An Analysis of Dasatinib Treatment Patterns in Patients with Chronic Myeloid Leukemia after Experiencing Pleural Effusion during Dasatinib Therapy.

INTRODUCTION: Treatment with dasatinib for chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) has been associated with development of pleural effusion; however, data regarding its optimal management are limited. We examined treatment patterns and healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) and costs among patients with CML treated with dasatinib who experienced a subsequent pleural effusion. METHODS: Adults with CML and ≥1 pharmacy claim for dasatinib in 2015-2018 who experienced pleural effusion after dasatinib were identified using data from claims databases. RESULTS: Overall, 123 patients were eligible. After 1 year, of the 38.2% of patients with a dose modification, 72.3% did not switch treatment; among these patients, 70.6% continued treatment. Among patients with a stable dose after pleural effusion (61.8%), 57.9% later switched to another TKI. The mean (SD) duration of dasatinib treatment after pleural effusion was 262.0 (124.0) days for patients with a dose modification versus 149.1 (155.2) days for those with a stable dose (p < 0.001). HCRU and costs were similar between groups. CONCLUSION: Dasatinib dose modification after pleural effusion was not always required; however, patients with dose modifications continued therapy for a longer duration with a lower rate of switching to another TKI versus patients who remained on a stable dose.

Defining ruxolitinib failure and transition to next-line therapy for patients with myelofibrosis: a modified Delphi panel consensus study.

Aim: To define ruxolitinib failure and develop parameters to guide transition to next-line therapy for patients with myelofibrosis. Methods: A modified Delphi panel with 14 hematologists-oncologists. Survey concepts included defining primary refractory status, loss of response, disease progression, intolerance and transition to next-line therapy. Results: Ruxolitinib failure may be defined as no improvement in symptoms or spleen size, progressive disease or ruxolitinib intolerance, following a maximally tolerated dose for ≥3 months. Loss of spleen response 1 month after initial response may prompt discontinuation. Lack of evidence to inform transition to next-line therapy was noted; tapering ruxolitinib should be considered according to ruxolitinib dose and patient characteristics. Conclusion: Expert consensus was provided on defining ruxolitinib failure and transition to next-line therapy as summarized in this position paper, which may support considerations in the development of future clinical practice guidelines.

People with myelofibrosis who receive treatment with ruxolitinib may need to stop treatment because it is not working or they cannot tolerate the side effects. There is little good scientific information available about how and when to stop ruxolitinib treatment, and how to move to another treatment after stopping ruxolitinib. A group of clinical experts in hematology and oncology followed a scientific process, called the Delphi method, to discuss this topic and to reach agreement on the most important aspects of this challenge. The experts agreed that ruxolitinib failure may be defined as having no improvement in symptoms or spleen size, progressive disease or ruxolitinib intolerance, after the patient was receiving the highest dose they could tolerate for ≥3 months. The results of this expert discussion may support patients and their healthcare providers making decisions in real life, and development of future clinical practice guidelines.

Pharmacist biosimilar survey reveals knowledge gaps.

BACKGROUND: Biosimilars are of increasing significance to pharmacy practice, with the potential to improve patient access to biologic therapies and help reduce overall health care costs. OBJECTIVES: This web-based survey assessed pharmacists' understanding of biosimilars, including interchangeability. METHODS: WebMD LLC fielded a survey including true or false and Likert-type questions to the Medscape pharmacist and certified pharmacy technician (CPT) panel in March 2021. Those practicing in community, home care or infusion, hospital or health system, managed care, outpatient, or specialty pharmacy settings and currently providing prescription services, or formulary or benefit management related to biologic products were included, to a quota of 500 responses. Results were analyzed descriptively. RESULTS: Data are reported for 507 of 992 respondents (265 did not meet eligibility criteria, 220 responded after the survey closed), including 498 pharmacists and 9 CPTs. These respondents worked in a community setting (66%), outpatient or ambulatory or other setting (16%), hospital or health system setting (14%), or managed care (5%). Overall, 87% and 91% of respondents knew that the biosimilar had equivalent efficacy and safety, respectively, to its reference product. Only 20% understood that a pharmacist can substitute a Food and Drug Administration-approved interchangeable without approval of the prescriber. However, 53% responded that they felt it was appropriate for a pharmacist to dispense an interchangeable in place of its reference product without authorization from the prescriber if consistent with state law; a numerically smaller proportion of community pharmacists understood this concept than the other groups (50% vs. 54%-61%). Only 11% of respondents knew that no biosimilars were designated as interchangeable at the time of the survey, with a numerically greater proportion of managed care pharmacists showing awareness than other groups. Slightly more than 50% of respondents felt that they were moderately or very comfortable in responding to patients' biosimilar questions. CONCLUSION: Gaps remain in pharmacists' understanding and comfort with key concepts about biosimilar products, including interchangeability, suggesting the need for further education.

