Performance of serum procalcitonin as a biochemical predictor of death in hematology patients with febrile neutropenia.

INTRODUCTION: Historically, the measurement of serum procalcitonin (PCT) levels in patients with leukopenia has been rejected without sufficient prospective evidence to justify this argument. On the other hand, the accumulated use of broad spectrum antibiotics in these patients and their consequences make the use of PCT attractive in an effort to reduce its use. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We conducted a prospective study between 2016 and 2018, recruiting newly diagnosed FN patients, evaluating them with PCT levels during the first 24 h. After this we evaluate them with overall survival throughout the follow-up. RESULTS: A total of 81 episodes of FN in 72 patients were included. We report a mortality of 27.2% in our cohort. The mean serum PCT in these patients was 4.01 ng/mL compared to 0.42 ng/mL in the survivors group (p < 0.01). Using ROC curves, we determined a cut-off point to predict septic shock/death at 0.46 ng/mL. Patients with a procalcitonin >0.46 ng/mL had an increased risk of death, with a HR of 4.43, (p = 0.048). CONCLUSION: In conclusion, in our trial a single PCT on admission at a cut-off value of 0.46 ng/mL was able to predict the occurrence of septic shock and death in FN patients.

Cyclosporine A for the Prevention of Ocular Graft versus Host Disease in Allogeneic Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplant Recipients Is Safe and Feasible.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of ocular cyclosporine in the prevention of the development of ocular graft versus host disease (oGVHD) in patients undergoing allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (AHSCT) in comparison with historic data. DESIGN: We developed a longitudinal, observational, prospective nonrandomized study. We evaluated the feasibility of prophylactic use of topical cyclosporine A (CsA) to prevent or decrease the incidence of oGVHD and compared this with historic data. METHODS: Patients undergoing AHSCT were treated with prophylactic topical CsA for 12 months after engraftment, followed by serial ophthalmic evaluations, including the Schirmer test. RESULTS: Twenty patients were included. No serious adverse effects were reported. Poor adherence was documented in 15% of patients. In spite of observing extra-ocular GVHD (acute and chronic GVHD incidence of 50 and 45%, respectively), only 1 in 20 patients developed oGVHD over the 20-month follow-up for the entire cohort. No statistically significant difference was observed in the incidence of oGVHD when compared to a historical cohort. CONCLUSIONS: Topical CsA as a prophylactic measure for oGVHD, administered over a period of 1 year after grafting, is safe and feasible and may decrease the incidence of ophthalmic manifestations of GVHD. These findings must be confirmed in a randomized trial.

Long-Term Efficacy of High-Dose Imatinib in Hispanic Patients Without Access to Second-Generation Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors Treated in LATAM Centers.

BACKGROUND: While second-generation tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) revolutionized treatment for patients with chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) who developed a suboptimal response to imatinib, many patients in developing countries are fixed to the latter due to socioeconomic barriers. Despite this scenario, scarce information is available to evaluate the clinical prognosis of these patients. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort analysis to compare the overall mortality of patients with CML who developed a suboptimal response to a standard dose of imatinib and were treated with either high-dose imatinib or a second-generation TKI. We created a marginal structural model with inverse probability weighting and stabilized weights. Our primary outcome was overall survival (OS) at 150 months. Our secondary outcomes were disease-free survival (DFS) at 150 months and adverse events. RESULTS: The cohort included 148 patients, of which 32 received high-dose imatinib and 116 a second-generation TKI. No difference was found in the 150-month overall survival risk (RR: 95% CI 0.91, 0.55-1.95, P-value = .77; RD: -0.04, -0.3 to 0.21, P-value = .78) and disease-free survival (RR: 1.02, 95% CI 0.53-2.71, P-value = .96; RD: 0.01, -0.26 to 0.22, P-value = .96). There was also no difference in the incidence of adverse events in either group. CONCLUSION: Ideally, patients who develop a suboptimal response to imatinib should be switched to a second-generation TKI. If impossible, however, our findings suggest that patients treated with high-dose imatinib have a similar overall survival and disease-free survival prognosis to patients receiving a second-generation TKI.