Reaching beyond maximum grade: progress and future directions for modernising the assessment and reporting of adverse events in haematological malignancies.

Remarkable improvements in outcomes for many haematological malignancies have been driven primarily by a proliferation of novel therapeutics over the past two decades. Targeted agents, immune and cellular therapies, and combination regimens have adverse event profiles distinct from conventional finite cytotoxic chemotherapies. In 2018, a Commission comprising patient advocates, clinicians, clinical investigators, regulators, biostatisticians, and pharmacists representing a broad range of academic and clinical cancer expertise examined issues of adverse event evaluation in the context of both newer and existing therapies for haematological cancers. The Commission proposed immediate actions and long-term solutions in the current processes in adverse event assessment, patient-reported outcomes in haematological malignancies, toxicities in cellular therapies, long-term toxicity and survivorship in haematological malignancies, issues in regulatory approval from an international perspective, and toxicity reporting in haematological malignancies and the real-world setting. In this follow-up report, the Commission describes progress that has been made in these areas since the initial report.

Beyond maximum grade: modernising the assessment and reporting of adverse events in haematological malignancies.

Tremendous progress in treatment and outcomes has been achieved across the whole range of haematological malignancies in the past two decades. Although cure rates for aggressive malignancies have increased, nowhere has progress been more impactful than in the management of typically incurable forms of haematological cancer. Population-based data have shown that 5-year survival for patients with chronic myelogenous and chronic lymphocytic leukaemia, indolent B-cell lymphomas, and multiple myeloma has improved markedly. This improvement is a result of substantial changes in disease management strategies in these malignancies. Several haematological malignancies are now chronic diseases that are treated with continuously administered therapies that have unique side-effects over time. In this Commission, an international panel of clinicians, clinical investigators, methodologists, regulators, and patient advocates representing a broad range of academic and clinical cancer expertise examine adverse events in haematological malignancies. The issues pertaining to assessment of adverse events examined here are relevant to a range of malignancies and have been, to date, underexplored in the context of haematology. The aim of this Commission is to improve toxicity assessment in clinical trials in haematological malignancies by critically examining the current process of adverse event assessment, highlighting the need to incorporate patient-reported outcomes, addressing issues unique to stem-cell transplantation and survivorship, appraising challenges in regulatory approval, and evaluating toxicity in real-world patients. We have identified a range of priority issues in these areas and defined potential solutions to challenges associated with adverse event assessment in the current treatment landscape of haematological malignancies.

Comprehensive assessment of genetic and molecular features predicting outcome in patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia: results from the US Intergroup Phase III Trial E2997.

PURPOSE: Genomic features including unmutated immunoglobulin variable region heavy chain (IgVH) genes, del(11q22.3), del(17p13.1), and p53 mutations have been reported to predict the clinical course and overall survival of patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). In addition, ZAP-70 and Bcl-2 family proteins have been explored as predictors of outcome. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We prospectively evaluated the prognostic significance of a comprehensive panel of laboratory factors on both response and progression-free survival (PFS) using samples and data from 235 patients enrolled onto a therapeutic trial. Patients received either fludarabine (FL; n = 113) or fludarabine plus cyclophosphamide (FC; n = 122) as part of a US Intergroup randomized trial for previously untreated CLL patients. RESULTS: Complete response (CR) rates were 24.6% for patients receiving FC and 5.3% for patients receiving FL (P = .00004). PFS was statistically significantly longer in patients receiving FC (median, 33.5 months for patients receiving FC and 19.9 months for patients receiving FL; P < .0001). The occurrence of del(17p13.1) (hazard ratio, 3.428; P = .0002) or del(11q22.3) (hazard ratio, 1.904; P = .006) was associated with reduced PFS. CR and overall response rates were not significantly different based on cytogenetics, IgVH mutational status, CD38 expression, or p53 mutational status. Expression of ZAP-70, Bcl-2, Bax, Mcl-1, XIAP, Caspase-3, and Traf-1 was not associated with either clinical response or PFS. CONCLUSION: These results support the use of interphase cytogenetic analysis, but not IgVH, CD38 expression, or ZAP-70 status, to predict outcome of FL-based chemotherapy. Patients with high-risk cytogenetic features should be considered for alternative therapies.