirolimus and sorafenib tosylate may stop the growth of tumor cells by blocking some of the enzymes needed for cell growth. Giving different combinations of bevacizumab, sorafenib tosylate, and temsirolimus may be more effective than bevacizumab alone in treating metastatic kidney cancer.
ID: NCT00378703
Sponsor: National Cancer Institute
Locations: VA San Diego Medical Center, California; Jesse Brown VAMC, Chicago, Illinois; Richard L. Roudebush VAMC, Indianapolis, Indiana; VA New Jersey Health Care System East Orange; Dayton VAMC, Ohio; Michael E. DeBakey VAMC, Houston, Texas
Everolimus in Treating Patients With Kidney Cancer Who Have Undergone Surgery (S0931)
Everolimus may stop the growth of tumor cells by blocking some of the enzymes needed for cell growth or by blocking blood flow to the tumor. This phase III trial is studying everolimus to see how well it works in treating patients with kidney cancer who have undergone surgery.
ID: NCT01120249
Sponsor: Southwest Oncology Group
Locations: Central Arkansas Veterans Healthcare System, Little Rock; Denver VAMC, Colorado; Hines VA Hospital, Illinois; Richard L. Roudebush VAMC Indianapolis, Indiana; VAMC Baltimore, Maryland; Minneapolis VeteransMedical Center, Minnesota; VA New Jersey Health Care System, East Orange; VA New York Harbor Healthcare System-Brooklyn Campus; Wright-Patterson, Medical Center, Ohio; Michael E.DeBakey VAMC, Houston, Texas; Audie L. Murphy VA Hospital, San Antonio, Texas
Cabozantinib-s-malate or Sunitinib Malate in Treating Patients With Previously Untreated Locally Advanced or Metastatic Kidney Cancer
This randomized phase II trial studies how well cabozantinib-s-malate works compared to sunitinib malate in treating patients with previously untreated kidney cancer that has spread from where it started to nearby tissue or lymph nodes or to other places in the body. Cabozantinib-s-malate and sunitinib malate may stop the growth of tumor cells by blocking some of the enzymes needed for cell growth. It is not yet known whether cabozantinib-s-malate is more effective than sunitinib malate in treating patients with kidney cancer.
ID: NCT01835158
Sponsor: National Cancer Institute
Locations: VA San Diego Medical Center, California; Minneapolis Veterans Medical Center, Minnesota; VAMC Columbia, Missouri; VA Western New York Health Care System, Buffalo
Everolimus With or Without Bevacizumab in Treating Patients With Advanced Kidney Cancer That Progressed After First-Line Therapy
This randomized phase III trial studies giving everolimus together with bevacizumab to see how well it works compared to everolimus alone in treating patients with advanced kidney cancer that progressed after first-line therapy. Everolimus may stop the growth of tumor cells by blocking some of the enzymes needed for cell growth. Monoclonal antibodies, such as bevacizumab, can interfere with tumor growth by blocking the ability of tumor cells to grow and spread. Everolimus and bevacizumab may also stop the growth of kidney cancer by blocking blood flow to the tumor. It is not yet known whether giving everolimus together with bevacizumab is better than everolimus alone in treating patients with advanced kidney cancer that has progressed after first-line therapy.
Sponsor: National Cancer Institute
ID: NCT01198158
Locations: Jesse Brown VAMC, Chicago, Illinois; Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, Bethesda, Maryland; VA Western New York Health Care System, Buffalo
Tivantinib With or Without Erlotinib Hydrochloride in Treating Patients With Metastatic or Locally Advanced Kidney Cancer That Cannot Be Removed by Surgery
This randomized phase II trial studies how well tivantinib with or without erlotinib hydrochloride works in treating patients with metastatic or locally advanced kidney cancer that cannot be removed by surgery. Tivantinib and erlotinib hydrochloride may stop the growth of tumor cells by blocking some of the enzymes needed for cell growth.
Sponsor: National Cancer Institute (NCI)
ID: NCT01688973
Locations: Hines VA Hospital, Illinois; VA New Jersey Health Care System, East Orange; Audie L. Murphy VA Hospital, San Antonio, Texas
Bioequivalence & Food Effect Study in Patients With Solid Tumor or Hematologic Malignancies
This study will enroll approximately 60 subjects in stage I and 60 subjects in stage II with hematologic or solid tumor malignancies, excluding gastrointestinal tumors and tumors that have originated or metastasized to the liver for which no standard treatment exists or have progressed or recurred following prior therapy. Subjects must not be eligible for therapy of higher curative potential where an alternative treatment has been shown to prolong survival in an analogous population. Approximately 23 sites in the U.S. and 2 in Canada will participate in this study.
Sponsor: Celgene
ID: NCT02223052
Location: VAMC Kansas City, Missouri
Gemcitabine Hydrochloride and Cisplatin With or Without Bevacizumab in Treating Patients With Advanced Urinary Tract Cancer
This randomized phase III trial studies gemcitabine hydrochloride, cisplatin, and bevacizumab to see how well they work compared with gemcitabine hydrochloride and cisplatin in treating patients with urinary tract cancer that has spread to other places in the body. Drugs used in chemotherapy, such as gemcitabine hydrochloride and cisplatin, work in different ways to stop the growth of tumor cells, either by killing the cells, by stopping them from dividing, or by stopping them from spreading. Monoclonal antibodies, such as bevacizumab, may interfere with the ability of tumor cells to grow and spread. It is not yet known whether gemcitabine hydrochloride and cisplatin are more effective when given with or without bevacizumab in treating patients with urinary tract cancer.
Sponsor: National Cancer Institute
ID: NCT00942331
Locations: Central Arkansas Veterans Healthcare System, Little Rock; Denver VAMC, Colorado; Baltimore VAMC, Maryland; Columbia VA, Missouri; VA New Jersey Health Care System, East Orange; VA New York Harbor Healthcare System-Brooklyn Campus; VA Western New York Health Care System, Buffalo; Dayton VAMC, Ohio
Eribulin Mesylate in Treating Patients With Locally Advanced or Metastatic Cancer of the Urothelium and Kidney Dysfunction
This phase I/II trial studies the side effects and best dose of eribulin mesylate and to see how well it works in treating patients with cancer of the urothelium that has spread to nearby tissue or to other places in the body and kidney dysfunction. Drugs used in chemotherapy, such as eribulin mesylate, work in different ways to stop the growth of tumor cells, either by killing the cells, by stopping them from dividing, or by stopping them from spreading. Chemotherapy drugs may have different effects in patients who have changes in their kidney function.
Sponsor: National Cancer Institute
ID: NCT00365157
Location: VA Hospital-Martinez, California
Click here to read the digital edition.
Providing access to clinical trials for veteran and active-duty military patients can be a challenge, but a significant number of trials are now recruiting from those populations. Many trials explicitly recruit patients from the VA, the military, and IHS. The VA Office of Research and Development alone sponsors more than 430 research initiatives, and many more are sponsored by Walter Reed National Medical Center and other major defense and VA facilities. The clinical trials listed below are all open as of July 24, 2017; have at least 1 VA, DoD, or IHS location recruiting patients; and are focused on treatment for kidney cancer/renal cell carninoma. For additional information and full inclusion/exclusion criteria, please consult clinicaltrials.gov.
NCI-MATCH: Targeted Therapy Directed by Genetic Testing in Treating Patients With Advanced Refractory Solid Tumors, Lymphomas, or Multiple Myeloma
This phase II trial studies how well treatment that is directed by genetic testing works in patients with solid tumors or lymphomas that have progressed following at least 1 line of standard treatment or for which no agreed upon treatment approach exists. Genetic tests look at the unique genetic material (genes) of patients’ tumor cells. Patients with genetic abnormalities (such as mutations, amplifications, or translocations) may benefit more from treatment that targets their tumor’s particular genetic abnormality. Identifying these genetic abnormalities first may help doctors plan better treatment for patients with solid tumors, lymphomas, or multiple myeloma.
ID: NCT02465060
Sponsor: National Cancer Institute
Locations (contact): Naval Medical Center-San Diego, California (Preston S. Gable); VA Connecticut Healthcare System-West Haven Campus (Herta H. Chao); Durham VAMC, North Carolina (Michael J. Kelley); Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, Bethesda, Maryland (Jeremy G. Perkins)
Bevacizumab, Sorafenib Tosylate, and Temsirolimus in Treating Patients With Metastatic Kidney Cancer
This randomized phase II trial studies different combinations of bevacizumab, temsirolimus, and sorafenib tosylate to see how well they work compared with bevacizumab alone in treating patients with kidney cancer that has spread to other places in the body. Monoclonal antibodies, such as bevacizumab, may interfere with the ability of tumor cells to grow and spread. Bevacizumab and sorafenib tosylate may stop the growth of tumor cells by blocking blood flow to the tumor. Temsirolimus and sorafenib tosylate may stop the growth of tumor cells by blocking some of the enzymes needed for cell growth. Giving different combinations of bevacizumab, sorafenib tosylate, and temsirolimus may be more effective than bevacizumab alone in treating metastatic kidney cancer.
ID: NCT00378703
Sponsor: National Cancer Institute
Locations: VA San Diego Medical Center, California; Jesse Brown VAMC, Chicago, Illinois; Richard L. Roudebush VAMC, Indianapolis, Indiana; VA New Jersey Health Care System East Orange; Dayton VAMC, Ohio; Michael E. DeBakey VAMC, Houston, Texas
Everolimus in Treating Patients With Kidney Cancer Who Have Undergone Surgery (S0931)
Everolimus may stop the growth of tumor cells by blocking some of the enzymes needed for cell growth or by blocking blood flow to the tumor. This phase III trial is studying everolimus to see how well it works in treating patients with kidney cancer who have undergone surgery.