Cost-Effectiveness and Economic Burden Analyses on All First-Line Treatments of Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia.

OBJECTIVES: Several chemoimmunotherapy and targeted treatment regimens are approved as front-line therapies in chronic lymphocytic leukemia. We estimated for the 10-year cost-effectiveness of these treatment regimens and the economic burden of following the estimated risk-stratified 21 040 patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia diagnosed in 2020 for 10 years. METHODS: A Markov model with 7 exclusive health states was specified over a 10-year time horizon. Treatment effectiveness inputs were obtained from a novel network meta-analysis on the progression-free survival, overall survival curves, and time to next treatment. Costs and utilities inputs were included for each health state for each treatment and discounted at 3.0%/year. Life-years (LYs) and quality-adjusted LYs (QALYs) for each treatment were determined. Using the lowest cost regimen as reference, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and incremental cost-utility ratio (ICUR) were estimated. The 10-year per-patient cost was determined by risk status and by initial treatment. RESULTS: Venetoclax-plus-obinutuzumab was the lowest cost regimen, hence the reference. Superior in effectiveness to all chemoimmunotherapies, it was cost saving. With the highest effectiveness gains at 6.26 LYs and 5.01 QALYs and despite being the most expensive regimen ($1 298 638 per patient), acalabrutinib-plus-obinutuzumab yielded the best ICER ($409 343/LY gained) and ICUR ($501 236/QALY gained). The remaining ICERs of targeted therapies ranged from $512 101/LY gained to $793 236/LY gained and the ICURs from $579 737/QALY gained to $869 300/QALY gained. The 10-year postdiagnosis low/high (venetoclax-plus-obinutuzumab/acalabrutinib-plus-obinutuzumab) economic burden ranges were $42 690 to $98 665 for low-risk, $141 339 to $326 660 for intermediate-risk, and $273 650 to $632 453 for high-risk patients. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with venetoclax-plus-obinutuzumab, chemoimmunotherapies are associated with less health benefits at higher cost. The targeted therapies achieve greater benefits at higher cost.

Expanded access to anticancer treatments from conversion to biosimilar pegfilgrastim-cbqv in US breast cancer patients.

Aim: To estimate cost-savings from conversion to biosimilar pegfilgrastim-cbqv that could be reallocated to provide budget-neutral expanded access to AC (doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide) and TCH (docetaxel/carboplatin/trastuzumab) in breast cancer (BC) patients. Methods: Simulation modeling in panels of 20,000 BC and 5000 HER2+ (HER2+ BC) patients, varying treatment duration (one-six cycles) and conversion rates (10-100%), to estimate cost-savings and additional AC and TCH treatment that could be provided. Results: In 20,000 patients, cost-savings of $1,083 per-patient per-cycle translate to $21,652,064 (one cycle) to $129,912,397 (six cycles). Savings range from $5,413,016 to $32,478,097, respectively, in the 5000-patient HER2+ BC panel. Conclusion: Conversion to pegfilgrastim-cbqv could save up to $130 million and provide more than 220,000 additional cycles of antineoplastic treatment on a budget-neutral basis to BC patients.

Lay abstract Pegfilgrastim is used to prevent low white blood cell count in patients receiving chemotherapy. Comparable to a generic version of a drug, a biosimilar is a follow-on version of a biologic treatment. We calculated the savings from using biosimilar pegfilgrastim in a hypothetical group of 20,000 patients with breast cancer receiving chemotherapy with AC (doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide). We then computed the number of additional doses of AC chemotherapy that could be purchased with those savings. We did the same for a group of 5000 HER2+ breast cancer patients treated with TCH (docetaxel/carboplatin/trastuzumab). Using biosimilar pegfilgrastim could save $1,083 per patient per cycle. If all patients were treated with biosimilar pegfilgrastim over six cycles, $129.9 million could be saved in the AC group and $32.5 million in the TCH group. This could provide 220,468 additional AC doses and 6981 TCH doses. Biosimilar pegfilgrastim can generate significant savings. These savings can be used to provide additional patients with chemotherapy cost-free.

Retrospective evaluation of safety and effectiveness of same-day pegfilgrastim in patients with lung cancer.

