RESUMO
BACKGROUND: High-dose chemotherapy with autologous stem-cell transplantation (asct) is an accepted part of standard therapy for patients with hematologic malignancies. Usually, stem-cell mobilization uses granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (g-csf); however, some patients are not able to be mobilized with chemotherapy and g-csf, and such patients could be at higher risk of failing mobilization. Plerixafor is a novel mobilization agent that is absorbed quickly after subcutaneous injection and, at the recommended dose of 0.24 mg/kg, provides a sustained increase in circulating CD34+ cells for 10-18 hours. The main purpose of the present report was to evaluate the most current evidence on the efficacy of plerixafor in enhancing hematopoietic stem-cell mobilization and collection before asct for patients in Ontario so as to make recommendations for clinical practice and to assist Cancer Care Ontario in decision-making with respect to this intervention. METHODS: The medline and embase databases were systematically searched for evidence from January 1996 to March 2015, and the best available evidence was used to draft recommendations relevant to the efficacy of plerixafor in enhancing hematopoietic stem-cell mobilization and collection before asct. Final approval of this practice guideline report was obtained from both the Stem Cell Transplant Steering Committee and the Report Approval Panel of the Program in Evidence-Based Care. RECOMMENDATIONS: These recommendations apply to adult patients considered for asct: â Adding plerixafor to g-csf is an option for initial mobilization in patients with non-Hodgkin lymphoma or multiple myeloma who are eligible for asct when chemotherapy cannot be used and only g-csf mobilization is available.â For patients with a low peripheral blood CD34+ cell count (for example, <10/µL) at the time of anticipated stem-cell harvesting, or with an inadequate first-day apheresis collection, it is recommended that plerixafor be added to the mobilization regimen to maximize stem-cell collection and to prevent the need for remobilization.â It is recommended that patients who have failed a previous mobilization attempt undergo remobilization with g-csf and plerixafor, with or without chemotherapy.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Bendamustine is a bifunctional alkylating agent with unique properties that distinguish it from other agents in its class. Bendamustine is used as monotherapy or in combination with other agents to treat patients with non-Hodgkin lymphoma (nhl) and chronic lymphocytic leukemia (cll). METHODS: The prospective interventional open-label bend-act trial evaluated bendamustine in patients with rituximab-refractory indolent nhl (inhl) and previously untreated cll. Study objectives were to assess the safety and tolerability of bendamustine monotherapy and to provide patients with access to bendamustine before Health Canada approval. The study aimed to enrol up to 100 patients. All patients with inhl received an intravenous dose of bendamustine 120 mg/m(2) over 60 minutes on days 1 and 2 for up to eight 21- or 28-day treatment cycles. All patients with cll received an intravenous dose of bendamustine 100 mg/m(2) over 30 minutes on days 1 and 2 for up to six 28-day treatment cycles. RESULTS: Of 90 patients treated on study (16 with cll and 74 with inhl), 35 completed the study (4 with cll and 31 with inhl). The most common treatment-emergent adverse events (teaes) were nausea (70%), fatigue (57%), vomiting (40%), and diarrhea (33%)-mostly grades 1 and 2. Ondansetron was the most common supportive medication used in the patients (63.5% of those with inhl and 68.8% of those with cll). Neutropenia (32%), anemia (23%), and thrombocytopenia (21%) were the most frequent hematologic teaes, with neutropenia being the most common grade 3 or 4 teae leading to dose modification. Dose delays occurred in 28 patients (31.3%) because of grade 3 or 4 teaes, with a higher incidence of dose delays being observed in inhl patients on the 21-day treatment cycle than in those on the 28-day treatment cycle (50.0% vs. 24.1%). During the study, 33 patients (36.7%) experienced at least 1 serious adverse event, and 4 deaths were reported (all in patients with inhl). CONCLUSIONS: The type and frequency of the teaes reported accorded with observations in earlier clinical trials and post-marketing experiences, thus confirming the acceptable and manageable safety profile of bendamustine.
RESUMO
QUESTION: Is there a benefit associated with the use of extracorporeal photopheresis (ecp) compared with other treatment options for patients who have received allogeneic stem-cell transplantation (sct) and are experiencing graft-versus-host disease (gvhd), if response rate, survival, or improvement in symptoms are the outcomes of interest? PERSPECTIVES: After allogeneic sct, gvhd is a common complication historically categorized as either acute (agvhd: onset ≤100 days post-transplantation) or chronic (cgvhd: >100 days post-transplantation). Graft-versus-host disease occurs when the donor's immune cells recognize the host patient's tissues and organs as foreign and attack them, causing a multitude of problems, often in liver, gastrointestinal system, and skin. Photopheresis is one therapy that has emerged since the early 2000s for the management of steroid-refractory gvhd because of its steroid-sparing ability, low associated toxicity, and efficacy in some clinical settings. The present recommendation report summarizes the available data about photopheresis for the treatment of gvhd and provides recommendations on its use. METHODOLOGY: The medline (Ovid) database was systematically searched for January 1995 to August 2013, and the best available evidence was used to draft recommendations relevant to adult and pediatric patients in Ontario who have received allogeneic sct and are experiencing gvhd. Draft recommendations were first reviewed by clinical and methodology experts before undergoing internal review. Final approval of this practice guideline report was obtained from both the Stem Cell Transplant Steering Committee and the Report Approval Panel of the Program in Evidence-Based Care. RECOMMENDATIONS: These recommendations apply to adult and pediatric patients who have received an allogeneic sct and are experiencing gvhd: ecp is an acceptable therapy for the treatment of steroid-dependent or refractory agvhd in adult and pediatric patients.ecp is an effective therapy for the treatment of steroid-dependent or refractory cgvhd in adult and pediatric patients. QUALIFYING STATEMENT: In Ontario, ecp is currently a covered therapy for patients with steroid-refractory gvhd who meet certain eligibility criteria.