ID: NCT01120249
Sponsor: Southwest Oncology Group
Locations: Central Arkansas Veterans Healthcare System, Little Rock; Denver VAMC, Colorado; Hines VA Hospital, Illinois; Richard L. Roudebush VAMC Indianapolis, Indiana; VAMC Baltimore, Maryland; Minneapolis VeteransMedical Center, Minnesota; VA New Jersey Health Care System, East Orange; VA New York Harbor Healthcare System-Brooklyn Campus; Wright-Patterson, Medical Center, Ohio; Michael E.DeBakey VAMC, Houston, Texas; Audie L. Murphy VA Hospital, San Antonio, Texas
Cabozantinib-s-malate or Sunitinib Malate in Treating Patients With Previously Untreated Locally Advanced or Metastatic Kidney Cancer
This randomized phase II trial studies how well cabozantinib-s-malate works compared to sunitinib malate in treating patients with previously untreated kidney cancer that has spread from where it started to nearby tissue or lymph nodes or to other places in the body. Cabozantinib-s-malate and sunitinib malate may stop the growth of tumor cells by blocking some of the enzymes needed for cell growth. It is not yet known whether cabozantinib-s-malate is more effective than sunitinib malate in treating patients with kidney cancer.
ID: NCT01835158
Sponsor: National Cancer Institute
Locations: VA San Diego Medical Center, California; Minneapolis Veterans Medical Center, Minnesota; VAMC Columbia, Missouri; VA Western New York Health Care System, Buffalo
Everolimus With or Without Bevacizumab in Treating Patients With Advanced Kidney Cancer That Progressed After First-Line Therapy
This randomized phase III trial studies giving everolimus together with bevacizumab to see how well it works compared to everolimus alone in treating patients with advanced kidney cancer that progressed after first-line therapy. Everolimus may stop the growth of tumor cells by blocking some of the enzymes needed for cell growth. Monoclonal antibodies, such as bevacizumab, can interfere with tumor growth by blocking the ability of tumor cells to grow and spread. Everolimus and bevacizumab may also stop the growth of kidney cancer by blocking blood flow to the tumor. It is not yet known whether giving everolimus together with bevacizumab is better than everolimus alone in treating patients with advanced kidney cancer that has progressed after first-line therapy.
Sponsor: National Cancer Institute
ID: NCT01198158
Locations: Jesse Brown VAMC, Chicago, Illinois; Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, Bethesda, Maryland; VA Western New York Health Care System, Buffalo
Tivantinib With or Without Erlotinib Hydrochloride in Treating Patients With Metastatic or Locally Advanced Kidney Cancer That Cannot Be Removed by Surgery
This randomized phase II trial studies how well tivantinib with or without erlotinib hydrochloride works in treating patients with metastatic or locally advanced kidney cancer that cannot be removed by surgery. Tivantinib and erlotinib hydrochloride may stop the growth of tumor cells by blocking some of the enzymes needed for cell growth.
Sponsor: National Cancer Institute (NCI)
ID: NCT01688973
Locations: Hines VA Hospital, Illinois; VA New Jersey Health Care System, East Orange; Audie L. Murphy VA Hospital, San Antonio, Texas
Bioequivalence & Food Effect Study in Patients With Solid Tumor or Hematologic Malignancies
This study will enroll approximately 60 subjects in stage I and 60 subjects in stage II with hematologic or solid tumor malignancies, excluding gastrointestinal tumors and tumors that have originated or metastasized to the liver for which no standard treatment exists or have progressed or recurred following prior therapy. Subjects must not be eligible for therapy of higher curative potential where an alternative treatment has been shown to prolong survival in an analogous population. Approximately 23 sites in the U.S. and 2 in Canada will participate in this study.
Sponsor: Celgene
ID: NCT02223052
Location: VAMC Kansas City, Missouri
Gemcitabine Hydrochloride and Cisplatin With or Without Bevacizumab in Treating Patients With Advanced Urinary Tract Cancer
This randomized phase III trial studies gemcitabine hydrochloride, cisplatin, and bevacizumab to see how well they work compared with gemcitabine hydrochloride and cisplatin in treating patients with urinary tract cancer that has spread to other places in the body. Drugs used in chemotherapy, such as gemcitabine hydrochloride and cisplatin, work in different ways to stop the growth of tumor cells, either by killing the cells, by stopping them from dividing, or by stopping them from spreading. Monoclonal antibodies, such as bevacizumab, may interfere with the ability of tumor cells to grow and spread. It is not yet known whether gemcitabine hydrochloride and cisplatin are more effective when given with or without bevacizumab in treating patients with urinary tract cancer.
Sponsor: National Cancer Institute
ID: NCT00942331
Locations: Central Arkansas Veterans Healthcare System, Little Rock; Denver VAMC, Colorado; Baltimore VAMC, Maryland; Columbia VA, Missouri; VA New Jersey Health Care System, East Orange; VA New York Harbor Healthcare System-Brooklyn Campus; VA Western New York Health Care System, Buffalo; Dayton VAMC, Ohio
Eribulin Mesylate in Treating Patients With Locally Advanced or Metastatic Cancer of the Urothelium and Kidney Dysfunction
This phase I/II trial studies the side effects and best dose of eribulin mesylate and to see how well it works in treating patients with cancer of the urothelium that has spread to nearby tissue or to other places in the body and kidney dysfunction. Drugs used in chemotherapy, such as eribulin mesylate, work in different ways to stop the growth of tumor cells, either by killing the cells, by stopping them from dividing, or by stopping them from spreading. Chemotherapy drugs may have different effects in patients who have changes in their kidney function.
Sponsor: National Cancer Institute
ID: NCT00365157
Location: VA Hospital-Martinez, California
Click here to read the digital edition.
Providing access to clinical trials for veteran and active-duty military patients can be a challenge, but a significant number of trials are now recruiting from those populations. Many trials explicitly recruit patients from the VA, the military, and IHS. The VA Office of Research and Development alone sponsors more than 430 research initiatives, and many more are sponsored by Walter Reed National Medical Center and other major defense and VA facilities. The clinical trials listed below are all open as of July 24, 2017; have at least 1 VA, DoD, or IHS location recruiting patients; and are focused on treatment for kidney cancer/renal cell carninoma. For additional information and full inclusion/exclusion criteria, please consult clinicaltrials.gov.
NCI-MATCH: Targeted Therapy Directed by Genetic Testing in Treating Patients With Advanced Refractory Solid Tumors, Lymphomas, or Multiple Myeloma
This phase II trial studies how well treatment that is directed by genetic testing works in patients with solid tumors or lymphomas that have progressed following at least 1 line of standard treatment or for which no agreed upon treatment approach exists. Genetic tests look at the unique genetic material (genes) of patients’ tumor cells. Patients with genetic abnormalities (such as mutations, amplifications, or translocations) may benefit more from treatment that targets their tumor’s particular genetic abnormality. Identifying these genetic abnormalities first may help doctors plan better treatment for patients with solid tumors, lymphomas, or multiple myeloma.
ID: NCT02465060
Sponsor: National Cancer Institute
Locations (contact): Naval Medical Center-San Diego, California (Preston S. Gable); VA Connecticut Healthcare System-West Haven Campus (Herta H. Chao); Durham VAMC, North Carolina (Michael J. Kelley); Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, Bethesda, Maryland (Jeremy G. Perkins)
Bevacizumab, Sorafenib Tosylate, and Temsirolimus in Treating Patients With Metastatic Kidney Cancer
This randomized phase II trial studies different combinations of bevacizumab, temsirolimus, and sorafenib tosylate to see how well they work compared with bevacizumab alone in treating patients with kidney cancer that has spread to other places in the body. Monoclonal antibodies, such as bevacizumab, may interfere with the ability of tumor cells to grow and spread. Bevacizumab and sorafenib tosylate may stop the growth of tumor cells by blocking blood flow to the tumor. Temsirolimus and sorafenib tosylate may stop the growth of tumor cells by blocking some of the enzymes needed for cell growth. Giving different combinations of bevacizumab, sorafenib tosylate, and temsirolimus may be more effective than bevacizumab alone in treating metastatic kidney cancer.
ID: NCT00378703
Sponsor: National Cancer Institute
Locations: VA San Diego Medical Center, California; Jesse Brown VAMC, Chicago, Illinois; Richard L. Roudebush VAMC, Indianapolis, Indiana; VA New Jersey Health Care System East Orange; Dayton VAMC, Ohio; Michael E. DeBakey VAMC, Houston, Texas
Everolimus in Treating Patients With Kidney Cancer Who Have Undergone Surgery (S0931)
Everolimus may stop the growth of tumor cells by blocking some of the enzymes needed for cell growth or by blocking blood flow to the tumor. This phase III trial is studying everolimus to see how well it works in treating patients with kidney cancer who have undergone surgery.
ID: NCT01120249
Sponsor: Southwest Oncology Group
Locations: Central Arkansas Veterans Healthcare System, Little Rock; Denver VAMC, Colorado; Hines VA Hospital, Illinois; Richard L. Roudebush VAMC Indianapolis, Indiana; VAMC Baltimore, Maryland; Minneapolis VeteransMedical Center, Minnesota; VA New Jersey Health Care System, East Orange; VA New York Harbor Healthcare System-Brooklyn Campus; Wright-Patterson, Medical Center, Ohio; Michael E.DeBakey VAMC, Houston, Texas; Audie L. Murphy VA Hospital, San Antonio, Texas
Cabozantinib-s-malate or Sunitinib Malate in Treating Patients With Previously Untreated Locally Advanced or Metastatic Kidney Cancer
This randomized phase II trial studies how well cabozantinib-s-malate works compared to sunitinib malate in treating patients with previously untreated kidney cancer that has spread from where it started to nearby tissue or lymph nodes or to other places in the body. Cabozantinib-s-malate and sunitinib malate may stop the growth of tumor cells by blocking some of the enzymes needed for cell growth. It is not yet known whether cabozantinib-s-malate is more effective than sunitinib malate in treating patients with kidney cancer.
