Medical nutrition therapy during intensive remission-induction treatment and hematopoietic stem cell transplantation in acute myeloid leukemia patients: Hematologists' experiences and perspectives.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: The European Societies for Clinical Nutrition and Metabolism (ESPEN) and Blood and Marrow Transplantation (EBMT) recommend enteral nutrition (EN) as the first-choice medical nutrition therapy in acute myeloid leukemia (AML) patients undergoing intensive treatments, including high-dose remission-induction chemotherapy and hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT). However, parenteral nutrition (PN) remains the preferred method of nutrition support in current clinical practice. The aim of this qualitative study was to gain insight into hematologists' experiences and perspectives regarding the choice and ESPEN/EBMT recommendations on EN versus PN. METHODS: Online semi-structured interviews were conducted with one hematologist from each of the 21 hospitals offering intensive AML treatments in the Netherlands, using Microsoft Teams. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim and thematically analyzed using Atlas. ti. One hundred nineteen hematologists working in the same hospitals were invited to complete a short online questionnaire survey (SurveyMonkey®) regarding their knowledge and opinion on the ESPEN/EBMT guidelines recommending EN over PN during intensive AML treatments. The results of this survey are presented in a descriptive way. RESULTS: Fifty-nine hematologists participated in this study (42% overall response rate), of which 21 in the semi-structured interviews (response rate 100%) and 38 in the online survey (response rate 32%). Hematologists considered medical nutrition therapy important for prevention and treatment of malnutrition and associated adverse outcomes in AML patients undergoing intensive remission-induction treatment and HSCT. However, opposed to the ESPEN/EBMT guidelines, the vast majority of hematologists were hesitant or reluctant to use EN instead of PN as the first-choice medical nutrition therapy in these patients. The most frequently cited barriers to use EN were the expected low feasibility and tolerance of EN, feeding tube-related discomfort and bleeding risk, and patient refusal. Other barriers to follow the guidelines on EN were related to personal factors, including hematologists' knowledge (lack of awareness and familiarity) and attitude (lack of agreement, outcome expectancy, experience, success, motivation, and learning culture), guideline-related factors (lack of evidence and applicability), and external factors (lack of collaboration and resources). Facilitators included strategies for nutrition education and dissemination of nutritional guidelines, interprofessional and patient collaboration, availability of feeding tubes that can be inserted without endoscopy and stronger scientific evidence. CONCLUSIONS: Hematologists recognized the importance of medical nutrition therapy for reducing malnutrition and related negative outcomes during intensive AML treatments. However, contrary to the ESPEN/EBMT guidelines, they preferred PN instead of EN as the medical nutrition therapy of first choice. To reduce compliance barriers, interventions should focus on improving hematologists' knowledge of medical nutrition therapy and dietary guidelines, enhancing success rates of EN by adequately triaging patients eligible for EN and inserting duodenal feeding tubes using an electromagnetic sensing device without endoscopy, developing decision aids and multidisciplinary guidelines and care pathways. Furthermore, future trials should focus on the feasibility and benefits of EN versus PN both during remission-induction treatment and HSCT.

First-Line Venetoclax Combinations in Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia.

BACKGROUND: Randomized trials of venetoclax plus anti-CD20 antibodies as first-line treatment in fit patients (i.e., those with a low burden of coexisting conditions) with advanced chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) have been lacking. METHODS: In a phase 3, open-label trial, we randomly assigned, in a 1:1:1:1 ratio, fit patients with CLL who did not have TP53 aberrations to receive six cycles of chemoimmunotherapy (fludarabine-cyclophosphamide-rituximab or bendamustine-rituximab) or 12 cycles of venetoclax-rituximab, venetoclax-obinutuzumab, or venetoclax-obinutuzumab-ibrutinib. Ibrutinib was discontinued after two consecutive measurements of undetectable minimal residual disease or could be extended. The primary end points were undetectable minimal residual disease (sensitivity, <10-4 [i.e., <1 CLL cell in 10,000 leukocytes]) as assessed by flow cytometry in peripheral blood at month 15 and progression-free survival. RESULTS: A total of 926 patients were assigned to one of the four treatment regimens (229 to chemoimmunotherapy, 237 to venetoclax-rituximab, 229 to venetoclax-obinutuzumab, and 231 to venetoclax-obinutuzumab-ibrutinib). At month 15, the percentage of patients with undetectable minimal residual disease was significantly higher in the venetoclax-obinutuzumab group (86.5%; 97.5% confidence interval [CI], 80.6 to 91.1) and the venetoclax-obinutuzumab-ibrutinib group (92.2%; 97.5% CI, 87.3 to 95.7) than in the chemoimmunotherapy group (52.0%; 97.5% CI, 44.4 to 59.5; P<0.001 for both comparisons), but it was not significantly higher in the venetoclax-rituximab group (57.0%; 97.5% CI, 49.5 to 64.2; P = 0.32). Three-year progression-free survival was 90.5% in the venetoclax-obinutuzumab-ibrutinib group and 75.5% in the chemoimmunotherapy group (hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.32; 97.5% CI, 0.19 to 0.54; P<0.001). Progression-free survival at 3 years was also higher with venetoclax-obinutuzumab (87.7%; hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.42; 97.5% CI, 0.26 to 0.68; P<0.001), but not with venetoclax-rituximab (80.8%; hazard ratio, 0.79; 97.5% CI, 0.53 to 1.18; P = 0.18). Grade 3 and grade 4 infections were more common with chemoimmunotherapy (18.5%) and venetoclax-obinutuzumab-ibrutinib (21.2%) than with venetoclax-rituximab (10.5%) or venetoclax-obinutuzumab (13.2%). CONCLUSIONS: Venetoclax-obinutuzumab with or without ibrutinib was superior to chemoimmunotherapy as first-line treatment in fit patients with CLL. (Funded by AbbVie and others; GAIA-CLL13 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02950051; EudraCT number, 2015-004936-36.).

