Phase II study of cladribine, idarubicin, and ara-C (CLIA) with or without sorafenib as initial therapy for patients with acute myeloid leukemia.

The addition of cladribine, or sorafenib to standard chemotherapy have each demonstrated improved survival in patients with newly-diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia (AML). We studied the combination of cladribine, idarubicin, and intermediate-dose cytarabine (CLIA) in patients ≤65 years of age with newly diagnosed AML, fit to receive intensive therapy. Cladribine (5 mg/m2) IV was administered on days (D)1-5, cytarabine (1 g/m2) on D1-5, and idarubicin (10 mg/m2) on D1-3. Sorafenib was added to the CLIA backbone for patients with FLT3-ITD mutated AML. 80 patients were enrolled: 65 with newly diagnosed AML and 15 with AML arising from previously treated MDS (ts-AML). The median age was 55 years (range, 21-65). CR + CRi was 83% (54/65) and 27% in the untreated and ts-AML cohorts, respectively; 74% and 75% of responding patients, respectively, had undetectable measurable residual disease (MRD). Among patients with FLT3-ITD mutated AML receiving CLIA+sorafenib, the CR + CRi rate was 95%, with 81% negative for MRD. With a median follow-up of 76 months, the 2- and 4-year OS of 57% and 50% compared to 20%, and 13% for ts-AML, respectively. Patients treated with CLIA+sorafenib had 2- and 5-year OS rates of 63% and 59%, respectively. The most common Grade ≥3 adverse events were infection/fever, elevated bilirubin, rash, and nausea. CLIA was safe and effective in young, fit patients with newly diagnosed AML with inferior outcomes among patients with ts-AML. The addition of sorafenib to CLIA in FLT3-ITD mutated AML resulted in high rates of durable remission and excellent long-term survival.

Perspective: Cancer Patient Management Challenges During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

On March 11, 2020, the WHO has declared the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) a global pandemic. As the last few months have profoundly changed the delivery of health care in the world, we should recognize the effort of numerous comprehensive cancer centers to share experiences and knowledge to develop best practices to care for oncological patients during the COVID-19 pandemic. Patients as well as physicians must be aware of all these constraints and profound social, personal, and medical challenges posed by the tackling of this deadly disease in everyday life in order to adjust to such a completely novel scenario. This review will discuss facing the challenges and the current approaches that cancer centers in Italy and United States are adopting in order to cope with clinical and research activities.

Time-to-progression after front-line fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, and rituximab chemoimmunotherapy for chronic lymphocytic leukaemia: a retrospective, multicohort study.

BACKGROUND: Fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, and rituximab (FCR) has become a gold-standard chemoimmunotherapy regimen for patients with chronic lymphocytic leukaemia. However, the question remains of how to treat treatment-naive patients with IGHV-unmutated chronic lymphocytic leukaemia. We therefore aimed to develop and validate a gene expression signature to identify which of these patients are likely to achieve durable remissions with FCR chemoimmunotherapy. METHODS: We did a retrospective cohort study in two cohorts of treatment-naive patients (aged ≥18 years) with chronic lymphocytic leukaemia. The discovery and training cohort consisted of peripheral blood samples collected from patients treated at the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center (Houston, TX, USA), who fulfilled the diagnostic criteria of the International Workshop on Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia, had received at least three cycles of FCR chemoimmunotherapy, and had been treated between Oct 10, 2000, and Oct 26, 2006 (ie, the MDACC cohort). We did transcriptional profiling on samples obtained from the MDACC cohort to identify genes associated with time to progression. We did univariate Cox proportional hazards analyses and used significant genes to cluster IGHV-unmutated samples into two groups (intermediate prognosis and unfavourable prognosis). After using cross-validation to assess robustness, we applied the Lasso method to standardise the gene expression values to find a minimum gene signature. We validated this signature in an external cohort of treatment-naive patients with IGHV-unmutated chronic lymphocytic leukaemia enrolled on the CLL8 trial of the German Chronic Lymphocytic Leukaemia Study Group who were treated between July 21, 2003, and April 4, 2006 (ie, the CLL8 cohort). FINDINGS: The MDACC cohort consisted of 101 patients and the CLL8 cohort consisted of 109 patients. Using the MDACC cohort, we identified and developed a 17-gene expression signature that distinguished IGHV-unmutated patients who were likely to achieve a long-term remission following front-line FCR chemoimmunotherapy from those who might benefit from alternative front-line regimens (hazard ratio 3·83, 95% CI 1·94-7·59; p<0·0001). We validated this gene signature in the CLL8 cohort; patients with an unfavourable prognosis versus those with an intermediate prognosis had a cause-specific hazard ratio of 1·90 (95% CI 1·18-3·06; p=0·008). Median time to progression was 39 months (IQR 22-69) for those with an unfavourable prognosis compared with 59 months (28-84) for those with an intermediate prognosis. INTERPRETATION: We have developed a robust, reproducible 17-gene signature that identifies a subset of treatment-naive patients with IGHV-unmutated chronic lymphocytic leukaemia who might substantially benefit from treatment with FCR chemoimmunotherapy. We recommend testing the value of this gene signature in a prospective study that compares FCR treatment with newer alternative therapies as part of a randomised clinical trial. FUNDING: Chronic Lymphocytic Leukaemia Global Research Foundation and the National Institutes of Health/National Cancer Institute.