Aim: To determine the incidence of chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia (FN) and related outcomes after same-day pegfilgrastim in lung cancer. Materials & methods: This single-center, retrospective study evaluated electronic health records of patients with lung cancer treated between 2013-2018. The main end points were incidence of FN and grade 3/4 neutropenia after the first and across all chemotherapy cycles. Results: A total of 114 patients received same-day pegfilgrastim in 384 cycles. The incidence of FN and grade 3/4 neutropenia was 2.3 and 25% after the first chemotherapy cycle and 1.6 and 10.4% across all cycles, respectively. Conclusion: Same-day prophylactic pegfilgrastim in patients with lung cancer may be a suitable option, owing to its low incidence of FN and related outcomes.

Chemotherapy is intended to kill fast-growing cancer cells but can also kill immune cells that are needed to prevent infections. When too many immune cells are killed by chemotherapy, patients with cancer may experience febrile neutropenia, a serious condition that can lead to death in the most severe cases. To prevent this side effect of chemotherapy, a protein that helps certain immune cells to grow (pegfilgrastim) is administered on the day after chemotherapy. To avoid a second clinic visit the day after receiving chemotherapy, it has become common to administer pegfilgrastim on the same day as chemotherapy. Whether this approach is as effective and safe as next-day administration is currently unclear. This study from the University of Arizona Cancer Center showed that in patients with lung cancer who receive chemotherapy, administration of pegfilgrastim on the same day as chemotherapy is a safe, effective method to prevent febrile neutropenia.

Economic burden in US patients with newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia receiving intensive induction chemotherapy.

Aim: This retrospective, observational study assessed healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) and costs for newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia (AML) patients receiving intensive induction chemotherapy. Materials & methods: Adult AML patients with inpatient hospitalization or hospital-based outpatient visit receiving intensive induction chemotherapy (CPX-351 or 7 + 3 treatments) were identified from the Premier Healthcare Database (US). Results: All 642 patients had inpatient hospitalizations (median number = 2; median length of stay = 16 days); 22.4% had an ICU admission. Median total outpatient hospital cost was US$2904 per patient, inpatient hospital cost was $83,440 per patient, and ICU cost was $16,550 per patient. Discussion: In the US hospital setting, substantial HCRU and costs associated with intensive induction chemotherapy for AML were driven by inpatient hospitalizations.

Indirect treatment comparison of oral versus injectable azacitidine as maintenance therapy for acute myeloid leukemia.

Aim: Evaluate the relative efficacy of oral versus injectable azacitidine (AZA) maintenance therapy in acute myeloid leukemia (AML) after complete remission. Materials & methods: Systematic literature review identified QUAZAR AML-001, HOVON 97 AML, UK NCRI AML16 and QoLESS-AZA-AMLE (sensitivity analysis) trials. Network meta-analysis and matching-adjusted indirect comparisons assessed survival outcomes. Results: In the network meta-analysis, combining the HOVON 97 and UK NCRI trials, oral AZA (QUAZAR) was associated with significantly improved overall survival (OS) versus injectable AZA (hazard ratio: 0.744; 95% credible interval: 0.557-0.998). After matching-adjusted indirect comparisons, to address differences in patient characteristics across trials, OS improvements were maintained with oral versus injectable AZA (hazard ratio: 0.753; credible interval: 0.563-0.998). Conclusion: In AML, maintenance therapy with oral AZA was associated with improved OS versus injectable AZA.

Older people with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) may have remission with or without blood count recovery, after first-line chemotherapy; however, remission is short lived and overall survival is limited (7­12 months). Ongoing treatment (maintenance therapy) after response to initial chemotherapy may prolong remission. Maintenance therapy with azacitidine (AZA) given by injection beneath the skin (subcutaneous) or into a vein (intravenous) can extend disease-free survival compared with no further treatment and best supportive care. However, treatment with intravenous AZA may only extend overall survival in certain patients. ONUREG^® is a novel formulation of AZA that can be taken by mouth (orally), remains in the body for longer periods and has the potential for significant clinical benefits compared with intravenous AZA. Presently, there are no studies directly comparing outcomes of maintenance therapy with oral and injectable AZA in older people with AML. In this analysis, we used an indirect treatment comparison method including four clinical trials to explore the survival benefit associated with ONUREG and injectable AZA when used as maintenance therapies after response to initial chemotherapy in older people with AML. Findings showed ONUREG significantly improved overall survival compared with injectable AZA, with an almost 26% reduction in the risk of death. These results suggest that maintenance therapy with ONUREG significantly improves overall survival compared with injectable AZA in older people with AML who may have remission with or without blood count recovery, after first-line chemotherapy.

