Use of defibrotide in COVID-19 pneumonia: comparison of a phase II study and a matched real-world cohort control.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic led to an unprecedented burden on healthcare systems around the world and a severe global socioeconomic crisis, with more than 750 million confirmed cases and at least 7 million deaths reported by 31st December 2023. The DEFI-VID19 study (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04335201), a phase II, single-arm, multicenter, open-label trial was designed in mid-2020 to assess the safety and efficacy of defibrotide in treating patients with COVID-19 pneumonia. Defibrotide was administered at a dose of 25 mg/kg/d intravenously, divided into four daily doses over a planned 14-day period for patients with COVID-19 pneumonia receiving non-invasive ventilation. The primary endpoint was Respiratory Failure Free Survival (RFFS); Overall Survival (OS), the number of post-recovery days, and adverse events were the secondary endpoints. For comparison, a contemporaneous control cohort receiving standard of care only was retrospectively selected by applying the eligibility criteria of the DEFI-VID19 trial. To adjust for the imbalance between the two cohorts in terms of baseline variable distributions, an outcome regression analysis was conducted. In adjusted analysis, patients receiving defibrotide reported a trend towards higher RFFS (HR=0.71[0.95CI: 0.34 to 1.29, P= .138]) and OS (HR=0.78[0.95CI: 0.33 to 1.53, P= .248]) and showed a significantly increased number of post-recovery days (difference in means: 3.61[ 0.95CI: 0.97 to 6.26, P= .0037]). Despite concomitant thromboprophylaxis with low molecular weight heparin, the safety profile of defibrotide proved to be favorable. Taken together, our findings suggest that defibrotide may represent a valuable addition to the COVID-19 therapeutic options.

Ponatinib alone or with chemo-immunotherapy in heavily pre-treated Philadelphia-like acute lymphoblastic leukemia: a CAMPUS ALL real-life study.

Not available.

Outcome of 421 adult patients with Philadelphia-negative acute lymphoblastic leukemia treated under an intensive program inspired by the GIMEMA LAL1913 clinical trial: a Campus ALL study.

The introduction of pediatric-inspired regimens in adult Philadelphia-negative acute lymphoblastic leukemia (Ph-ALL) has significantly improved patients' prognosis. Within the Campus ALL network we analyzed the outcome of adult Ph-ALL patients treated according to the GIMEMA LAL1913 protocol outside the clinical trial, to compare the real-life data with the study results. We included 421 consecutive patients, with a median age of 42 years. The complete remission (CR) rate after the first course of chemotherapy was 94% and a measurable residual disease (MRD) negativity after the third course was achieved in 72% of patients. The 3-year overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) were 67% and 57%, respectively. In a multivariate analysis, MRD positivity negatively influenced DFS. In a time-dependent analysis including only very high risk (VHR) and MRD positive cases, transplanted (HSCT) patients had a significantly better DFS than non-HSCT ones (P=0.0017). During induction, grade ≥2 pegaspargase-related hepato-toxicity was observed in 25% of patients (vs 12% in the GIMEMA LAL1913 trial, P=0.0003). In this large real-life cohort of Ph-ALL, we confirmed the very high CR rate and a superimposable OS and DFS compared to the GIMEMA LAL1913 clinical trial: CR rate after C1 94% vs 85%, P=0.0004; 3-year OS 67% vs 67%, P=0.94; 3-year DFS 57% vs 63%, P=0.17. HSCT confirms its important role in VHR and MRD-positive patients. The rate of pegaspargase-related toxicity was significantly higher in the real-life setting, emphasizing the importance of dose adjustment in the presence of risk factors to avoid excessive toxicity.

Ponatinib as a Prophylactic or Pre-Emptive Strategy to Prevent Cytological Relapse after Allogeneic Stem Cell Transplantation in Patients with Philadelphia Chromosome-Positive Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia Transplanted in Complete Cytological Remission.

The administration of TKIs after Allo-SCT in Philadelphia chromosome-positive acute lymphoblastic leukemia (Ph + ALL) remains controversial, and the TKI approach (prophylactic, pre-emptive or salvage) is still heterogeneous in transplant centers. In this context, very little is known about the feasibility and safety of third-generation TKIs. In this paper, we analyze the efficacy and safety of ponatinib (PONA) administered after Allo-SCT to prevent cytologic relapse of Ph + ALL. This is a multicenter observational study including 48 patients (pts) with Ph + ALL (median age 49 years) who received PONA after Allo-SCT while in complete cytological remission (cCR); 26 (54%) had positive minimal residual disease (MRD pos) before Allo-SCT. PONA was administered after Allo-SCT prophylactically (starting with MRD neg) in 26 pts or pre-emptively (starting with MRD pos post-SCT and without hematological relapse) in 22 pts. Patients treated prophylactically with PONA started treatment earlier, at a median of 4.3 months (range 1.5-6) after Allo-SCT, than those treated pre-emptively, who started PONA at a median of 7.4 months (range 2-63) after Allo-SCT (p = 0.01). The median starting dose of PONA was 30 mg/day (range 15-45). A dose reduction was required in 10/48 (21%) of cases, but a permanent discontinuation of PONA, due to toxicity, was required in only 5/48 pts (10.5%). No deaths due to PONA-related adverse events (AEs) were reported. The median follow-up time after Allo-SCT was 34 months (range 7.7-118). At the last follow-up, the median duration of PONA therapy was 22 months (range 2-100). The 5-year OS and RFS after Allo-SCT were 92% and 71%, respectively. The 5-year RFS after Allo-SCT of pts who received PONA prophylaxis was 95%, and it was 57% for those who received PONA pre-emptively (log-rank p = 0.02). In conclusion, this multicenter analysis of 48 patients with Ph + ALL undergoing Allo-SCT while in CcR, although with the caution of the retrospective data, supports the feasibility of PONA maintenance strategy after Allo-SCT with a low rate of discontinuations (10.5%) due to PONA-related AE.

Identification of Novel Potential Predisposing Variants in Familial Acute Myeloid Leukemia.

BACKGROUND: Myeloid neoplasms, including acute myeloid leukemia, have been traditionally among the less investigated cancer types concerning germline predisposition. Indeed, myeloid neoplasms with germline predisposition are challenging to identify because often display similar clinical and morphological characteristics of sporadic cases and have similar age at diagnosis. However, a misidentifications of familiarity in myeloid neoplasms have a critical impact on clinical management both for the carriers and their relatives. AIMS: We conducted a family segregation study, in order to identify novel cancer predisposing genes in myeloid neoplasms and classify novel identified variants. METHODS AND RESULTS: We performed a thorough genomic analysis using a large custom gene panel (256 genes), the Myelo-Panel, targeted on cancer predisposing genes. In particular, we assessed both germline and somatic variants in four families, each with two siblings, who developed hematological neoplasms: seven acute myeloid leukemia and one Philadelphia-positive chronic myeloid leukemia. In each family, we identified at least one novel potentially predisposing variant, affecting also genes not included in the current European LeukemiaNet guidelines for AML management. Moreover, we suggest reclassification of two germline variants as pathogenic: likely pathogenic p.S21Tfs*139 in CEPBA and VUS p.K392Afs*66 in DDX41. CONCLUSION: We believe that predisposition to hematological neoplasms is still underestimated and particularly difficult to diagnosed. Considering that misidentification of familiarity in myeloid neoplasms have a critical impact on the clinical management both for the carriers and their relatives, our study highlights the importance of revision, in this clinical context, of clinical practices that should include thorough reconstruction of family history and in-depth genetic testing.