Association of Country-Specific Socioeconomic Factors With Survival of Patients Who Experience Severe Classic Acute Graft-vs.-Host Disease After Allogeneic Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation. An Analysis From the Transplant Complications Working Party of the EBMT.

Acute graft-vs.-host disease (aGvHD) is one of the most frequent causes of transplant-related mortality (TRM) after allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (alloHCT). Its treatment is complex and costly. The aim of this study was to retrospectively analyze the impact of country-specific socioeconomic factors on outcome of patients who experience severe aGvHD. Adults with hematological malignancies receiving alloHCT from either HLA-matched siblings (n = 1,328) or unrelated donors (n = 2,824) developing grade 3 or 4 aGvHD were included. In univariate analysis, the probability of TRM at 2 years was increased for countries with lower current Health Care Expenditure (HCE, p = 0.04), lower HCE as % of Gross Domestic Product per capita (p = 0.003) and lower values of the Human Development Index (p = 0.02). In a multivariate model, the risk of TRM was most strongly predicted by current HCE (HR = 0.76, p = 0.006). HCE >median was also associated with reduced risk of the overall mortality (HR 0.73, p = 0.0006) and reduced risk of treatment failure (either relapse or TRM; HR 0.77, p = 0.004). We conclude that country-specific socioeconomic factors, in particular current HCE, are strongly associated with survival of patients who experience severe aGvHD.

Prospective target assessment and multimodal prediction of survival for personalized and risk-adapted treatment strategies in multiple myeloma in the GMMG-MM5 multicenter trial.

BACKGROUND: Personalized and risk-adapted treatment strategies in multiple myeloma prerequisite feasibility of prospective assessment, reporting of targets, and prediction of survival probability in clinical routine. Our aim was first to set up and prospectively test our experimental and analysis strategy to perform advanced molecular diagnostics, i.e., interphase fluorescence in-situ hybridization (iFISH) in ≥ 90% and gene expression profiling (GEP) in ≥ 80% of patients within the first cycle of induction chemotherapy in a phase III trial, seen as prerequisite for target expression-based personalized treatment strategies. Secondly, whether the assessment of risk based on the integration of clinical, cytogenetic, and expression-based parameters ("metascoring") is possible in this setting and superior to the use of single prognostic factors. METHODS: We prospectively performed plasma cell purification, GEP using DNA-microarrays, and iFISH within our randomized multicenter GMMG-MM5-trial recruiting 604 patients between July 2010 and November 2013. Patient data were analyzed using our published gene expression report (GEP-R): after quality and identity control, integrated risk assessment (HM metascore) and targets were reported in clinical routine as pdf-document. RESULTS: Bone marrow aspirates were obtained from 573/604 patients (95%) and could be CD138-purified in 559/573 (97.6%). Of these, iFISH-analysis was possible in 556 (99.5%), GEP in 458 (82%). Identity control using predictors for sex, light and heavy chain type allowed the exclusion of potential sample interchanges (none occurred). All samples passed quality control. As exemplary targets, IGF1R-expression was reported expressed in 33.1%, AURKA in 43.2% of patients. Risk stratification using an integrated approach, i.e., HM metascore, delineated 10/77/13% of patients as high/medium/low risk, transmitting into significantly different median progression-free survival (PFS) of 15 vs. 39 months vs. not reached (NR; P < 0.001) and median overall survival (OS) of 41 months vs. NR vs. NR (P < 0.001). Five-year PFS and OS-rates were 5/31/54% and 25/68/98%, respectively. Survival prediction by HM metascore (Brier score 0.132, P < 0.001) is superior compared with the current gold standard, i.e., revised ISS score (0.137, P = 0.005). CONCLUSIONS: Prospective assessment and reporting of targets and risk by GEP-R in clinical routine are feasible in ≥ 80% of patients within the first cycle of induction chemotherapy, simultaneously allowing superior survival prediction.

A cost and resource utilization analysis of micafungin bridging for hemato-oncological high-risk patients undergoing allogeneic stem cell transplantation.