High karyotypic complexity is an independent prognostic factor in patients with CLL treated with venetoclax combinations.

Complex karyotypes have been associated with inferior outcomes in chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) treated with chemoimmunotherapy (CIT), whereas their prognostic impact in the context of venetoclax-based treatments is still debated. In this prospective analysis on karyotype complexity in CLL, we evaluated the impact of complex (≥3 chromosomal aberrations [CAs], CKTs) and highly complex karyotypes (≥5 CAs; hCKTs) as well as specific aberrations in previously untreated patients without TP53 aberrations undergoing either CIT or time-limited venetoclax-based therapies in the phase 3 GAIA/CLL13 trial. Karyotype analyses were available for 895 of 926 patients (96.7%), of whom 153 (17%) had a CKT and 43 (5%) hCKT. In the CIT arm, CKT was associated with shorter progression-free survival (PFS) (hazard ratio [HR] 2.58; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 1.54-4.32; P < .001) and overall survival (HR, 3.25; 95% CI, 1.03-10.26; P = .044). In the pooled venetoclax arms, a multivariable analysis identified hCKTs (HR, 1.96; 95% CI, 1.03-3.72; P = .041), but not CKTs, as independent adverse prognosticators for PFS. The presence of translocations (unbalanced and/or balanced) was also independently associated with shorter PFSs in the venetoclax arms. CIT led to the acquisition of additional CAs (mean CAs, 2.0-3.4; from baseline to CLL progression), whereas karyotype complexity remained stable after venetoclax-based treatments (2.0, both time points). This analysis establishes highly complex karyotypes and translocations as adverse prognostic factors in the context of venetoclax-based combination treatments. The findings of this study support the incorporation of karyotyping into the standard diagnostic workup of CLL, because it identifies patients at high risk of poor treatment outcomes and thereby improves prognostication. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT02950051.

Radiation-Induced Giant Cell Granuloma Mimicking Relapsed Hodgkin Lymphoma at FDG-PET/CT.

A 22-year-old woman was diagnosed with intermediate risk stage II Hodgkin lymphoma and treated with three cycles of adriamycin, bleomycin, vinblastine, and dacarbazine (ABVD) followed by involved-field radiation therapy. A complete metabolic remission was achieved after two cycles of ABVD, which was maintained until three years after completion of treatment. Follow-up FDG-PET/CT four years after completion of treatment, however, showed a new FDG-avid (Deauville score of 4) lesion in the right scapula, suggesting relapsed disease. Computer tomography (CT)-guided biopsy of this lesion was performed and subsequent histological examination revealed a radiation-induced giant cell granuloma.

18F-FDG or 3'-deoxy-3'-18F-fluorothymidine to detect transformation of follicular lymphoma.