ID: NCT01835158
Sponsor: National Cancer Institute
Locations: VA San Diego Medical Center, California; Minneapolis Veterans Medical Center, Minnesota; VAMC Columbia, Missouri; VA Western New York Health Care System, Buffalo
Everolimus With or Without Bevacizumab in Treating Patients With Advanced Kidney Cancer That Progressed After First-Line Therapy
This randomized phase III trial studies giving everolimus together with bevacizumab to see how well it works compared to everolimus alone in treating patients with advanced kidney cancer that progressed after first-line therapy. Everolimus may stop the growth of tumor cells by blocking some of the enzymes needed for cell growth. Monoclonal antibodies, such as bevacizumab, can interfere with tumor growth by blocking the ability of tumor cells to grow and spread. Everolimus and bevacizumab may also stop the growth of kidney cancer by blocking blood flow to the tumor. It is not yet known whether giving everolimus together with bevacizumab is better than everolimus alone in treating patients with advanced kidney cancer that has progressed after first-line therapy.
Sponsor: National Cancer Institute
ID: NCT01198158
Locations: Jesse Brown VAMC, Chicago, Illinois; Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, Bethesda, Maryland; VA Western New York Health Care System, Buffalo
Tivantinib With or Without Erlotinib Hydrochloride in Treating Patients With Metastatic or Locally Advanced Kidney Cancer That Cannot Be Removed by Surgery
This randomized phase II trial studies how well tivantinib with or without erlotinib hydrochloride works in treating patients with metastatic or locally advanced kidney cancer that cannot be removed by surgery. Tivantinib and erlotinib hydrochloride may stop the growth of tumor cells by blocking some of the enzymes needed for cell growth.
Sponsor: National Cancer Institute (NCI)
ID: NCT01688973
Locations: Hines VA Hospital, Illinois; VA New Jersey Health Care System, East Orange; Audie L. Murphy VA Hospital, San Antonio, Texas
Bioequivalence & Food Effect Study in Patients With Solid Tumor or Hematologic Malignancies
This study will enroll approximately 60 subjects in stage I and 60 subjects in stage II with hematologic or solid tumor malignancies, excluding gastrointestinal tumors and tumors that have originated or metastasized to the liver for which no standard treatment exists or have progressed or recurred following prior therapy. Subjects must not be eligible for therapy of higher curative potential where an alternative treatment has been shown to prolong survival in an analogous population. Approximately 23 sites in the U.S. and 2 in Canada will participate in this study.
Sponsor: Celgene
ID: NCT02223052
Location: VAMC Kansas City, Missouri
Gemcitabine Hydrochloride and Cisplatin With or Without Bevacizumab in Treating Patients With Advanced Urinary Tract Cancer
This randomized phase III trial studies gemcitabine hydrochloride, cisplatin, and bevacizumab to see how well they work compared with gemcitabine hydrochloride and cisplatin in treating patients with urinary tract cancer that has spread to other places in the body. Drugs used in chemotherapy, such as gemcitabine hydrochloride and cisplatin, work in different ways to stop the growth of tumor cells, either by killing the cells, by stopping them from dividing, or by stopping them from spreading. Monoclonal antibodies, such as bevacizumab, may interfere with the ability of tumor cells to grow and spread. It is not yet known whether gemcitabine hydrochloride and cisplatin are more effective when given with or without bevacizumab in treating patients with urinary tract cancer.
Sponsor: National Cancer Institute
ID: NCT00942331
Locations: Central Arkansas Veterans Healthcare System, Little Rock; Denver VAMC, Colorado; Baltimore VAMC, Maryland; Columbia VA, Missouri; VA New Jersey Health Care System, East Orange; VA New York Harbor Healthcare System-Brooklyn Campus; VA Western New York Health Care System, Buffalo; Dayton VAMC, Ohio
Eribulin Mesylate in Treating Patients With Locally Advanced or Metastatic Cancer of the Urothelium and Kidney Dysfunction
This phase I/II trial studies the side effects and best dose of eribulin mesylate and to see how well it works in treating patients with cancer of the urothelium that has spread to nearby tissue or to other places in the body and kidney dysfunction. Drugs used in chemotherapy, such as eribulin mesylate, work in different ways to stop the growth of tumor cells, either by killing the cells, by stopping them from dividing, or by stopping them from spreading. Chemotherapy drugs may have different effects in patients who have changes in their kidney function.
Sponsor: National Cancer Institute
ID: NCT00365157
Location: VA Hospital-Martinez, California
Click here to read the digital edition.
Insurance is a matter of life or death for lymphoma patients
Having health insurance can mean the difference between life and death for patients with follicular lymphoma, suggest results of a study showing that patients with private health insurance had nearly twofold better survival outcomes than patients without insurance or those who were covered by Medicare or Medicaid.
A review of records on more than 43,000 patients with follicular lymphoma (FL) in a national cancer registry showed that, compared with patients under age 65 with private insurance, the hazard ratios (HR) for death among patients in the same age bracket with either no insurance, Medicaid, or Medicare were, respectively, 1.96, 1.83, and 1.96 (P less than .0001 for each comparison).
“Our study finds that insurance status contributes to survival disparities in FL. Future studies on outcomes in FL should include insurance status as an important predictor,” Christopher R. Flowers, MD, of Emory University in Atlanta and his colleagues wrote in Blood.
“Further research on prognosis for FL should examine the impact of public policy, such as the passage of the [Affordable Care Act], on FL outcomes, as well as examine other factors that influence access to care, such as individual-level socioeconomic status, regular primary care visits, access to prescription medications, and care affordability,” they added.
The investigators noted that earlier research found that patients with Medicaid or no insurance were more likely than privately-insured patients to be diagnosed with cancers at advanced stages, and that some patients with aggressive non-Hodgkin lymphomas have been shown to have insurance-related disparities in treatments and outcomes.
To see whether the same could be true for patients with indolent-histology lymphomas such as FL, they extracted data from the National Cancer Database, a nationwide hospital-based cancer registry sponsored jointly by the American College of Surgeons and the American Cancer Society.
They identified a total of 43,648 patients aged 18 years or older who were diagnosed with FL from 2004 through 2014. They looked at both patients 18-64 years and those 65 years and older to account for changes in insurance with Medicare eligibility.
Overall survival among patients younger than age 65 was significantly worse for patients with public insurance (Medicaid or Medicare) or no insurance in Cox proportional hazard models controlling for available data on sociodemographic factors and prognostic indicators.
However, compared with patients aged 65 and older with private insurance, only patients with Medicare as their sole source of insurance had significantly worse overall survival (HR, 1.28; P less than .0001).
Patients who were uninsured or had Medicaid were more likely than others to have lower socioeconomic status, present with advanced-stage disease, have systemic symptoms, and have multiple comorbidities that persisted after controlling for known sociodemographic and prognostic factors.
The investigators found that, among patients under age 65, those with a comorbidity score of 1 had an HR for death of 1.71, compared with patients with no comorbidities, and that patients with a score of 2 or greater had a HR of 3.1 (P less than .0001 for each comparison).
“The findings of the study indicate that improving access to affordable, quality health care may reduce disparities in survival for those currently lacking coverage,” the investigators wrote.
The study was supported by Emory University, the National Institutes of Health, and the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences. Dr. Flowers reported financial relationships with AbbVie, Spectrum, Celgene, and several other companies. The other authors reported having nothing to disclose.
SOURCE: Goldstein JS et al. Blood. 2018 Jul 24. doi: 10.1182/blood-2018-03-839035.
Having health insurance can mean the difference between life and death for patients with follicular lymphoma, suggest results of a study showing that patients with private health insurance had nearly twofold better survival outcomes than patients without insurance or those who were covered by Medicare or Medicaid.
A review of records on more than 43,000 patients with follicular lymphoma (FL) in a national cancer registry showed that, compared with patients under age 65 with private insurance, the hazard ratios (HR) for death among patients in the same age bracket with either no insurance, Medicaid, or Medicare were, respectively, 1.96, 1.83, and 1.96 (P less than .0001 for each comparison).
“Our study finds that insurance status contributes to survival disparities in FL. Future studies on outcomes in FL should include insurance status as an important predictor,” Christopher R. Flowers, MD, of Emory University in Atlanta and his colleagues wrote in Blood.
“Further research on prognosis for FL should examine the impact of public policy, such as the passage of the [Affordable Care Act], on FL outcomes, as well as examine other factors that influence access to care, such as individual-level socioeconomic status, regular primary care visits, access to prescription medications, and care affordability,” they added.
The investigators noted that earlier research found that patients with Medicaid or no insurance were more likely than privately-insured patients to be diagnosed with cancers at advanced stages, and that some patients with aggressive non-Hodgkin lymphomas have been shown to have insurance-related disparities in treatments and outcomes.
To see whether the same could be true for patients with indolent-histology lymphomas such as FL, they extracted data from the National Cancer Database, a nationwide hospital-based cancer registry sponsored jointly by the American College of Surgeons and the American Cancer Society.
They identified a total of 43,648 patients aged 18 years or older who were diagnosed with FL from 2004 through 2014. They looked at both patients 18-64 years and those 65 years and older to account for changes in insurance with Medicare eligibility.
Overall survival among patients younger than age 65 was significantly worse for patients with public insurance (Medicaid or Medicare) or no insurance in Cox proportional hazard models controlling for available data on sociodemographic factors and prognostic indicators.
However, compared with patients aged 65 and older with private insurance, only patients with Medicare as their sole source of insurance had significantly worse overall survival (HR, 1.28; P less than .0001).