Models to Predict Hepatitis B Virus Infection Among Patients With Cancer Undergoing Systemic Anticancer Therapy: A Prospective Cohort Study.

PURPOSE: Most patients with cancer are not screened for hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection before undergoing anticancer therapy, and optimal screening strategies are unknown. We sought to develop selective HBV screening strategies for patients who require systemic anticancer therapy. METHODS: This prospective cohort study included adults age ≥ 18 years with solid or hematologic malignancies who received systemic anticancer therapy at a comprehensive cancer center during 2013 and 2014. Patients underwent hepatitis B surface antigen, hepatitis B core antibody, and hepatitis B surface antibody testing, and completed a 19-question modified Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) HBV survey. Multivariable models that predict chronic or past HBV infection were developed and validated using bootstrapping. RESULTS: A total of 2,124 patients (mean age, 58 ± 13 years) completed the risk survey and HBV testing. Of these, 54% were women; 77% were non-Hispanic white, 11% Hispanic, 8% black, and 4% Asian; and 20% had a hematologic malignancy and 80% a solid tumor. Almost 12% were born outside the United States. The prevalence was 0.3% for chronic HBV infection and 6% for past HBV infection. Significant predictors of positive hepatitis B surface antigen or hepatitis B core antibody tests were as follows: men who had sex with men, black or Asian race, birthplace outside the United States, parent's birthplace outside the United States, household exposure to HBV, age ≥ 50 years, and history of injection drug use. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of the model on the basis of these seven predictors was 0.79 (95% CI, 0.73 to 0.82). The modified CDC survey and brief tools with fewer than seven questions yielded similar false-negative rates (0% and 0% to 0.7%, respectively). CONCLUSION: An internally validated risk tool performed as well as the modified CDC survey; however, more than 90% of patients who completed the tool would still require HBV testing. Universal HBV testing is more efficient than risk-based screening.

microRNA Therapeutics in Cancer - An Emerging Concept.

MicroRNAs (miRNAs) are an evolutionarily conserved class of small, regulatory non-coding RNAs that negatively regulate protein coding gene and other non-coding transcripts expression. miRNAs have been established as master regulators of cellular processes, and they play a vital role in tumor initiation, progression and metastasis. Further, widespread deregulation of microRNAs have been reported in several cancers, with several microRNAs playing oncogenic and tumor suppressive roles. Based on these, miRNAs have emerged as promising therapeutic tools for cancer management. In this review, we have focused on the roles of miRNAs in tumorigenesis, the miRNA-based therapeutic strategies currently being evaluated for use in cancer, and the advantages and current challenges to their use in the clinic.