Hematocrit control and thrombotic risk in patients with polycythemia vera treated with ruxolitinib in clinical practice.

Polycythemia vera (PV) is a myeloproliferative neoplasm characterized by unregulated red blood cell production resulting in elevated hemoglobin and/or hematocrit levels. Patients often have symptoms such as fatigue, pruritus, and painful splenomegaly, but are also at risk of thrombosis, both venous and arterial. Ruxolitinib, a selective Janus kinase inhibitor, is approved by the US Food and Drug Administration as second-line cytoreductive treatment after intolerance or inadequate response to hydroxyurea. Although ruxolitinib has been widely used in this setting, limited data exist in the literature on ruxolitinib treatment patterns and outcomes among patients with PV in routine clinical practice. We report a retrospective, observational, cohort study of patients treated for PV with ruxolitinib across three US centers (academic and regional practice) from December 2014-December 2019. The study included 69 patients, with a median follow-up duration of 3.7 years (95% CI, 2.9-4.4). Our data demonstrate very high rates of hematocrit control (88% of patients by three months and 89% by six months); few patients required dose adjustments or suspension. No arterial thromboses were observed; however, the follow-up duration does not allow for the generation of meaningful conclusions from this. Three patients had thrombotic events; one was in the setting of a second malignancy, one post-operative, and a third related to prolonged immobility. We also found that 28% of patients initiated ruxolitinib as a result of poorly controlled platelet counts, second only to hydroxyurea intolerance (46%) as a reason to start therapy. In clinical practice, ruxolitinib continues to be effective in controlling hematocrit levels after three and six months of treatment in patients and is associated with low thrombotic risk.

Financial Toxicity Intervention Improves Outcomes in Patients With Hematologic Malignancy.

PURPOSE: Patients with hematologic malignancies are extremely vulnerable to financial toxicity (FT) because of the high costs of treatment and health care utilization. This pilot study identified patients at high risk because of FT and attempted to improve clinical outcomes with comprehensive intervention. METHODS: All patients who presented to the Levine Cancer Institute's Leukemia Clinic between May 26, 2019, and March 10, 2020, were screened for inclusion by standardized two question previsit survey. Patients screening positive were enrolled in the comprehensive intervention that used nurse navigators, clinical pharmacists, and community pro bono financial planners. Primary outcomes were defined as improvement in mental and physical quality of life in all patients and improvement in overall survival in the high-risk disease group. RESULTS: One hundred seven patients completed comprehensive intervention. Patients experiencing FT had increased rates of noncompliance including to prescription (16.8%) and over-the-counter medications (15.9%). The intervention resulted in statistically significantly higher quality of life when measured by using Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System physical (12.5 ± 2.2 v 13.7 ± 1.8) and mental health scores (11.4 ± 2.2 v 12.4 ± 2.2; all P < .001). In patients with high-risk disease (as determined by using disease-specific scoring systems), risk of death in those receiving the intervention was 0.44 times the risk of death in those without the intervention after adjusting for race, and treatment with stem-cell transplant, oral chemotherapy, or immunotherapy (95% CI, 0.21 to 0.94; P = .034). CONCLUSION: Screening and intervention on FT for patients with hematologic malignancies is associated with increased quality of life and survival.

Effectiveness of the Ad26.COV2.S vaccine in health-care workers in South Africa (the Sisonke study): results from a single-arm, open-label, phase 3B, implementation study.

BACKGROUND: We aimed to assess the effectiveness of a single dose of the Ad26.COV2.S vaccine (Johnson & Johnson) in health-care workers in South Africa during two waves of the South African COVID-19 epidemic. METHODS: In the single-arm, open-label, phase 3B implementation Sisonke study, health-care workers aged 18 years and older were invited for vaccination at one of 122 vaccination sites nationally. Participants received a single dose of 5 × 1010 viral particles of the Ad26.COV2.S vaccine. Vaccinated participants were linked with their person-level data from one of two national medical insurance schemes (scheme A and scheme B) and matched for COVID-19 risk with an unvaccinated member of the general population. The primary outcome was vaccine effectiveness against severe COVID-19, defined as COVID-19-related admission to hospital, hospitalisation requiring critical or intensive care, or death, in health-care workers compared with the general population, ascertained 28 days or more after vaccination or matching, up to data cutoff. This study is registered with the South African National Clinical Trial Registry, DOH-27-022021-6844, ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04838795, and the Pan African Clinical Trials Registry, PACTR202102855526180, and is closed to accrual. FINDINGS: Between Feb 17 and May 17, 2021, 477 102 health-care workers were enrolled and vaccinated, of whom 357 401 (74·9%) were female and 119 701 (25·1%) were male, with a median age of 42·0 years (33·0-51·0). 215 813 vaccinated individuals were matched with 215 813 unvaccinated individuals. As of data cutoff (July 17, 2021), vaccine effectiveness derived from the total matched cohort was 83% (95% CI 75-89) to prevent COVID-19-related deaths, 75% (69-82) to prevent COVID-19-related hospital admissions requiring critical or intensive care, and 67% (62-71) to prevent COVID-19-related hospitalisations. The vaccine effectiveness for all three outcomes were consistent across scheme A and scheme B. The vaccine effectiveness was maintained in older health-care workers and those with comorbidities including HIV infection. During the course of the study, the beta (B.1.351) and then the delta (B.1.617.2) SARS-CoV-2 variants of concerns were dominant, and vaccine effectiveness remained consistent (for scheme A plus B vaccine effectiveness against COVID-19-related hospital admission during beta wave was 62% [95% CI 42-76] and during delta wave was 67% [62-71], and vaccine effectiveness against COVID-19-related death during beta wave was 86% [57-100] and during delta wave was 82% [74-89]). INTERPRETATION: The single-dose Ad26.COV2.S vaccine shows effectiveness against severe COVID-19 disease and COVID-19-related death after vaccination, and against both beta and delta variants, providing real-world evidence for its use globally. FUNDING: National Treasury of South Africa, the National Department of Health, Solidarity Response Fund NPC, The Michael & Susan Dell Foundation, The Elma Vaccines and Immunization Foundation, and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

Evaluation of SLE arthritis using frequency domain optical imaging.