Transitioning ifosfamide chemotherapy regimens to the ambulatory setting: reviewing cost savings and safety profile.

PURPOSE: To characterize and compare both the outcome and cost of treatment of outpatient (OP) and inpatient (IP) ifosfamide therapy. METHODS: A single-center retrospective chart review of patients 18 years and older receiving ifosfamide therapy. The primary endpoint compares and evaluates the side effect profiles of ifosfamide-treated patients in the OP/IP settings. The adverse event grading system was characterized using the CTCAE Version 5.0. The highest grade was documented per cycle. The secondary endpoint of this study compares the costs of OP/IP therapy. It was assumed that the cost of medication was equivalent for IP/OP treatments. The cost saved with OP administration was determined by the average cost of hospital stay for IP admission. RESULTS: Ifosfamide therapy of 86 patients (57 OP, 29 IP) was reviewed. The predominant OP regimens were doxorobucin-ifosfamide-mesna (AIM) with 43.9% and ifosfamide-etoposide (IE) with 29.8%. Grade 4 anemia, thrombocytopenia, and neutropenia were most frequent in IP vs OP therapies (22.9% IP vs 4.3% OP, 21.6% IP vs 9.2% OP, and 22.8% IP vs 19.6% OP respectively). Neutropenic fever (NF) occurred in 20 OP patients which were predominantly treated with AIM or IE and led to average hospital stay of 6 days. Neurotoxicity, treated with methylene blue (MB) occurred in 4 OP patients. OP therapy saved a total of 783 hospital days, leading to a cost savings of $2,103,921. CONCLUSIONS: Transitioning ifosfamide to the OP setting is feasible for academic and community infusion centers with the OP administration being safe, well-tolerated, and associated with decreased total cost of care. The current processes allow for safe transition of chemotherapy of chemotherapy under times of COVID.

Survival trends in chronic lymphocytic leukemia across treatment eras: US SEER database analysis (1985-2017).

In this population-based study, we used the SEER database (1985-2015) to examine survival outcomes in chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) patients followed up to the era of advanced treatments including targeted therapies. Data were extracted for patients 15 years or older with a primary diagnosis of CLL. A period analysis was performed to estimate 5- and 10-year relative survival rates for patients diagnosed during different calendar periods from 1985 to 2015. A mixture cure model was used to examine long-term survivors' proportions among patients diagnosed in 1985-2015 and for two cohorts diagnosed in 2000-2003, followed up to 2012 and 2004-2007, and followed up to 2015. Cox proportional hazard modeling was used for the two cohorts to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) of death adjusted for gender and age. The 5-year and 10-year age-adjusted relative survival rate ranged between 73.7 and 89.4% and from 51.6% to "not reached," respectively, for calendar periods of 1985-1989 to 2010-2014. The long-term survivor proportions varied by age and gender from 0 to 59%. The HRs (95%CI) for the 2004-2007 cohort in comparison to the 2000-2003 cohort were 0.58 (0.43-0.78), 0.58 (0.48-0.70), 0.57 (0.49-0.0.67), 0.68 (0.54-0.85), and 0.83 (0.68-1.02) for the age categories of 45-54, 55-64, 65-74, 75-84, and ≥ 85 years, respectively. Overall, relative survival improved significantly for CLL patients diagnosed between 1985 and 2015. These improvements were markedly better following the introduction of targeted therapies.

Conversion to biosimilar pegfilgrastim-cbqv enables budget-neutral access to FOLFIRINOX treatment for metastatic pancreatic cancer.

Aim: To estimate the cost-savings from conversion to biosimilar pegfilgrastim-cbqv that can be reallocated to provide budget-neutral expanded access to FOLFIRINOX in patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer. Methods: Simulation modeling in a panel of 2500 FOLFIRINOX-treated patients, using varying treatment duration (1-12 cycles) and conversion rates (10-100%), to estimate cost-savings and additional FOLFIRINOX treatment that could be budget neutral. Results: In a 2500-patient panel at 100% conversion, savings of US$6,907.41 per converted patient over 12 cycles of prophylaxis translate to US$17.3 million and could provide 72,273 additional FOLFIRINOX doses or 6023 full 6-month regimens. Conclusion: Conversion to biosimilar CIN/FN prophylaxis can generate significant cost-savings and provide budget-neutral expanded access to FOLFIRINOX treatment for patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer.