Patients who were uninsured or had Medicaid were more likely than others to have lower socioeconomic status, present with advanced-stage disease, have systemic symptoms, and have multiple comorbidities that persisted after controlling for known sociodemographic and prognostic factors.
The investigators found that, among patients under age 65, those with a comorbidity score of 1 had an HR for death of 1.71, compared with patients with no comorbidities, and that patients with a score of 2 or greater had a HR of 3.1 (P less than .0001 for each comparison).
“The findings of the study indicate that improving access to affordable, quality health care may reduce disparities in survival for those currently lacking coverage,” the investigators wrote.
The study was supported by Emory University, the National Institutes of Health, and the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences. Dr. Flowers reported financial relationships with AbbVie, Spectrum, Celgene, and several other companies. The other authors reported having nothing to disclose.
SOURCE: Goldstein JS et al. Blood. 2018 Jul 24. doi: 10.1182/blood-2018-03-839035.
Having health insurance can mean the difference between life and death for patients with follicular lymphoma, suggest results of a study showing that patients with private health insurance had nearly twofold better survival outcomes than patients without insurance or those who were covered by Medicare or Medicaid.
A review of records on more than 43,000 patients with follicular lymphoma (FL) in a national cancer registry showed that, compared with patients under age 65 with private insurance, the hazard ratios (HR) for death among patients in the same age bracket with either no insurance, Medicaid, or Medicare were, respectively, 1.96, 1.83, and 1.96 (P less than .0001 for each comparison).
“Our study finds that insurance status contributes to survival disparities in FL. Future studies on outcomes in FL should include insurance status as an important predictor,” Christopher R. Flowers, MD, of Emory University in Atlanta and his colleagues wrote in Blood.
“Further research on prognosis for FL should examine the impact of public policy, such as the passage of the [Affordable Care Act], on FL outcomes, as well as examine other factors that influence access to care, such as individual-level socioeconomic status, regular primary care visits, access to prescription medications, and care affordability,” they added.
The investigators noted that earlier research found that patients with Medicaid or no insurance were more likely than privately-insured patients to be diagnosed with cancers at advanced stages, and that some patients with aggressive non-Hodgkin lymphomas have been shown to have insurance-related disparities in treatments and outcomes.
To see whether the same could be true for patients with indolent-histology lymphomas such as FL, they extracted data from the National Cancer Database, a nationwide hospital-based cancer registry sponsored jointly by the American College of Surgeons and the American Cancer Society.
They identified a total of 43,648 patients aged 18 years or older who were diagnosed with FL from 2004 through 2014. They looked at both patients 18-64 years and those 65 years and older to account for changes in insurance with Medicare eligibility.
Overall survival among patients younger than age 65 was significantly worse for patients with public insurance (Medicaid or Medicare) or no insurance in Cox proportional hazard models controlling for available data on sociodemographic factors and prognostic indicators.
However, compared with patients aged 65 and older with private insurance, only patients with Medicare as their sole source of insurance had significantly worse overall survival (HR, 1.28; P less than .0001).
Patients who were uninsured or had Medicaid were more likely than others to have lower socioeconomic status, present with advanced-stage disease, have systemic symptoms, and have multiple comorbidities that persisted after controlling for known sociodemographic and prognostic factors.
The investigators found that, among patients under age 65, those with a comorbidity score of 1 had an HR for death of 1.71, compared with patients with no comorbidities, and that patients with a score of 2 or greater had a HR of 3.1 (P less than .0001 for each comparison).
“The findings of the study indicate that improving access to affordable, quality health care may reduce disparities in survival for those currently lacking coverage,” the investigators wrote.
The study was supported by Emory University, the National Institutes of Health, and the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences. Dr. Flowers reported financial relationships with AbbVie, Spectrum, Celgene, and several other companies. The other authors reported having nothing to disclose.
SOURCE: Goldstein JS et al. Blood. 2018 Jul 24. doi: 10.1182/blood-2018-03-839035.
FROM BLOOD
Key clinical point:
Major finding: The risk for death among patients under age 65 with no insurance, Medicaid, or Medicare was nearly twice that of similar patients with private health insurance.
Study details: Review of data on 43,648 patients with follicular lymphoma in the National Cancer Database.
Disclosures: The study was supported by Emory University, the National Institutes of Health, and the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences. Dr. Flowers reported financial relationships with AbbVie, Spectrum, Celgene, and several other companies. The other authors reported having nothing to disclose.
Source: Goldstein JS et al. Blood. 2018 Jul 24. doi: 10.1182/blood-2018-03-839035.
FDA warns against azithromycin in blood or lymph node cancers
The Food and Drug Administration has issued a in patients with blood or lymph node cancers who have received donor stem cell transplants.
This use of azithromycin can lead to increased risk of cancer relapse and death in this population. The FDA is continuing to review data and is expected to issue further recommendations.
Patients with blood or lymph node cancers are at an increased risk of bronchiolitis obliterans syndrome after donor stem cell transplant; although azithromycin is not approved for prevention of this condition, the antibiotic is sometimes prescribed for that purpose.
A French study of 480 patients was undertaken to assess the effectiveness of this prophylaxis but revealed the increased risk of relapse and death and was halted 13 months after completing enrollment. The rate of cancer relapse was 32.9% in the azithromycin group and just 20.8% in the placebo group; the 2-year survival rate was 56.6% in the azithromycin group and 70.1% in the placebo group (JAMA 2017;318[6]:557-66).
Bronchiolitis obliterans syndrome is marked by inflammation and scarring of the airways that leads to severe shortness of breath and dry cough. There are no known effective antibiotic treatments for prophylaxis of the condition, according to the FDA.
FDA officials are advising physicians not to prescribe long-term azithromycin in this population. Patients who have had a stem cell transplant and are already taking the antibiotic, should consult a doctor before discontinuing.
The manufacturer of brand name azithromycin (Zithromax) has issued a Dear Healthcare Provider letter about the safety issue, and more information can be found in the FDA’s safety announcement.
The Food and Drug Administration has issued a in patients with blood or lymph node cancers who have received donor stem cell transplants.
This use of azithromycin can lead to increased risk of cancer relapse and death in this population. The FDA is continuing to review data and is expected to issue further recommendations.
Patients with blood or lymph node cancers are at an increased risk of bronchiolitis obliterans syndrome after donor stem cell transplant; although azithromycin is not approved for prevention of this condition, the antibiotic is sometimes prescribed for that purpose.
A French study of 480 patients was undertaken to assess the effectiveness of this prophylaxis but revealed the increased risk of relapse and death and was halted 13 months after completing enrollment. The rate of cancer relapse was 32.9% in the azithromycin group and just 20.8% in the placebo group; the 2-year survival rate was 56.6% in the azithromycin group and 70.1% in the placebo group (JAMA 2017;318[6]:557-66).
Bronchiolitis obliterans syndrome is marked by inflammation and scarring of the airways that leads to severe shortness of breath and dry cough. There are no known effective antibiotic treatments for prophylaxis of the condition, according to the FDA.
FDA officials are advising physicians not to prescribe long-term azithromycin in this population. Patients who have had a stem cell transplant and are already taking the antibiotic, should consult a doctor before discontinuing.
The manufacturer of brand name azithromycin (Zithromax) has issued a Dear Healthcare Provider letter about the safety issue, and more information can be found in the FDA’s safety announcement.
The Food and Drug Administration has issued a in patients with blood or lymph node cancers who have received donor stem cell transplants.
This use of azithromycin can lead to increased risk of cancer relapse and death in this population. The FDA is continuing to review data and is expected to issue further recommendations.
Patients with blood or lymph node cancers are at an increased risk of bronchiolitis obliterans syndrome after donor stem cell transplant; although azithromycin is not approved for prevention of this condition, the antibiotic is sometimes prescribed for that purpose.
A French study of 480 patients was undertaken to assess the effectiveness of this prophylaxis but revealed the increased risk of relapse and death and was halted 13 months after completing enrollment. The rate of cancer relapse was 32.9% in the azithromycin group and just 20.8% in the placebo group; the 2-year survival rate was 56.6% in the azithromycin group and 70.1% in the placebo group (JAMA 2017;318[6]:557-66).
Bronchiolitis obliterans syndrome is marked by inflammation and scarring of the airways that leads to severe shortness of breath and dry cough. There are no known effective antibiotic treatments for prophylaxis of the condition, according to the FDA.
FDA officials are advising physicians not to prescribe long-term azithromycin in this population. Patients who have had a stem cell transplant and are already taking the antibiotic, should consult a doctor before discontinuing.
The manufacturer of brand name azithromycin (Zithromax) has issued a Dear Healthcare Provider letter about the safety issue, and more information can be found in the FDA’s safety announcement.
Advances in Hematology and Oncology (August 2018)
Click here to access August 2018 Advances In Hematology and Oncology Digital Edition.
Table of Contents
- VHA Practice Guideline Recommendations for Diffuse Gliomas
- Positivity Rates in Head and Neck Cancer in the VA
- Prevalence of Cancer in Thyroid Nodules in a Veteran Population
- Fatal Drug-Resistant Invasive Infection in a 56-Year-Old Immunosuppressed Man
- Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors for Urothelial Cancer: An Update on New Therapies
- Research News: RCC. Adrenal Tumors, Myeloma Therapy, Cancer Clusters, Hodgkin Lymphoma
- Coordination of Prostate Cance Care Between Primary Care and Oncology
- Open Clinical Trials for Patients With Lung Cancers
Click here to access August 2018 Advances In Hematology and Oncology Digital Edition.