BACKGROUND: Intravenous bridging strategies increase exposure of antifungal prophylaxis in high-risk hematological patients. The cost-effectiveness of such strategies has not been analyzed. METHODS: A recent study compared the impact of oral posaconazole (POS) and oral posaconazole with intravenous micafungin bridging (POS-MIC) as prophylactic antifungal regimens in patients undergoing allogeneic stem cell transplantation (aSCT). Based on data from the Cologne Cohort of Neutropenic Patients (CoCoNut), a health economic evaluation of direct treatment costs was performed to analyze the economic impact of micafungin bridging. Analysis was undertaken based on current guidelines for the German societal perspective with an annual discount rate of 5%, whereby indirect costs were disregarded due to the severity of the underlying disease. Sensitivity analysis of cost calculation with different discount rates was performed to improve robustness of our health economic evaluation. RESULTS: A retrospective case-control analysis of patients undergoing aSCT between 05/2006 and 07/2011 was performed; 106 patients each in the POS and POS-MIC group were included. In the POS and POS-MIC group, mean costs per patient for the treatment on bone marrow transplant ward were €27,228 (95% CI: €24,932-€29,525) vs. €27,894 (95% CI: €26,414-€29,375; P = 0.629), for diagnostic measures €2124 (95% CI: €1823-€2425) vs. €1269 (95% CI: €1168-€1370; P ≤ 0.001), for laboratory findings €10,612 (95% CI: €9681-€11,544) vs. €8836 (95% CI: €8198-€9475; P = 0.002), and for overall antifungal treatment €6105 (95% CI: €4703-€7508) vs. €6943 (95% CI: €5393-€8493; P = 0.428), resulting in mean overall costs per patient of €60,304 (95% CI: €53,969-€66,639) vs. €58,089 (95% CI: €51,736-64,442; P = 0.625). CONCLUSIONS: Our health economic evaluation shows micafungin bridging in aSCT patients did not result in excess cost. Higher acquisition costs of antifungal prophylaxis were balanced by a reduced incidence of possible IFD and lower costs for empirical, preemptive, and targeted antifungal therapy as well as lower costs for diagnostic measures and laboratory tests in the micafungin bridging group.

18-Fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography for assessment of response to brentuximab vedotin treatment in relapsed and refractory Hodgkin lymphoma.

Brentuximab vedotin has emerged as a possible treatment option in patients suffering from relapsed and refractory Hodgkin lymphoma (HL). We investigated the role of 18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography (FDG-PET/CT) for monitoring treatment response to brentuximab vedotin in patients with relapsed and refractory HL. Twelve consecutive, heavily pretreated patients with relapsed and refractory HL treated with brentuximab vedotin were available for analysis. FDG-PET/CT studies were performed early during treatment after a median of 3 cycles (range, 2-5 cycles), and were analyzed visually using a 5-point scale (5PS) and quantitatively using the maximum standardized uptake value (SUV(max)) and the three-dimensional (3D) isocontour at 50% of the maximum pixel value (SUV(50)) in the hottest single lesion. The median follow-up in our study cohort was 16 months (range, 5-30 months). The median progression-free survival (PFS) was 12.5 months and PFS at 12 months was 58%. Patients treated with brentuximab vedotin and negative interim FDG-PET/CT assessed by visual or quantitative analysis demonstrated a significantly prolonged PFS compared to patients with positive interim FDG-PET/CT. The 1-year PFS was 100% in patients with negative interim FDG-PET/CT assessed by visual analysis, whereas patients with positive interim FDG-PET/CT had a worse outcome with a 1-year PFS of 38% (p = 0.033). The 1-year PFS was 75% in patients with negative interim FDG-PET/CT assessed by quantitative analysis using the SUV(50), whereas patients with positive interim FDG-PET/CT had a worse outcome with a 1-year PFS of 25% (p = 0.017) Interim FDG-PET/CT might be a suitable diagnostic approach to predict response to brentuximab vedotin in relapsed and refractory HL.