Lay abstract Pegfilgrastim is used to prevent low white blood cell count in patients receiving chemotherapy. Comparable to a generic version of a drug, a biosimilar is a follow-on version of a biologic treatment. The authors calculated the savings from using biosimilar pegfilgrastim in a hypothetical group of 2500 patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer and then computed the number of additional doses of FOLFIRINOX chemotherapy that could be purchased with those savings. Using biosimilar pegfilgrastim for 12 cycles could save US$6,907.41 per patient. If all 2500 patients were treated with biosimilar pegfilgrastim, US$17.3 million could be saved. This could provide 72,273 additional FOLFIRINOX doses. Biosimilar pegfilgrastim can generate significant savings to purchase chemotherapy for additional patients cost-free.

Same-day versus next-day pegfilgrastim or pegfilgrastim-cbqv in patients with lymphoma receiving CHOP-like chemotherapy.

Aim: To compare the incidence of febrile neutropenia and related outcomes of prophylactic same-day versus next-day pegfilgrastim/pegfilgrastim-cbqv in patients with lymphoma receiving cyclophosphamide, hydroxydaunorubicin, vincristine, prednisone (CHOP)-like chemotherapy. Methods: Retrospective, real-world, single-institution study. Results: 93 patients received 460 cycles of CHOP-like chemotherapy. The incidence of febrile neutropenia and grade 3/4 chemotherapy-induced neutropenia was 5 and 16.5%, respectively. In 401 cycles pegfilgrastim was administered same-day versus 12 cycles next-day. Febrile neutropenia occurred in 17 cycles versus 0 cycles (p = 1.00) and grade 3/4 chemotherapy-induced neutropenia in 65 cycles (16.2%) versus 1 cycle (16.7%; p = 1.00) with same-day versus next-day pegfilgrastim administration, respectively. Conclusion: Pegfilgrastim may be safely administered on the same day as chemotherapy in patients with lymphoma receiving CHOP-like chemotherapy.

Lay abstract Aside from killing cancer cells, chemotherapy can also affect the growth of immune cells that normally prevent infections. Without enough of these immune cells in the blood, the patient's body cannot fight infections. This can lead to a serious condition called febrile neutropenia, and death in the most severe cases. Pegfilgrastim, a growth factor that helps important types of immune cells to grow, can prevent this side effect of chemotherapy. Usually, pegfilgrastim is administered the day after chemotherapy but there is a trend to administer it on the day of chemotherapy, but whether this is effective and safe is currently unclear. This study from the University of Arizona Cancer Center showed that administration of pegfilgrastim on the same day as chemotherapy is a safe, effective method of preventing febrile neutropenia in patients who receive standard-of-care chemotherapy to treat lymphoma.

Economic burden of central nervous system metastases in human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive breast cancer.

Aim: Compare healthcare resource utilization and costs among patients with HER2+ metastatic breast cancer (MBC) with and without central nervous system (CNS) metastases. Methods: Retrospective matched cohort study using IQVIA's PharMetrics® Plus claims database. Results: Patients with CNS metastases (n = 753) experienced more outpatient, emergency room and inpatient visits versus controls (n = 753; all p < 0.05). In the post-index year, median total all-cause healthcare costs were significantly higher among patients with CNS metastases versus controls ($112,402 vs $50,835; p < 0.0001); outpatient costs primarily drove the cost differential. Conclusion: More effective therapies are needed that improve clinical outcomes and reduce economic burden associated with CNS metastases in patients with HER2+ MBC.

Outcomes of primary and secondary prophylaxis of chemotherapy-induced and febrile neutropenia in bendamustine plus rituximab regimens in patients with lymphoma and chronic lymphocytic leukemia: real-world, single-center experience.