Table of Contents
- VHA Practice Guideline Recommendations for Diffuse Gliomas
- Positivity Rates in Head and Neck Cancer in the VA
- Prevalence of Cancer in Thyroid Nodules in a Veteran Population
- Fatal Drug-Resistant Invasive Infection in a 56-Year-Old Immunosuppressed Man
- Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors for Urothelial Cancer: An Update on New Therapies
- Research News: RCC. Adrenal Tumors, Myeloma Therapy, Cancer Clusters, Hodgkin Lymphoma
- Coordination of Prostate Cance Care Between Primary Care and Oncology
- Open Clinical Trials for Patients With Lung Cancers
Click here to access August 2018 Advances In Hematology and Oncology Digital Edition.
Table of Contents
- VHA Practice Guideline Recommendations for Diffuse Gliomas
- Positivity Rates in Head and Neck Cancer in the VA
- Prevalence of Cancer in Thyroid Nodules in a Veteran Population
- Fatal Drug-Resistant Invasive Infection in a 56-Year-Old Immunosuppressed Man
- Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors for Urothelial Cancer: An Update on New Therapies
- Research News: RCC. Adrenal Tumors, Myeloma Therapy, Cancer Clusters, Hodgkin Lymphoma
- Coordination of Prostate Cance Care Between Primary Care and Oncology
- Open Clinical Trials for Patients With Lung Cancers
Do Erythropoiesis-Stimulating Agents Have a Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy? (FULL)
Epoetin alfa and darbepoetin alfa are erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs), approved for the treatment of anemia (low red blood cells [RBCs]) resulting from chronic kidney disease, chemotherapy, and certain treatments for HIV. These ESAs also are used to reduce the number of blood transfusions during and after certain major surgeries. Erythropoiesis-stimulating agents work like the human protein erythropoietin, which stimulates bone marrow to make RBCs. Epoetin alfa (marketed as Procrit and Epogen) and darbepoetin alfa (marketed as Aranesp) are manufactured by Amgen, Inc. (Thousand Oaks, CA).
In 1989 epoetin alfa was approved for the treatment of anemia associated with chronic renal failure, including patients on dialysis and patients not on dialysis, and in 1993 for the treatment of anemia due to the effects of concomitant myelosuppressive chemotherapy. Epoetin alfa also is indicated for anemia due to zidovudine in patients with HIV and reduction of RBC transfusions during certain surgeries.
Darbepoetin alfa was approved in 2001 for the treatment of anemia associated with chronic renal failure, including patients on dialysis and patients not on dialysis, and in 2006 for the treatment of anemia due to the effects of concomitant myelosuppressive chemotherapy.
Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategies
Both epoetin alfa and darbepoetin alfa increase the risk of death, myocardial infarction, stroke, venous thromboembolism, and thrombosis of vascular access and tumor progression or recurrence. Epoetin alfa also can lead to an increase in adverse cardiovascular events, hypertension, seizures, and severe anemia.
In 2008, the FDA determined that Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategies (REMS) were necessary for ESAs (darbopoetin alfa and epoetin alfa), to ensure that the benefits for use as treatment for anemia associated with myelosuppressive chemotherapy outweigh the risk of shortened overall survival (OS) and/or the increased risk of tumor progression or recurrence in patients with cancer. The REMS was approved in 2010.
Under the ESA REMS program, referred to as the ESA APPRISE Oncology Program, health care providers (HCPs) that prescribed and/or dispensed darbopoetin alfa to patients with cancer and hospitals that dispensed darbopoetin alfa to patients with cancer were required to enroll and become certified in the ESA REMS. The ESA REMS also required the completion of a Patient and Healthcare Provider Acknowledgement Form for each patient with cancer before the new ESA treatment course to ensure patients were counseled about the benefits and risks of these products.
In April 2017, the FDA determined that the ESA REMS that was limited to the use of epoetin alfa and darbopoetin alfa to treat patients with anemia due to associated myelosuppressive chemotherapy was no longer necessary; the benefits of ESAs outweighed the risks of shortened OS and/or increased risk of tumor progression or recurrence in patients with cancer. 1 The FDA recognized the burden that some REMS can place on HCPs and patients. The agency has authority to modify or remove the REMS to minimize the burden on the health care delivery system of complying with the strategy.
Data
The FDA discontinued the REMS based on an evaluation of the results of the REMS Assessments submitted by Amgen and additional FDA analyses to understand the impact of the various regulatory and other actions on the use of ESAs. The REMS Assessment showed the following:
- The results from surveyed prescribers demonstrated acceptable knowledge of the product risks of decreased survival and/or the increased risk of tumor progression or recurrence and the need to counsel patients about these risks; and
- The drug utilization data indicated appropriate prescribing of ESAs consistent with the intended use as a treatment alternative to RBC transfusion for anemia associated with myelosuppressive chemotherapy.
The FDA also conducted an evaluation of the impact of multiple actions, including the ESA REMS, on the use of the ESAs using sponsor-submitted data from outpatient oncology practices between 2006 and 2014. During 2004 to 2009, the FDA took multiple regulatory actions, including labeling changes. In 2007, the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) made a National Coverage Determination (NCD) to limit coverage of ESAs for nonrenal disease indications. These actions coincided with the following:
- A decrease in the proportion of patients receiving chemotherapy using ESAs;
- An increase in the proportion of patients receiving chemotherapy who initiate ESAs at a hemoglobin level < 10 g/dL; and
- An increase in the proportion of patients who initiate ESAs at a dosage consistent with product prescribing information.
Full implementation of the ESA REMS in 2011 had minimal impact on trends in these 3 ESA utilization metrics beyond the changes observed after the CMS coverage determination and multiple other FDA regulatory actions.
This information led the FDA to conclude that it was no longer necessary to require the certification of prescribers and hospitals that prescribe and/or dispense ESAs to patients with cancer in order to ensure that the benefits outweigh the risks.
The FDA has released the REMS requirements for the epoetin alfa and darbopoetin alfa ESA products, and the risks can be communicated by the current product prescribing information. The appropriate use of ESAs is supported by the CMS NCD, the American Society of Clinical Oncology, and American Society of Hematology clinical guidelines, which are evidence-based guidelines intended to provide a basis for the standard of care in clinical oncology.
Education
While the REMS is no longer necessary to ensure the benefits outweigh the risks, the serious risks of shortened OS and/or increased risk of tumor progression or recurrence associated with these drugs remain. The boxed warning language remains as follows: ESAs INCREASE THE RISK OF DEATH, MYOCARDIAL INFARCTION, STROKE, VENOUS THROMBOEMBOLISM, THROMBOSIS OF VASCULAR ACCESS AND TUMOR PROGRESSION OR RECURRENCE. Health care providers are encouraged to discuss the risks and benefits of using ESAs with each patient before initiating use.
Click here to read the digital edition.
1. U.S. Food & Drug Administration. Information on erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESA) epoetin alfa (marketed as Procrit, Epogen), darbepoetin alfa (marketed as Aranesp). https://www.fda.gov/Drugs/DrugSafety/ucm109375.htm. Updated April 13, 2017. Accessed July 13, 2017.
Epoetin alfa and darbepoetin alfa are erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs), approved for the treatment of anemia (low red blood cells [RBCs]) resulting from chronic kidney disease, chemotherapy, and certain treatments for HIV. These ESAs also are used to reduce the number of blood transfusions during and after certain major surgeries. Erythropoiesis-stimulating agents work like the human protein erythropoietin, which stimulates bone marrow to make RBCs. Epoetin alfa (marketed as Procrit and Epogen) and darbepoetin alfa (marketed as Aranesp) are manufactured by Amgen, Inc. (Thousand Oaks, CA).
In 1989 epoetin alfa was approved for the treatment of anemia associated with chronic renal failure, including patients on dialysis and patients not on dialysis, and in 1993 for the treatment of anemia due to the effects of concomitant myelosuppressive chemotherapy. Epoetin alfa also is indicated for anemia due to zidovudine in patients with HIV and reduction of RBC transfusions during certain surgeries.
Darbepoetin alfa was approved in 2001 for the treatment of anemia associated with chronic renal failure, including patients on dialysis and patients not on dialysis, and in 2006 for the treatment of anemia due to the effects of concomitant myelosuppressive chemotherapy.
Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategies
Both epoetin alfa and darbepoetin alfa increase the risk of death, myocardial infarction, stroke, venous thromboembolism, and thrombosis of vascular access and tumor progression or recurrence. Epoetin alfa also can lead to an increase in adverse cardiovascular events, hypertension, seizures, and severe anemia.
In 2008, the FDA determined that Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategies (REMS) were necessary for ESAs (darbopoetin alfa and epoetin alfa), to ensure that the benefits for use as treatment for anemia associated with myelosuppressive chemotherapy outweigh the risk of shortened overall survival (OS) and/or the increased risk of tumor progression or recurrence in patients with cancer. The REMS was approved in 2010.
Under the ESA REMS program, referred to as the ESA APPRISE Oncology Program, health care providers (HCPs) that prescribed and/or dispensed darbopoetin alfa to patients with cancer and hospitals that dispensed darbopoetin alfa to patients with cancer were required to enroll and become certified in the ESA REMS. The ESA REMS also required the completion of a Patient and Healthcare Provider Acknowledgement Form for each patient with cancer before the new ESA treatment course to ensure patients were counseled about the benefits and risks of these products.
In April 2017, the FDA determined that the ESA REMS that was limited to the use of epoetin alfa and darbopoetin alfa to treat patients with anemia due to associated myelosuppressive chemotherapy was no longer necessary; the benefits of ESAs outweighed the risks of shortened OS and/or increased risk of tumor progression or recurrence in patients with cancer. 1 The FDA recognized the burden that some REMS can place on HCPs and patients. The agency has authority to modify or remove the REMS to minimize the burden on the health care delivery system of complying with the strategy.