UNLABELLED: Considering the different treatment strategy for transformed follicular lymphoma (TF) as opposed to follicular lymphoma (FL), diagnosing transformation early in the disease course is important. There is evidence that (18)F-FDG has utility as a biomarker of transformation. However, quantitative thresholds may require inclusion of homogeneous non-Hodgkin lymphoma subtypes to account for differences in tracer uptake per subtype. Moreover, because proliferation is a hallmark of transformation, 3'-deoxy-3'-(18)F-fluorothymidine ((18)F-FLT) might be superior to (18)F-FDG in this setting. To define the best tracer for detection of TF, we performed a prospective a head-to-head comparison of (18)F-FDG and (18)F-FLT in patients with FL and TF. METHODS: (18)F-FDG and (18)F-FLT PET scans were obtained in 17 patients with FL and 9 patients with TF. We measured the highest maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax), defined as the lymph node with the highest uptake per patient, and SUVrange, defined as the difference between the SUVmax of the lymph node with the highest and lowest uptake per patient. To reduce partial-volume effects, only lymph nodes larger than 3 cm(3) (A50 isocontour) were analyzed. Scans were acquired 1 h after injection of 185 MBq of (18)F-FDG or (18)F-FLT. To determine the discriminative ability of SUVmax and SUVrange of both tracers for TF, receiver-operating-characteristic curve analysis was performed. RESULTS: The highest SUVmax was significantly higher for TF than FL for both (18)F-FDG and (18)F-FLT (P < 0.001). SUVrange was significantly higher for TF than FL for (18)F-FDG (P = 0.029) but not for (18)F-FLT (P = 0.075). The ability of (18)F-FDG to discriminate between FL and TF was superior to that of (18)F-FLT for both the highest SUVmax (P = 0.039) and the SUVrange (P = 0.012). The cutoff value for the highest SUVmax of (18)F-FDG aiming at 100% sensitivity with a maximum specificity was found to be 14.5 (corresponding specificity, 82%). For (18)F-FLT, these values were 5.1 and 18%, respectively. When the same method was applied to SUVrange, the cutoff values were 5.8 for (18)F-FDG (specificity, 71%) and 1.5 for (18)F-FLT (specificity, 36%). CONCLUSION: Our data suggest that (18)F-FDG PET is a better biomarker for TF than (18)F-FLT PET. The proposed thresholds of highest SUVmax and SUVrange should be prospectively validated.

Comparison of modern and conventional imaging techniques in establishing multiple myeloma-related bone disease: a systematic review.

This systematic review of studies compared magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), (18) F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET), FDG-PET with computerized tomography (PET-CT) and CT with whole body X-Ray (WBXR) or (whole body) CT in order to provide evidence-based diagnostic guidelines in multiple myeloma bone disease. A comprehensive search of 3 bibliographic databases was performed; methodological quality was assessed using Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS) criteria (score 1-14). Data from 32 directly comparative studies were extracted. The mean QUADAS score was 7·1 (3-11), with quality hampered mainly by a poor description of selection and execution criteria. All index tests had a higher detection rate when compared to WBXR, with up to 80% more lesions detected by the newer imaging techniques; MRI (1·12-1·82) CT (1·04-1·33), PET (1·00-1·58) and PET-CT (1·27-1·45). However, the modern imaging techniques detected fewer lesions in the skull and ribs. In a direct comparison CT and MRI performed equally with respect to detection rate and sensitivity. This systematic review supports the International Myeloma Working Group guidelines, which recommend that WBCT can replace WBXR. In our opinion, the equal performance of MRI also indicates that it is a valuable alternative. As lesions of the skull and ribs are underdiagnosed by modern imaging techniques we advise additional X-rays of these regions. The consequences of this approach are discussed.

¹8F-fluoro-deoxyglucose positron emission tomography in assessment of myeloma-related bone disease: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: The goal of this study was to conduct a comparative analysis of whole body X-ray (WBXR) and (18) F-fluoro-deoxyglucose positron emission tomography ((18) FDG PET) in staging and response assessment of multiple myeloma. METHODS: We performed a systematic review of studies comparing (18) FDG PET with WBXR and/or magnetic resonance imaging in terms of sensitivity for myeloma-related bone disease at staging and during follow-up. RESULTS: Eighteen studies involving 798 patients met the inclusion criteria. The mean Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS) score, expressed as a percentage of the maximum score, was 61%. In 7 studies (n = 242 patients), concordance assessment between WBXR and (18) FDG PET scan was possible, showing a higher sensitivity of the (18) FDG PET in the detection of myeloma bone lesions in 6 studies. The only study reporting on the prognostic value of (18) FDG PET at staging found that the number of FDG-avid focal lesions was an independent prognostic parameter. In addition, the limited studies on response monitoring showed that normalization of (18) FDG PET during treatment correlated with a superior clinical outcome. CONCLUSIONS: In general, (18) FDG PET has a superior sensitivity for myeloma bone lesions compared with WBXR. Future studies have to validate the additive value of myeloma-related bone disease detected on (18) FDG PET-computed tomography (CT) in predicting outcome. Response monitoring with the use of (18) FDG PET-CT during treatment is promising, allowing more precise prediction of prognosis compared with the standard response monitoring. In view of the expanding treatment options for multiple myeloma, this may provide important information for treatment decisions in the future.