OBJECTIVES: Systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) affects the joints in up to 95% of patients. The diagnosis and evaluation of SLE arthritis remain challenging in both practice and clinical trials. Frequency domain optical imaging (FDOI) has been previously used to assess joint involvement in inflammatory arthritis. The objective of this study was to evaluate FDOI in SLE arthritis. METHODS: Ninety-six proximal interphalangeal (PIP) joints from 16 patients with SLE arthritis and 60 PIP joints from 10 age-matched, gender-matched and race/ethnicity-matched controls were examined. A laser beam with a wavelength of 670 nm, 1 mm in diameter and intensity modulated at 300 MHz and 600 MHz was directed onto the dorsal surface of each joint, scanning across a sagittal plane. The transmitted light intensities and phase shifts were measured with an intensified charge-coupled device camera. The data were analysed using Discriminant Analysis and Support Vector Machine algorithms. RESULTS: The amplitude and phase of the transmitted light were significantly different between SLE and control PIPs (p<0.05). Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis of cross-validated models showed an Area Under the ROC Curve (AUC)of 0.89 with corresponding sensitivity of 95%, specificity of 79%, and accuracy of 80%. CONCLUSION: This study is the first evaluation of optical methods in the assessment of SLE arthritis; there was a statistically significant difference in the FDOI signals between patients with SLE and healthy volunteers. The results show that FDOI may have the potential to provide an objective, user-independent, evaluation of SLE PIP joints arthritis.

Equal access to care and nurse navigation leads to equitable outcomes for minorities with aggressive large B-cell lymphoma.

BACKGROUND: Aggressive large B-cell lymphomas (LBCLs) are curable, but previous studies have shown inferior outcomes in minorities. Nurse navigation programs can improve patient outcomes by providing patient support. This study presents the outcomes of White and minority patients with aggressive LBCL at an institution with an active nurse navigation program. METHODS: The authors prospectively collected baseline characteristics, treatment regimens, and outcome data for patients with aggressive LBCL. Navigation encounters were characterized as low or high intensity. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were calculated with Kaplan-Meier methods. Baseline characteristics were compared with Fisher exact tests. RESULTS: Two hundred four consecutive patients (47 minority patients and 157 White patients) were included. Results were presented as minorities versus Whites. There were no differences in prognostic scores (Revised International Prognostic Index score of 3-5, 43% vs 47%; P = .50), frontline chemotherapy (98% vs 96%; P = .68), or the incidence of relapsed/refractory disease (40% vs 38%; P = .74). For relapsed/refractory LBCL, similar proportions of patients underwent hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (32% vs 29%; P > .99) or chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy (16% vs 19%; P > .99). Enrollment in clinical trials was comparable (17% vs 14%; P = .64). More than 85% received nurse navigation, but minorities had higher intensity navigation encounters (42% vs 21%; P = .01). The 2-year OS rates were 81% and 76% for minorities and Whites, respectively (P = .27); the 2-year PFS rates were 62% and 65%, respectively (P = .78). CONCLUSIONS: This study shows similar survival between Whites and minorities with aggressive LBCL, which was likely due to equal access to guideline-concordant therapy. Minorities received higher intensity navigation encounters, which may have helped them to overcome socioeconomic disadvantages.

The Rise and Fall of Hydroxychloroquine with the COVID-19 Pandemic: Narrative Review of Selected Data.

Since the first outbreak of Coronavirus Disease-2019 (COVID-19) in January 2020, the medical community has been pursuing effective countermeasures. Early in the pandemic, several small clinical and in vitro studies from France and China reported on the efficacy of chloroquine (CQ) and hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) against SARS-CoV-2 infections, which generated global attention towards these decades-old antimalarials (AM) and heralded numerous studies investigating their role in treating COVID-19. Despite several observational studies early in the pandemic affirming their beneficial role in treating COVID-19, 12 clinical studies reported no mortality benefits for CQ/HCQ in COVID-19 patients. The excitement over CQ/HCQ was ultimately quenched after three large randomized clinical trials, the COALITION-I trial in Brazil, the RECOVERY trial in the United Kingdom (UK), and the SOLIDARITY trial from World Health Organization (WHO) consistently reported no beneficial effects for CQ/HCQ in hospitalized COVID-19 patients. While initial studies suggested that CQ/HCQ might have a role in treating the early phases of infection, the results from three rigorously designed studies investigating their role in non-hospitalized COVID-19 patients were equivocal and inconsistent. Here we review the major social events related to the therapeutic use of CQ/HCQ in COVID-19, and the data from selected clinical studies evaluating their efficacy in hospitalized and non-hospitalized COVID-19 patients along with the major safety concerns.