Data
The FDA discontinued the REMS based on an evaluation of the results of the REMS Assessments submitted by Amgen and additional FDA analyses to understand the impact of the various regulatory and other actions on the use of ESAs. The REMS Assessment showed the following:
- The results from surveyed prescribers demonstrated acceptable knowledge of the product risks of decreased survival and/or the increased risk of tumor progression or recurrence and the need to counsel patients about these risks; and
- The drug utilization data indicated appropriate prescribing of ESAs consistent with the intended use as a treatment alternative to RBC transfusion for anemia associated with myelosuppressive chemotherapy.
The FDA also conducted an evaluation of the impact of multiple actions, including the ESA REMS, on the use of the ESAs using sponsor-submitted data from outpatient oncology practices between 2006 and 2014. During 2004 to 2009, the FDA took multiple regulatory actions, including labeling changes. In 2007, the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) made a National Coverage Determination (NCD) to limit coverage of ESAs for nonrenal disease indications. These actions coincided with the following:
- A decrease in the proportion of patients receiving chemotherapy using ESAs;
- An increase in the proportion of patients receiving chemotherapy who initiate ESAs at a hemoglobin level < 10 g/dL; and
- An increase in the proportion of patients who initiate ESAs at a dosage consistent with product prescribing information.
Full implementation of the ESA REMS in 2011 had minimal impact on trends in these 3 ESA utilization metrics beyond the changes observed after the CMS coverage determination and multiple other FDA regulatory actions.
This information led the FDA to conclude that it was no longer necessary to require the certification of prescribers and hospitals that prescribe and/or dispense ESAs to patients with cancer in order to ensure that the benefits outweigh the risks.
The FDA has released the REMS requirements for the epoetin alfa and darbopoetin alfa ESA products, and the risks can be communicated by the current product prescribing information. The appropriate use of ESAs is supported by the CMS NCD, the American Society of Clinical Oncology, and American Society of Hematology clinical guidelines, which are evidence-based guidelines intended to provide a basis for the standard of care in clinical oncology.
Education
While the REMS is no longer necessary to ensure the benefits outweigh the risks, the serious risks of shortened OS and/or increased risk of tumor progression or recurrence associated with these drugs remain. The boxed warning language remains as follows: ESAs INCREASE THE RISK OF DEATH, MYOCARDIAL INFARCTION, STROKE, VENOUS THROMBOEMBOLISM, THROMBOSIS OF VASCULAR ACCESS AND TUMOR PROGRESSION OR RECURRENCE. Health care providers are encouraged to discuss the risks and benefits of using ESAs with each patient before initiating use.
Click here to read the digital edition.
Epoetin alfa and darbepoetin alfa are erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs), approved for the treatment of anemia (low red blood cells [RBCs]) resulting from chronic kidney disease, chemotherapy, and certain treatments for HIV. These ESAs also are used to reduce the number of blood transfusions during and after certain major surgeries. Erythropoiesis-stimulating agents work like the human protein erythropoietin, which stimulates bone marrow to make RBCs. Epoetin alfa (marketed as Procrit and Epogen) and darbepoetin alfa (marketed as Aranesp) are manufactured by Amgen, Inc. (Thousand Oaks, CA).
In 1989 epoetin alfa was approved for the treatment of anemia associated with chronic renal failure, including patients on dialysis and patients not on dialysis, and in 1993 for the treatment of anemia due to the effects of concomitant myelosuppressive chemotherapy. Epoetin alfa also is indicated for anemia due to zidovudine in patients with HIV and reduction of RBC transfusions during certain surgeries.
Darbepoetin alfa was approved in 2001 for the treatment of anemia associated with chronic renal failure, including patients on dialysis and patients not on dialysis, and in 2006 for the treatment of anemia due to the effects of concomitant myelosuppressive chemotherapy.
Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategies
Both epoetin alfa and darbepoetin alfa increase the risk of death, myocardial infarction, stroke, venous thromboembolism, and thrombosis of vascular access and tumor progression or recurrence. Epoetin alfa also can lead to an increase in adverse cardiovascular events, hypertension, seizures, and severe anemia.
In 2008, the FDA determined that Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategies (REMS) were necessary for ESAs (darbopoetin alfa and epoetin alfa), to ensure that the benefits for use as treatment for anemia associated with myelosuppressive chemotherapy outweigh the risk of shortened overall survival (OS) and/or the increased risk of tumor progression or recurrence in patients with cancer. The REMS was approved in 2010.
Under the ESA REMS program, referred to as the ESA APPRISE Oncology Program, health care providers (HCPs) that prescribed and/or dispensed darbopoetin alfa to patients with cancer and hospitals that dispensed darbopoetin alfa to patients with cancer were required to enroll and become certified in the ESA REMS. The ESA REMS also required the completion of a Patient and Healthcare Provider Acknowledgement Form for each patient with cancer before the new ESA treatment course to ensure patients were counseled about the benefits and risks of these products.
In April 2017, the FDA determined that the ESA REMS that was limited to the use of epoetin alfa and darbopoetin alfa to treat patients with anemia due to associated myelosuppressive chemotherapy was no longer necessary; the benefits of ESAs outweighed the risks of shortened OS and/or increased risk of tumor progression or recurrence in patients with cancer. 1 The FDA recognized the burden that some REMS can place on HCPs and patients. The agency has authority to modify or remove the REMS to minimize the burden on the health care delivery system of complying with the strategy.
Data
The FDA discontinued the REMS based on an evaluation of the results of the REMS Assessments submitted by Amgen and additional FDA analyses to understand the impact of the various regulatory and other actions on the use of ESAs. The REMS Assessment showed the following:
- The results from surveyed prescribers demonstrated acceptable knowledge of the product risks of decreased survival and/or the increased risk of tumor progression or recurrence and the need to counsel patients about these risks; and
- The drug utilization data indicated appropriate prescribing of ESAs consistent with the intended use as a treatment alternative to RBC transfusion for anemia associated with myelosuppressive chemotherapy.
The FDA also conducted an evaluation of the impact of multiple actions, including the ESA REMS, on the use of the ESAs using sponsor-submitted data from outpatient oncology practices between 2006 and 2014. During 2004 to 2009, the FDA took multiple regulatory actions, including labeling changes. In 2007, the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) made a National Coverage Determination (NCD) to limit coverage of ESAs for nonrenal disease indications. These actions coincided with the following:
- A decrease in the proportion of patients receiving chemotherapy using ESAs;
- An increase in the proportion of patients receiving chemotherapy who initiate ESAs at a hemoglobin level < 10 g/dL; and
- An increase in the proportion of patients who initiate ESAs at a dosage consistent with product prescribing information.
Full implementation of the ESA REMS in 2011 had minimal impact on trends in these 3 ESA utilization metrics beyond the changes observed after the CMS coverage determination and multiple other FDA regulatory actions.
This information led the FDA to conclude that it was no longer necessary to require the certification of prescribers and hospitals that prescribe and/or dispense ESAs to patients with cancer in order to ensure that the benefits outweigh the risks.
The FDA has released the REMS requirements for the epoetin alfa and darbopoetin alfa ESA products, and the risks can be communicated by the current product prescribing information. The appropriate use of ESAs is supported by the CMS NCD, the American Society of Clinical Oncology, and American Society of Hematology clinical guidelines, which are evidence-based guidelines intended to provide a basis for the standard of care in clinical oncology.
Education
While the REMS is no longer necessary to ensure the benefits outweigh the risks, the serious risks of shortened OS and/or increased risk of tumor progression or recurrence associated with these drugs remain. The boxed warning language remains as follows: ESAs INCREASE THE RISK OF DEATH, MYOCARDIAL INFARCTION, STROKE, VENOUS THROMBOEMBOLISM, THROMBOSIS OF VASCULAR ACCESS AND TUMOR PROGRESSION OR RECURRENCE. Health care providers are encouraged to discuss the risks and benefits of using ESAs with each patient before initiating use.
Click here to read the digital edition.
1. U.S. Food & Drug Administration. Information on erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESA) epoetin alfa (marketed as Procrit, Epogen), darbepoetin alfa (marketed as Aranesp). https://www.fda.gov/Drugs/DrugSafety/ucm109375.htm. Updated April 13, 2017. Accessed July 13, 2017.
1. U.S. Food & Drug Administration. Information on erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESA) epoetin alfa (marketed as Procrit, Epogen), darbepoetin alfa (marketed as Aranesp). https://www.fda.gov/Drugs/DrugSafety/ucm109375.htm. Updated April 13, 2017. Accessed July 13, 2017.
Angular cheilitis induced by iron deficiency anemia
A 20-year-old woman had a 4-month history of painful red erosions around the mouth. She had no dysphagia or fatigue and no history of diarrhea, gluten intolerance, or diabetes mellitus. An antifungal-antibacterial ointment prescribed by her dentist had provided no relief.
- Hemoglobin 8.0 g/dL (reference range for females 12.3–15.3)
- Mean corpuscular volume 62 fL (80–100)
- Serum ferritin 1.3 ng/mL (15–200)
- Reticulocyte count 0.86% (0.5–1.5)
- White blood cell count 9.8 × 109/L (4.5–11.0)
- Platelet count 450 × 109/L (150–400).
Vitamin B12 and folate levels were normal, and tests for antitissue transglutaminase and antinuclear antibodies were negative.
Based on these results, the diagnosis was angular cheilitis from iron deficiency anemia. Treatment with oral ferrous gluconate 300 mg twice daily cleared the cheilitis, and after 4 weeks of this treatment, the hemoglobin level increased to 9.8 g/dL, the serum ferritin increased to 7 ng/mL, and the reticulocyte count increased to 2.6%. She was advised to continue taking oral iron tablets for another 3 months until the hemoglobin level reached 12.0 g/dL.
