Philadelphia-negative chronic myeloproliferative neoplasm follow-up: when the phone rings. Changes during the COVID-19 pandemic and patient satisfaction. Experience in 30 health centers in Spain.

The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has favored the expansion of telemedicine. Philadelphia-negative chronic myeloproliferative neoplasms (Ph-MPN) might be good candidates for virtual follow-up. In this study, we aimed to analyze the follow-up of patients with Ph-MPN in Spain during COVID-19, its effectiveness, and acceptance among patients. We present a multicenter retrospective study from 30 centers. Five hundred forty-one patients were included with a median age of 67 years (yr). With a median follow-up of 19 months, 4410 appointments were recorded. The median of visits per patient was 7 and median periodicity was 2.7 months; significantly more visits and a higher frequency of them were registered in myelofibrosis (MF) patients. 60.1% of visits were in-person, 39.5% were by telephone, and 0.3% were videocall visits, with a predominance of telephone visits for essential thrombocythemia (ET) and polycythemia vera (PV) patients over MF, as well as for younger patients (< 50 yr). The proportion of phone visits significantly decreased after the first semester of the pandemic. Pharmacological modifications were performed only in 25.7% of the visits, and, considering overall management, ET patients needed fewer global treatment changes. Telephone contact effectiveness reached 90% and only 5.4% required a complementary in-person appointment. Although 56.2% of the cohort preferred in-person visits, 90.5% of our patients claimed to be satisfied with follow-up during the pandemic, with an 83% of positive comments. In view of our results, telemedicine has proven effective and efficient, and might continue to play a complementary role in Ph-MPN patients' follow-up.

Efficacy of chemotherapy protocols for hematological malignancies: H-CVAD versus GELA/BURKIMAB/PETHEMA LAL.

The hyper-CVAD/methotrexate-cytarabine (H-CVAD/ MTX-AraC) chemotherapy protocol has been one of the standard treatments for hematological malignancies, such as mantle cell lymphoma (MCL), Burkitt lymphoma (BL), and B-cell and T-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia. Because results of this therapy are poor, it has been progressively replaced with new specific regimens with better efficacy profiles (GELA protocol for MCL, BURKIMAB for BL, and PETHEMA for B-cell and T-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia [ALL]). The objective of this study was to analyze the response rates and survival of these therapeutic regimens. This retrospective and descriptive observational study of 81 patients compared 42 patients treated with hyper-CVAD/methotrexate-cytarabine (group A) with 39 patients treated with GELA/BURKIMAB/PETHEMA (group B). More patients in group B than in group A completed the treatment (89.7% vs. 47.6%, p < 0.001). In group A, 14.3% did not complete treatment because of death compared with 7.7% in group B, and 29% in group A had cycle delays versus 6.7% in group B (p < 0.001). In group A, 78.6% of group A achieved a complete response (CR) compared with 94.9% of group B (p = 0.050). Disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) were significantly higher in group B (p < 0.001 in both cases). Data for current therapeutic protocols have indicated superior efficacy, with higher complete response rates, as well as better disease-free survival and overall survival results. This article provides the best results in terms of the efficacy of treatment of four hematological malignancies (MCL, BL, B-cell ALL, and T-cell ALL) with the most current specific therapeutic regimens (GELA for MCL, BURKIMAB for BL, and PETHEMA for B-cell ALL and T-cell ALL) with respect to a classic general protocol (H-CVAD/MTX-AraC for all four). These results may represent a great advance in the treatment of these blood cancers, achieving an important long-term benefit for these hematological patients.

Comparison in safety of chemotherapy protocols for blood cancers: toxicity of H-CVAD versus GELA/BURKIMAB/PETHEMA LAL.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The Hyper-CVAD/Methotrexate-Cytarabine (H-CVAD/MTX-AraC) chemotherapy protocol has been one of the standard treatments for blood cancers, such as Mantle cell lymphoma (MCL), Burkitt's lymphoma (BL) and B-cell and T-cell acute lymphoblastic leukaemia (ALL). Due to high toxicity, it has been progressively replaced with new specific regimens with a better safety profile (GELA protocol for MCL, BURKIMAB for BL and PETHEMA for B-cell and T-cell ALL). The objective of this study is to analyse the toxicity and infectious complications of these therapeutic regimens, as well as the event free survival (EFS). PATIENTS AND METHODS: This is a retrospective and descriptive observational study of 81 patients, comparing 42 patients treated with H-CVAD/MTX-AraC (group A) versus 39 patients treated with GELA/BURKIMAB/PETHEMA (group B). RESULTS: All patients in group A developed pancytopenia, but in group B 74.4% neutropenia, 51.3% thrombocytopenia and 69.2% anaemia. The total number of infections in group A was higher than in group B: 154 versus 48, 3.67 versus 1.23 per patient and 0.59 versus 0.25 per cycle. Likewise, febrile neutropenia happened: 106 versus 21 cases, 2.52 versus 0.52 per patient and 0.41 versus 0.11 per cycle. EVS is higher in group B: 33% versus 79% (2-year), and 24% versus 69% (5-year). CONCLUSIONS: Current therapeutic protocols have shown higher EFS due to better safety profile, with less haematological, neurological and haemorrhagic toxicity, as well as lower rates of infectious complications.