RESUMO
Multiple myeloma is a malignant plasma cell disease, which typically affects older patients, with a median age at diagnosis of 70 years. The challenge in treating older patients is to accurately identify 'fit' patients that can tolerate more intensive treatment to maximize disease control, while simultaneously identifying vulnerable or 'frail' patients who may develop toxicity with significant morbidity and mortality, requiring different treatment options or dose modification. Multiple frailty scores have been devised for multiple myeloma over the years in newly-diagnosed patients. This paper gives an overview of the three common frailty measurements: the International Myeloma Working Group Frailty Score, Mayo Clinic Frailty Score and the Revised Myeloma Co-Morbidity Index. We will summarize the derivation, validation, usability and applicability of these scores in different clinical settings, emphasizing the main strengths and limitations for each index score. We will also highlight future directions in the operationalization of frailty in multiple myeloma.
Assuntos
Fragilidade/diagnóstico , Avaliação Geriátrica/métodos , Mieloma Múltiplo/epidemiologia , Idoso , Idoso Fragilizado , Humanos , Reprodutibilidade dos TestesRESUMO
Background: In Canada, requests for public reimbursement of cancer drugs are predominately initiated by pharmaceutical manufacturers. Clinician-led submissions provide a mechanism to initiate the drug funding process when industry does not submit a request for funding consideration. Although such requests are resource-intensive to produce, Cancer Care Ontario (cco) has the capacity to facilitate clinician-led submissions. In 2014, cco began developing a cancer drug prioritization framework that allocates resources to systematically address a growing number of clinician-identified funding gaps with clinician-led submissions. Methods: Cancer site-specific drug advisory committees established by cco consist of health care practitioners whose roles include identifying and prioritizing funding gaps. The committees submit their identified gaps to a cross-cancer-site prioritization exercise in which the requests are ranked based on a set of guiding principles derived from health technology assessment. The requests are then sequentially allocated the resources needed to meet submission requirements. Whether the funding gap is of provincial or pan-Canadian relevance determines where the submission is filed for assessment. Results: Since its inception, the cco framework has identified 17 funding gaps in 9 cancer sites. In 4 prioritizations, the framework supported 6 submissions. As of June 2018, the framework had contributed to the eventual funding of more than 9 new drug-indication pairs, with more awaiting funding consideration. Conclusions: The cco prioritization framework has enabled clinicians to effectively and systematically identify, prioritize, and fill funding gaps not addressed by industry. Ultimately, the framework helps to ensure that patients can access evidence-informed and cost-effective therapies. The framework will continue to evolve as it encounters new challenges, including funding requests for rare indications.
Assuntos
Oncologia/economia , Oncologistas/organização & administração , Antineoplásicos/economia , Análise Custo-Benefício , Organização do Financiamento , Humanos , Neoplasias/economia , OntárioRESUMO
Hematologic toxicities of cancer chemotherapy are common and often limit the ability to provide treatment in a timely and dose-intensive manner. These limitations may be of utmost importance in the adjuvant and curative intent settings. Hematologic toxicities may result in febrile neutropenia, infections, fatigue, and bleeding, all of which may lead to additional complications and prolonged hospitalization. The older cancer patient and patients with significant comorbidities may be at highest risk of neutropenic complications. Colony-stimulating factors (csfs) such as filgrastim and pegfilgrastim can effectively attenuate most of the neutropenic consequences of chemotherapy, improve the ability to continue chemotherapy on the planned schedule, and minimize the risk of febrile neutropenia and infectious morbidity and mortality. The present consensus statement reviews the use of csfs in the management of neutropenia in patients with cancer and sets out specific recommendations based on published international guidelines tailored to the specifics of the Canadian practice landscape. We review existing international guidelines, the indications for primary and secondary prophylaxis, the importance of maintaining dose intensity, and the use of csfs in leukemia, stem-cell transplantation, and radiotherapy. Specific disease-related recommendations are provided related to breast cancer, non-Hodgkin lymphoma, lung cancer, and gastrointestinal cancer. Finally, csf dosing and schedules, duration of therapy, and associated acute and potential chronic toxicities are examined.