During 2 years of follow-up, she had no recurrence of angular cheilitis, and her hemoglobin and serum ferritin levels remained normal. Ferrous gluconate was her only medication from the time of her diagnosis.
A BROAD DIFFERENTIAL DIAGNOSIS
Angular cheilitis (perlèche) is an inflammatory condition characterized by erosive inflammation at one or both angles of the mouth. It typically presents as erythema, scaling, fissuring, and ulceration. A wide variety of factors, including nutritional deficiencies, local and systemic factors, and drug side effects, may produce cheilitis.1,2
Nutritional deficiencies account for 25% of all cases of angular cheilitis3 and include iron deficiency and deficiencies of the B vitamins riboflavin (B2), niacin (B3), pyridoxine (B6), and cyanocobalamin (B12).1
Local causes include infection with Candida albicans or Staphylococcus aureus and allergic contact dermatitis. Common causes of allergic contact dermatitis include lipstick, toothpaste, mouthwash, cosmetics, sunscreen, fragrance, metals such as nickel, and dental appliances.1
Systemic diseases associated with angular cheilitis include xerostomia, inflammatory bowel disease, Sjögren syndrome, glucagonoma, and human immunodeficiency virus.1
Drugs that cause angular cheilitis include isotretinoin, sorafenib (antineoplastic kinase inhibitor), and ointments or creams such as neomycin sulfate–polymyxin B sulfate, bacitracin, idoxuridine, and steroids.1,4
Conditions that mimic angular cheilitis include herpes simplex type 1 (herpes labialis) and actinic cheilitis. Herpes labialis, characterized by burning sensation, itching, or paresthesia, usually precedes a recurrence of vesicles that eventually ulcerate or form a crust and heal without a crust. Herpes labialis often recurs, affecting the vermilion border and lasting approximately 1 week.
Actinic cheilitis, a premalignant condition that commonly involves the lower lip with sparing of the corners of the mouth, is caused by excessive sun exposure. Patients often have persistent dryness and cracking of the lips.
In our patient, angular cheilitis was the main clinical manifestation of iron deficiency anemia, highlighting the importance of looking for iron deficiency in affected patients without a more obvious cause.
- Park KK, Brodell RT, Helms SE. Angular cheilitis, part 2: nutritional, systemic, and drug-related causes and treatment. Cutis 2011; 88(1):27–32. pmid:21877503
- Park KK, Brodell RT, Helms SE. Angular cheilitis, part 1: local etiologies. Cutis 2011; 87(6):289–295. pmid:21838086
- Konstantinidis AB, Hatziotis JH. Angular cheilosis: an analysis of 156 cases. J Oral Med 1984; 39(4):199–206. pmid:6594458
- Yang CH, Lin WC, Chuang CK, et al. Hand-foot skin reaction in patients treated with sorafenib: a clinicopathological study of cutaneous manifestations due to multitargeted kinase inhibitor therapy. Br J Dermatol 2008; 158(3):592–596. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2133.2007.08357.x
A 20-year-old woman had a 4-month history of painful red erosions around the mouth. She had no dysphagia or fatigue and no history of diarrhea, gluten intolerance, or diabetes mellitus. An antifungal-antibacterial ointment prescribed by her dentist had provided no relief.
- Hemoglobin 8.0 g/dL (reference range for females 12.3–15.3)
- Mean corpuscular volume 62 fL (80–100)
- Serum ferritin 1.3 ng/mL (15–200)
- Reticulocyte count 0.86% (0.5–1.5)
- White blood cell count 9.8 × 109/L (4.5–11.0)
- Platelet count 450 × 109/L (150–400).
Vitamin B12 and folate levels were normal, and tests for antitissue transglutaminase and antinuclear antibodies were negative.
Based on these results, the diagnosis was angular cheilitis from iron deficiency anemia. Treatment with oral ferrous gluconate 300 mg twice daily cleared the cheilitis, and after 4 weeks of this treatment, the hemoglobin level increased to 9.8 g/dL, the serum ferritin increased to 7 ng/mL, and the reticulocyte count increased to 2.6%. She was advised to continue taking oral iron tablets for another 3 months until the hemoglobin level reached 12.0 g/dL.
During 2 years of follow-up, she had no recurrence of angular cheilitis, and her hemoglobin and serum ferritin levels remained normal. Ferrous gluconate was her only medication from the time of her diagnosis.
A BROAD DIFFERENTIAL DIAGNOSIS
Angular cheilitis (perlèche) is an inflammatory condition characterized by erosive inflammation at one or both angles of the mouth. It typically presents as erythema, scaling, fissuring, and ulceration. A wide variety of factors, including nutritional deficiencies, local and systemic factors, and drug side effects, may produce cheilitis.1,2
Nutritional deficiencies account for 25% of all cases of angular cheilitis3 and include iron deficiency and deficiencies of the B vitamins riboflavin (B2), niacin (B3), pyridoxine (B6), and cyanocobalamin (B12).1
Local causes include infection with Candida albicans or Staphylococcus aureus and allergic contact dermatitis. Common causes of allergic contact dermatitis include lipstick, toothpaste, mouthwash, cosmetics, sunscreen, fragrance, metals such as nickel, and dental appliances.1
Systemic diseases associated with angular cheilitis include xerostomia, inflammatory bowel disease, Sjögren syndrome, glucagonoma, and human immunodeficiency virus.1
Drugs that cause angular cheilitis include isotretinoin, sorafenib (antineoplastic kinase inhibitor), and ointments or creams such as neomycin sulfate–polymyxin B sulfate, bacitracin, idoxuridine, and steroids.1,4
Conditions that mimic angular cheilitis include herpes simplex type 1 (herpes labialis) and actinic cheilitis. Herpes labialis, characterized by burning sensation, itching, or paresthesia, usually precedes a recurrence of vesicles that eventually ulcerate or form a crust and heal without a crust. Herpes labialis often recurs, affecting the vermilion border and lasting approximately 1 week.
Actinic cheilitis, a premalignant condition that commonly involves the lower lip with sparing of the corners of the mouth, is caused by excessive sun exposure. Patients often have persistent dryness and cracking of the lips.
In our patient, angular cheilitis was the main clinical manifestation of iron deficiency anemia, highlighting the importance of looking for iron deficiency in affected patients without a more obvious cause.
A 20-year-old woman had a 4-month history of painful red erosions around the mouth. She had no dysphagia or fatigue and no history of diarrhea, gluten intolerance, or diabetes mellitus. An antifungal-antibacterial ointment prescribed by her dentist had provided no relief.
- Hemoglobin 8.0 g/dL (reference range for females 12.3–15.3)
- Mean corpuscular volume 62 fL (80–100)
- Serum ferritin 1.3 ng/mL (15–200)
- Reticulocyte count 0.86% (0.5–1.5)
- White blood cell count 9.8 × 109/L (4.5–11.0)
- Platelet count 450 × 109/L (150–400).
Vitamin B12 and folate levels were normal, and tests for antitissue transglutaminase and antinuclear antibodies were negative.
Based on these results, the diagnosis was angular cheilitis from iron deficiency anemia. Treatment with oral ferrous gluconate 300 mg twice daily cleared the cheilitis, and after 4 weeks of this treatment, the hemoglobin level increased to 9.8 g/dL, the serum ferritin increased to 7 ng/mL, and the reticulocyte count increased to 2.6%. She was advised to continue taking oral iron tablets for another 3 months until the hemoglobin level reached 12.0 g/dL.
During 2 years of follow-up, she had no recurrence of angular cheilitis, and her hemoglobin and serum ferritin levels remained normal. Ferrous gluconate was her only medication from the time of her diagnosis.
A BROAD DIFFERENTIAL DIAGNOSIS
Angular cheilitis (perlèche) is an inflammatory condition characterized by erosive inflammation at one or both angles of the mouth. It typically presents as erythema, scaling, fissuring, and ulceration. A wide variety of factors, including nutritional deficiencies, local and systemic factors, and drug side effects, may produce cheilitis.1,2
Nutritional deficiencies account for 25% of all cases of angular cheilitis3 and include iron deficiency and deficiencies of the B vitamins riboflavin (B2), niacin (B3), pyridoxine (B6), and cyanocobalamin (B12).1
Local causes include infection with Candida albicans or Staphylococcus aureus and allergic contact dermatitis. Common causes of allergic contact dermatitis include lipstick, toothpaste, mouthwash, cosmetics, sunscreen, fragrance, metals such as nickel, and dental appliances.1
Systemic diseases associated with angular cheilitis include xerostomia, inflammatory bowel disease, Sjögren syndrome, glucagonoma, and human immunodeficiency virus.1
Drugs that cause angular cheilitis include isotretinoin, sorafenib (antineoplastic kinase inhibitor), and ointments or creams such as neomycin sulfate–polymyxin B sulfate, bacitracin, idoxuridine, and steroids.1,4
Conditions that mimic angular cheilitis include herpes simplex type 1 (herpes labialis) and actinic cheilitis. Herpes labialis, characterized by burning sensation, itching, or paresthesia, usually precedes a recurrence of vesicles that eventually ulcerate or form a crust and heal without a crust. Herpes labialis often recurs, affecting the vermilion border and lasting approximately 1 week.
Actinic cheilitis, a premalignant condition that commonly involves the lower lip with sparing of the corners of the mouth, is caused by excessive sun exposure. Patients often have persistent dryness and cracking of the lips.
In our patient, angular cheilitis was the main clinical manifestation of iron deficiency anemia, highlighting the importance of looking for iron deficiency in affected patients without a more obvious cause.