PURPOSE: To examine the outcomes associated with granulocyte colony stimulating factors (G-CSFs) administered as primary versus secondary prophylaxis in setting of bendamustine plus rituximab (BR) regimens. METHODS: Eighty-five patients who underwent treatment for non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL) or chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) with BR at the University of Arizona Cancer Center from November 2013 to June 2019 were evaluated through retrospective chart review. Patients were stratified into two groups: those who were given G-CSF for primary prophylaxis (n = 47) and for secondary prophylaxis (n = 38). G-CSF-included filgrastim or pegfilgrastim. The primary endpoints were incidence of febrile neutropenia and grade 3 or 4 neutropenia. RESULTS: Same-day G-CSF compared with next-day G-CSF was the most common G-CSF dosing method utilized in primary and secondary prophylaxis (94% and 100%), respectively. Primary and secondary prophylaxis groups were similar on baseline characteristics (p > 0.05); the primary outcome of FN (p > 0.05); all secondary outcomes (p > 0.05) except for a higher frequency of dose delays in secondary (40%) vs primary prophylaxis patients (13%; p = 0.01), and mean absolute neutrophil counts (ANC) in cycles 1 through 5. With higher ANC levels observed during all cycles in the primary prophylaxis group compared with secondary prophylaxis. CONCLUSIONS: In this single-center retrospective study, BR-treated lymphoma and CLL patients receiving primary versus secondary with G-CSF showed similar outcomes except, notably, for chemotherapy dose delays that may put secondary patients at risk for poor treatment outcomes. Further research is needed to evaluate the impact of primary versus secondary prophylaxis on treatment outcomes.

Glasdegib plus low-dose cytarabine for acute myeloid leukemia: Practical considerations from advanced practitioners and pharmacists.

OBJECTIVE: Acute myeloid leukemia (AML) is primarily a disease of older adults. These patients may not be candidates for intensive treatment, and there has been an ongoing need for treatment options for this group. We review the use of glasdegib, a hedgehog-pathway inhibitor available for use in combination with low-dose cytarabine (LDAC).Data Sources: PubMed and relevant congress abstracts were searched using the term "glasdegib". In addition, based on our experience with glasdegib, we considered treatment aspects of particular relevance to pharmacists and advanced practitioners.Data Summary: In a randomized phase II study, the combination of glasdegib plus LDAC demonstrated superior overall survival versus LDAC alone (hazard ratio 0.51, 80% confidence interval 0.39-0.67, p = 0.0004). The trial reported adverse events (AEs) of special relevance for older patients, such as hematologic events, gastrointestinal toxicity, and fatigue, as well as AEs associated with Hh-pathway inhibitors (alopecia, muscle spasms, dysgeusia). Educating patients about typical AEs can facilitate adherence as well as early AE identification and proactive management. For LDAC, which is a long-established therapy in AML, various stages of delivery need consideration, with attention to individual circumstances. Practical measures such as dispensing a longer supply can reduce the number of return clinic visits, providing a meaningful difference for many patients. CONCLUSIONS: Pharmacists and advanced practitioners play important roles in treatment with glasdegib plus LDAC. Ultimately, framing plans for treatment delivery within the individual circumstances of each patient may enable them to stay on therapy longer, giving them the greatest potential to achieve benefit.

Relapse Prevention with Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors after Allogeneic Transplantation for Philadelphia Chromosome-Positive Acute Lymphoblast Leukemia: A Systematic Review.

Relapse after stem cell transplantation for Philadelphia chromosome-positive (Ph+) acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) remains a significant challenge. In this systematic review, we compare survival outcomes of second-generation tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) nilotinib and dasatinib with first-generation TKI imatinib when these agents are used after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (allo-HSCT) in Ph+ ALL. In addition, we review the literature on TKI use to prevent relapse in patients who proceed to allo-HSCT beyond first complete response (>CR1). We performed database searches (inception to January 2018) using PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Embase. After exclusions, 17 articles were included in this analysis. Imatinib was used post-transplant either prophylactically or preemptively in 12 studies, 7 prospective studies and 5 retrospective studies. Overall survival (OS) for most prospective studies at 1.5 to 3 and 5 years ranged between 62% to 92% and 74.5% to 86.7%. Disease-free survival at 1.5 to 5 years was 60.4% to 92%. Additionally, imatinib failed to show survival benefit in patients who were >CR1 at the time of allo-HSCT. The cumulative OS for most retrospective studies using imatinib at 1 to 2 and 3 to 5 years was 42% to 100% and 33% to 40% respectively. Event-free survival at 1 to 2 and 3 to 5 years was 33.3% to 67% and 20% to 31% respectively. Dasatinib was used as maintenance treatment in 3 retrospective studies (n = 34). The OS for patients with Ph+ ALL using dasatinib as maintenance regimen after allo-HSCT at 1.4 to 3 years was 87% to 100% and disease-free survival at 1.4 to 3 years was 89% to 100%. Ninety-three percent of patients with minimal residual disease (MRD) positive status after allo-HSCT became MRD negative. Three prospective studies used nilotinib. In 2 studies where investigators studied patients with advanced chronic myeloid leukemia and Ph+ ALL, the cumulative OS and event-free survival at 7.5 months to 2 years were 69% to 84% and 56% to 84%, respectively. In the third study (n = 5) in patients with Ph+ ALL, nilotinib use resulted in OS at 5 years of 60%. Our review showed that use of TKIs (all generations) after allo-HSCT for patients in CR1 improved OS when given as a prophylactic or preemptive regimen. Limited data suggest that second-generation TKIs (ie, dasatinib) have a better OS, especially in patients with MRD-positive status. Imatinib did not improve OS in patients who were >CR1 at the time of allo-HSCT; for this population, no data were available with newer generation TKIs. The evaluation of survival benefit with newer generation TKIs and their efficacy in patients in >CR1 needs further study in large randomized clinical trials.