RESUMO
Anemia is a common finding in cancer patients, most often as a result of chemotherapy. Management of anemia requires a comprehensive approach of appropriate diagnosis, exclusion of reversible causes, use of erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAS), and iron supplementation. Recently, consensus guidelines on the management of chemotherapy-induced anemia were published in Europe and the United States. The present review is intended to be a practical guide for Canadian physicians, based on published guidelines, but specifically tailored to the Canadian environment. Recommendations for the use of ESAS are presented, including initiation, target hemoglobin, dosing and adjustments, monitoring, and re-initiation. Issues of safety are also addressed, including thromboembolic risk, impact on survival, and tumour progression. The importance of iron metabolism and the use of iron supplementation (both oral and parenteral) is discussed.
RESUMO
PURPOSE: To define the optimal model of care for patients receiving outpatient chemotherapy who experience a fever. Fever is a common symptom in patients receiving chemotherapy, but the approach to evaluation of fever is not standardized. METHODS: We conducted a search for existing guidelines and a systematic review of the primary literature from database inception to November 2015. Full-text reports and conference abstracts were considered for inclusion. The search focused on the following topics: the relationship between temperature and poor outcome; predictors for the development of febrile neutropenia (FN); the timing, location, and personnel involved in fever assessment; and the provision of information to patients receiving chemotherapy. RESULTS: Eight guidelines and 38 studies were included. None of the guidelines were directly relevant to the target population because they dealt primarily with the management of FN after diagnosis. The primary studies tended to include fever as one of many symptoms assessed in the setting of chemotherapy. Temperature level was a weak predictor of poor outcomes. We did not find validated prediction models for identifying patients at risk of FN among patients receiving chemotherapy. Several studies presented approaches to symptom management that included fever among the symptoms, but results were not mature enough to merit widespread adoption. CONCLUSION: Despite the frequency and risks of fever in the setting of chemotherapy, there is limited evidence to define who needs urgent assessment, where the assessment should be performed, and how quickly. Future research in this area is greatly needed to inform new models of care.
Assuntos
Antineoplásicos/efeitos adversos , Febre/induzido quimicamente , Febre/diagnóstico , Neoplasias/tratamento farmacológico , Assistência Ambulatorial/métodos , Neutropenia Febril Induzida por Quimioterapia/diagnóstico , Humanos , Pacientes Ambulatoriais , Guias de Prática Clínica como Assunto , Prognóstico , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como AssuntoRESUMO
AIMS: Bortezomib (Velcade™, PS-341), a first-in-class proteasome inhibitor, has been extensively studied either alone or in combination with other agents for the treatment of multiple myeloma. We created a provincial guideline for the use of bortezomib, in newly diagnosed individuals (both eligible and ineligible for transplant) and in individuals with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic review was conducted searching MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library and relevant meeting abstracts. Outcomes of interest were survival, disease control, response rate, response duration, quality of life and adverse effects. Members of the Cancer Care Ontario Hematology Disease Site Group (CCO HDSG), comprising physicians with content expertise, epidemiologists and consumers, developed a guideline through a systematic process that involved assessment of the best available evidence, consensus interpretation of the evidence and a validation process involving practitioners across the province. RESULTS: The CCO HDSG recommends the use of bortezomib-based combinations in previously untreated patients with multiple myeloma who are candidates for autologous stem cell transplantation and in individuals who are ineligible for autologous stem cell transplantation. The group further recommends the use of bortezomib, alone or in combination, for patients with relapsed/refractory disease. The evidence did not establish a subgroup of patients with myeloma that should be uniquely targeted for therapy with bortezomib. Qualifying statements by the HDSG address alternative dosing options, the management of cytopenias and the prevention of toxicities, including herpes zoster reactivation. CONCLUSIONS: Bortezomib alone or in combination with other agents can be recommended for both previously untreated or relapsed/refractory patients with multiple myeloma. Guidelines for monitoring and reducing toxicity are provided.
Assuntos
Antineoplásicos/administração & dosagem , Ácidos Borônicos/administração & dosagem , Mieloma Múltiplo/tratamento farmacológico , Pirazinas/administração & dosagem , Bortezomib , HumanosRESUMO
BACKGROUND: We evaluated the activity and toxic effects of bortezomib in patients with mantle cell lymphoma. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Thirty patients, including 29 eligible patients, were enrolled; 13 had received no prior chemotherapy. The dose of bortezomib was 1.3 mg/m2 given on days 1, 4, 8 and 11 every 21 days. Response was assessed according to the International Workshop Criteria for non-Hodgkin's lymphoma and toxicity graded using the National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria version 2.0. RESULTS: There were 13 responding patients (46.4%; 95% confidence interval=27.5% to 66.1%), including one unconfirmed complete remission. The median response duration was 10 months. Response rates were similar in previously untreated (46.2%) and treated (46.7%) patients. Neurological toxicity and myalgia led to treatment discontinuation in 10 patients after two to seven treatment cycles. Five serious adverse events (including two deaths) associated with fluid retention were observed in the first 12 patients. We subsequently excluded patients with baseline effusions, dyspnea or edema; no further events were seen. CONCLUSIONS: Bortezomib is active in treating patients with mantle cell lymphoma. While cumulative neuromuscular toxic effects limited therapy duration and specific issues related to fluid retention require further evaluation, continued study of this drug in combination regimens is warranted.