- Park KK, Brodell RT, Helms SE. Angular cheilitis, part 2: nutritional, systemic, and drug-related causes and treatment. Cutis 2011; 88(1):27–32. pmid:21877503
- Park KK, Brodell RT, Helms SE. Angular cheilitis, part 1: local etiologies. Cutis 2011; 87(6):289–295. pmid:21838086
- Konstantinidis AB, Hatziotis JH. Angular cheilosis: an analysis of 156 cases. J Oral Med 1984; 39(4):199–206. pmid:6594458
- Yang CH, Lin WC, Chuang CK, et al. Hand-foot skin reaction in patients treated with sorafenib: a clinicopathological study of cutaneous manifestations due to multitargeted kinase inhibitor therapy. Br J Dermatol 2008; 158(3):592–596. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2133.2007.08357.x
- Park KK, Brodell RT, Helms SE. Angular cheilitis, part 2: nutritional, systemic, and drug-related causes and treatment. Cutis 2011; 88(1):27–32. pmid:21877503
- Park KK, Brodell RT, Helms SE. Angular cheilitis, part 1: local etiologies. Cutis 2011; 87(6):289–295. pmid:21838086
- Konstantinidis AB, Hatziotis JH. Angular cheilosis: an analysis of 156 cases. J Oral Med 1984; 39(4):199–206. pmid:6594458
- Yang CH, Lin WC, Chuang CK, et al. Hand-foot skin reaction in patients treated with sorafenib: a clinicopathological study of cutaneous manifestations due to multitargeted kinase inhibitor therapy. Br J Dermatol 2008; 158(3):592–596. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2133.2007.08357.x
Late mortality risk after childhood BMT is substantial, persistent
Children who undergo allogeneic blood or marrow transplantation (BMT) remain at an elevated risk of premature death even 25 years after the procedure, results of large, retrospective cohort study suggest.
Despite a significant decrease over several decades, the risk of all-cause mortality remained elevated, compared with the general population, according to this study of individuals who had BMT performed in childhood between 1974 and 2010.
“These findings emphasize the need for lifelong follow-up care after allogeneic BMT performed in childhood,” reported Anna Sällfors Holmqvist, MD, PhD, of the department of clinical sciences at Skåne University Hospital, Lund University, Sweden, and her associates.
, Dr. Holmqvist and her colleagues reported in JAMA Oncology.
Their retrospective analysis included 1,388 individuals who lived at least 2 years after allogeneic BMT performed in childhood at one of three centers: the University of Alabama at Birmingham; the University of Minnesota, Minneapolis; and City of Hope, Duarte, Calif.
There were 295 deaths over a median of 14.9 years of follow-up, for an overall survival rate of 79.3% at 20 years after BMT, reported Dr. Holmqvist and her associates. The three leading causes of death were infection or chronic graft-versus-host disease in 49.6% of cases, primary disease in 24.6%, and later malignancies in 18.4%.
Relative to the general population, the cohort had a 14.4-fold increased risk of premature death (95% confidence interval, 12.8-16.1), compared with the general population. Relative mortality was highest 2-5 years after BMT and dropped substantially after that but remained elevated – even 25 years or more after the procedure, the investigators noted.
Mortality decreased significantly over the 3 decades evaluated in this study. The rate of all-cause, 10-year cumulative mortality was 18.9% before 1990, 12.9% from 1990 to 1999, and 11.0% from 2000 to 2010 (P = .002).
That decrease in cumulative mortality over time could not be explained by changes in transplant practice over those three time periods, according to results of a mediation analysis performed by Dr. Holmqvist and her associates.
That finding suggests that unmeasured variables might underlie the decrease in late mortality, the investigators said.
Those unmeasured variables might include supportive care strategies, management of chronic graft-versus-host disease, or improved patient selection, they noted.
Dr. Holmqvist and her associates cited as one limitation their reliance on death certificates for causes of death. In addition, the causes of death for 51 of the 295 deceased patients were lacking.
The study was supported in part by grants from the National Cancer Institute, the Leukemia Lymphoma Society, and the Swedish Childhood Cancer Foundation. Dr. Holmqvist and her associates reported no conflicts of interest.
SOURCE: Holmqvist AS et al. JAMA Oncol. 2018 Jul 26. doi: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2018.2453.
Children who undergo allogeneic blood or marrow transplantation (BMT) remain at an elevated risk of premature death even 25 years after the procedure, results of large, retrospective cohort study suggest.
Despite a significant decrease over several decades, the risk of all-cause mortality remained elevated, compared with the general population, according to this study of individuals who had BMT performed in childhood between 1974 and 2010.
“These findings emphasize the need for lifelong follow-up care after allogeneic BMT performed in childhood,” reported Anna Sällfors Holmqvist, MD, PhD, of the department of clinical sciences at Skåne University Hospital, Lund University, Sweden, and her associates.
, Dr. Holmqvist and her colleagues reported in JAMA Oncology.
Their retrospective analysis included 1,388 individuals who lived at least 2 years after allogeneic BMT performed in childhood at one of three centers: the University of Alabama at Birmingham; the University of Minnesota, Minneapolis; and City of Hope, Duarte, Calif.
There were 295 deaths over a median of 14.9 years of follow-up, for an overall survival rate of 79.3% at 20 years after BMT, reported Dr. Holmqvist and her associates. The three leading causes of death were infection or chronic graft-versus-host disease in 49.6% of cases, primary disease in 24.6%, and later malignancies in 18.4%.
Relative to the general population, the cohort had a 14.4-fold increased risk of premature death (95% confidence interval, 12.8-16.1), compared with the general population. Relative mortality was highest 2-5 years after BMT and dropped substantially after that but remained elevated – even 25 years or more after the procedure, the investigators noted.
Mortality decreased significantly over the 3 decades evaluated in this study. The rate of all-cause, 10-year cumulative mortality was 18.9% before 1990, 12.9% from 1990 to 1999, and 11.0% from 2000 to 2010 (P = .002).
That decrease in cumulative mortality over time could not be explained by changes in transplant practice over those three time periods, according to results of a mediation analysis performed by Dr. Holmqvist and her associates.
That finding suggests that unmeasured variables might underlie the decrease in late mortality, the investigators said.
Those unmeasured variables might include supportive care strategies, management of chronic graft-versus-host disease, or improved patient selection, they noted.
Dr. Holmqvist and her associates cited as one limitation their reliance on death certificates for causes of death. In addition, the causes of death for 51 of the 295 deceased patients were lacking.
The study was supported in part by grants from the National Cancer Institute, the Leukemia Lymphoma Society, and the Swedish Childhood Cancer Foundation. Dr. Holmqvist and her associates reported no conflicts of interest.
SOURCE: Holmqvist AS et al. JAMA Oncol. 2018 Jul 26. doi: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2018.2453.
Children who undergo allogeneic blood or marrow transplantation (BMT) remain at an elevated risk of premature death even 25 years after the procedure, results of large, retrospective cohort study suggest.
Despite a significant decrease over several decades, the risk of all-cause mortality remained elevated, compared with the general population, according to this study of individuals who had BMT performed in childhood between 1974 and 2010.
“These findings emphasize the need for lifelong follow-up care after allogeneic BMT performed in childhood,” reported Anna Sällfors Holmqvist, MD, PhD, of the department of clinical sciences at Skåne University Hospital, Lund University, Sweden, and her associates.
, Dr. Holmqvist and her colleagues reported in JAMA Oncology.
Their retrospective analysis included 1,388 individuals who lived at least 2 years after allogeneic BMT performed in childhood at one of three centers: the University of Alabama at Birmingham; the University of Minnesota, Minneapolis; and City of Hope, Duarte, Calif.
There were 295 deaths over a median of 14.9 years of follow-up, for an overall survival rate of 79.3% at 20 years after BMT, reported Dr. Holmqvist and her associates. The three leading causes of death were infection or chronic graft-versus-host disease in 49.6% of cases, primary disease in 24.6%, and later malignancies in 18.4%.
Relative to the general population, the cohort had a 14.4-fold increased risk of premature death (95% confidence interval, 12.8-16.1), compared with the general population. Relative mortality was highest 2-5 years after BMT and dropped substantially after that but remained elevated – even 25 years or more after the procedure, the investigators noted.
Mortality decreased significantly over the 3 decades evaluated in this study. The rate of all-cause, 10-year cumulative mortality was 18.9% before 1990, 12.9% from 1990 to 1999, and 11.0% from 2000 to 2010 (P = .002).
That decrease in cumulative mortality over time could not be explained by changes in transplant practice over those three time periods, according to results of a mediation analysis performed by Dr. Holmqvist and her associates.
That finding suggests that unmeasured variables might underlie the decrease in late mortality, the investigators said.
Those unmeasured variables might include supportive care strategies, management of chronic graft-versus-host disease, or improved patient selection, they noted.
Dr. Holmqvist and her associates cited as one limitation their reliance on death certificates for causes of death. In addition, the causes of death for 51 of the 295 deceased patients were lacking.
The study was supported in part by grants from the National Cancer Institute, the Leukemia Lymphoma Society, and the Swedish Childhood Cancer Foundation. Dr. Holmqvist and her associates reported no conflicts of interest.
SOURCE: Holmqvist AS et al. JAMA Oncol. 2018 Jul 26. doi: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2018.2453.
FROM JAMA ONCOLOGY
Key clinical point: Individuals undergoing allogeneic blood or marrow transplantation (BMT) in childhood require careful follow-up for many years because of a persistent elevated risk of premature death.
Major finding: Risk of premature death was increased 14.4-fold, compared with the general population (95% confidence interval, 12.8-16.1).
Study details: A retrospective cohort study including 1,388 individuals living 2 years or more after allogeneic BMT performed in childhood.
Disclosures: The study was supported in part by grants from the National Cancer Institute, the Leukemia Lymphoma Society, and the Swedish Childhood Cancer Foundation. Dr. Holmqvist and her coauthors reported no conflicts of interest.
Source: Holmqvist AS et al. JAMA Oncol. 2018 Jul 26. doi: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2018.2453.