Revisiting Role of Vaccinations in Donors, Transplant Recipients, Immunocompromised Hosts, Travelers, and Household Contacts of Stem Cell Transplant Recipients.

Vaccination is an effective strategy to prevent infections in immunocompromised hematopoietic stem cell transplant recipients. Pretransplant vaccination of influenza, pneumococcus, Haemophilus influenza type b, diphtheria, tetanus, and hepatitis B, both in donors and transplant recipients, produces high antibody titers in patients compared with recipient vaccination only. Because transplant recipients are immunocompromised, live vaccines should be avoided with few exceptions. Transplant recipients should get inactive vaccinations when possible to prevent infection. This includes vaccination against influenza, pneumococcus, H. influenza type b, diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis, meningococcus, measles, mumps, rubella, polio, hepatitis A, human papillomavirus, and hepatitis B. Close contacts of transplant recipients can safely get vaccinations (inactive and few live vaccines) as per their need and schedule. Transplant recipients who wish to travel may need to get vaccinated against endemic diseases that are prevalent in such areas. There is paucity of data on the role of vaccinations for patients receiving novel immunotherapy such as bispecific antibodies and chimeric antigen receptor T cells despite data on prolonged B cell depletion and higher risk of opportunistic infections.

Efficacy of olanzapine, neurokinin-1 receptor antagonists, and thalidomide in combination with palonosetron plus dexamethasone in preventing highly emetogenic chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting: a Bayesian network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Olanzapine, neurokinin-1-receptor-antagonists (NK-1-RA), and thalidomide added to palonosetron + dexamethasone (PALO-DEX) have been evaluated in separate studies as prophylaxis for chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) due to highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC). We conducted a Bayesian network meta-analysis to compare the prophylactic efficacy of these agents in combination with PALO-DEX. METHODS: PubMed, Medline/Ovid, Embase, and Clinicaltrials.gov were searched from inception through 22 Mar 2018. Study quality was assessed using the Cochrane methodology. A Bayesian network meta-analysis using random-effects models was used to asses complete response (CR) and rate of no nausea (RNN) in acute, delayed, and overall phases and were expressed as odds ratios (OR) and 95% credible interval (95% CrI). Ranking probabilities of treatments were calculated using the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) to identify the probability of a given treatment as the best option against the worst option. RESULTS: Nine RCTs involving two thousand nine hundred fifty-nine patients were included. The olanzapine-based regimen showed greater CR in the acute, delayed, and overall-phases versus the PALO-DEX regimen (OR = 3.97, 95% CrI = 1.02-19.13; OR = 5.62, 95% CrI = 1.66-28.58; OR = 4.79, 95% CrI = 1.40-24.02, respectively). Additionally, it showed greater RNN than the NK-1-RA-based and the PALO-DEX regimens in the delayed phase only (OR = 2.90, 95% CrI = 1.34-5.15; OR = 4.53, 95% CrI = 1.89-10.55, respectively). Olanzapine-, NK-1-RA-, and thalidomide-based regimens did not differ in CR in the three phases. SUCRA probabilities ranked the olanzapine-based regimen as the best option in terms of CR and RNN, while ranking the NK-1-RA-based regimens as the second best option in terms of CR throughout the three phases. CONCLUSION: Based on the data included in the analyses, there is insufficient evidence to support adding thalidomide or NK-1-RA to PALO-DEX in preventing CINV induced by HEC. However, adding olanzapine to PALO-DEX achieves better CR and RNN. Olanzapine side-effects and the absence of direct comparisons explain why some guidelines are cautious in suggesting the use of olanzapine.

Significant Risk of Graft-versus-Host Disease with Exposure to Checkpoint Inhibitors before and after Allogeneic Transplantation.

Investigators are using checkpoint inhibitors (CPIs) to treat aggressive hematologic malignancies in patients undergoing allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (allo-HSCT) and in some patients with relapsed disease after allo-HSCT. CTLA-4 inhibitors and PD-1 inhibitors are 2 main types of CPIs, which work through activation of the immune system. On one hand, CPIs can achieve graft-versus-tumor effect, and on the other hand, there is a risk of graft-versus-host disease (GVHD). After a comprehensive literature review, we included data (n = 283) from 24 studies (11 original manuscripts and 13 case reports or case series) and evaluated the results to assess the safety and efficacy of CPI use in conjunction with allo-HSCT. Among the 283 patients, 107 received CPI before allo-HSCT, and 176 received CPI after allo-HSCT. The most common indication for CPI use was for Hodgkin lymphoma. The CPIs used in various studies included ipilimumab, nivolumab, and pembrolizumab. Among the patients exposed to CPI before allo-HSCT, 56% developed acute GVHD and 29% developed chronic GVHD. Investigators reported 20 deaths, 60% of which were GVHD-related. The overall mortality risk with GVHD is 11%. In this group, investigators noted an objective response rate (ORR) in 68% of patients, with complete remission (CR) in 47%, partial remission (PR) in 21%, and stable disease in 11%. Among the patients who received a CPI after allo-HSCT for disease relapse, 14% developed acute GVHD and 9% developed chronic GVHD. Investigators reported 40 deaths, 28% of which were GVHD-related. The mortality risk with GVHD is approximately 7%. Investigators reported ORR in 54% of patients, with CR in 33%, PR in 21%, and disease stabilization in 5%. After careful evaluation of collective data, we found that CPI use both before and after allo-HSCT can be highly effective, but exposure can lead to a significantly increased risk of GVHD-related morbidity and mortality in this patient population. Despite limited availability of data, there is need for extreme caution while making decisions regarding the use of CPIs. Detailed discussions and prospective well-designed clinical trials are needed to explore this issue further.

The association of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations with prostate cancer risk, frequency, and mortality: A meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: A prior meta-analysis found no association between BRCA1 mutation and prostate cancer (PCa). Subsequent BRCA2 mutation studies have shown an association with PCa risk and mortality. We conducted a meta-analysis of overall BRCA mutation carriers and in subgroups to (1) estimate PCa risk in BRCA mutation carriers, (2) evaluate the frequency of BRCA mutation carriers in patients with PCa, and (3) compare cancer-specific survival (CSS) and overall survival (OS) among BRCA mutation carriers and noncarriers. METHODS: We searched the PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane databases. Unadjusted odds ratio (OR), percentage (%), and hazard ratio (HR) were used to calculate pooled estimates for PCa risk, frequency, and survival, respectively. Subgroup analyses by mutation type ( BRCA1 or BRCA2) were conducted for the three objectives. Further subgroup analyses by study design (age-sex-adjusted or crude), ascertainment method (ascertained or inferred genotyping), population (Ashkenazi Jewish or general population), and survival outcomes (CSS or OS) were conducted. The associations were evaluated using random-effects models, in two-sided statistical tests. RESULTS: A total of 8 cohort, 7 case-control, 4 case-series, 28 frequency, and 11 survival studies were included. Being a BRCA mutation carrier ( BRCA1 and/or BRCA2) was associated with a significant increase in PCa risk (OR = 1.90, 95% CI = 1.58-2.29), with BRCA2 mutation being associated with a greater risk of PCa (OR = 2.64, 95% CI = 2.03-3.47) than BRCA1 (OR = 1.35, 95% CI = 1.03-1.76). The frequency of BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers in patients with PCa was 0.9% and 2.2%, respectively. OS (HR = 2.21, 95% CI = 1.64-2.30) and CSS (HR = 2.63, 95% CI = 2.00-3.45) were significantly worse among BRCA2 carriers compared to noncarriers, whereas OS (HR = 0.47, 95% CI = 0.11-1.99) and CSS (HR = 1.07, 95% CI = 0.38-2.96) were statistically not significant when comparing BRCA1 carriers and noncarriers. CONCLUSIONS: There is a 1.90-fold greater risk of PCa in overall BRCA mutation carriers. This elevated PCa risk is attributable mainly to a 2.64-fold greater risk of PCa in BRCA2 carriers compared to a moderate 1.35-fold greater risk in BRCA1 carriers. The frequency of BRCA2 mutations was higher than BRCA1 mutations among patients with PCa. BRCA2 but not BRCA1 mutations were associated with higher PCa mortality. The BRCA mutation may be a clinical factor to stratify high-risk patients and guide clinical strategies for more effective treatments for patients with PCa.