A Severe Case of Drug-Induced Liver Injury after Gemcitabine Administration: A Highly Probable Causality Grading as Assessed by the Updated RUCAM Diagnostic Scoring System.

Gemcitabine is an antineoplastic drug used in several forms of advanced pancreatic, lung, breast, ovarian, and bladder cancer. Common side effects include bone marrow suppression, fatigue, diarrhea, nausea, gastrointestinal upset, rash, alopecia, and stomatitis. Transient serum enzyme elevations could be observed during therapy, but clinically significant acute liver injury has been rarely associated with its use. Few cases of acute liver injury have been reported in the literature. We reported the clinical case of a 73--year-old man who developed clinically significant acute hepatic injury after using gemcitabine. Possible causes, clinical presentation, and treatments are discussed. According to the updated RUCAM score, the case was rated 10 points and became a suspected drug-induced liver injury. Moreover, on the liver biopsy, there were histological findings of mild-to-moderate portal hepatitis, eosinophilia, bile duct injury, and mild perisinusoidal fibrosis, suggesting drug damage.

Severe Dizziness and Hypereosinophilia: Coincidence or Complication? A Case Report.

Hypereosinophilia is a common issue in medicine. One rare cause is myeloproliferative neoplasm with PDGFRA rearrangement. In these patients, the gold standard for therapy is low-dose imatinib. We present the case of a patient with a new diagnosis of myeloproliferative neoplasm following an unconventional diagnostic pattern, which developed clinically relevant unexplained dizziness a week after starting treatment. Our case presented with lower back pain and multiple bone lesions at MRI investigation. Bone marrow and cytogenetic analysis led to the diagnosis of myeloproliferative neoplasm with PDGFRA rearrangement. We started a treatment with a tyrosine kinase inhibitor (imatinib), and the patient noticed an onset of severe, persistent and intense dizziness, which was more intense with closed eyes. Diagnostic tests were not conclusive, and dizziness persisted at 48 months of follow-up. In conclusion, clinically relevant dizziness was never described in patients with myeloproliferative neoplasm. Even if the exact physiopathological mechanism is not clear, clinicians should know that hypereosinophilia could lead to central nervous system damage.

A phase I-II study to determine the maximum tolerated infusion rate of rituximab with special emphasis on monitoring the effect of rituximab on cardiac function.

PURPOSE: This phase I infusion rate escalation trial was undertaken to evaluate the maximum applicable infusion rate for rituximab without steroid premedication in patients having received one previous rituximab infusion. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Cohorts of at least three patients were assigned to rituximab with or without concomitant chemotherapy. The initial infusion rate was 200 mg/h in the first cohort, and was increased by 100 mg/h in each subsequent cohort to a maximum of 700 mg/h. In each patient the infusion rate was increased by 100 mg/h every 30 minutes to the total dose (375 mg/m2). In the first six cohorts (21 patients), two well-tolerated rituximab administrations were required; in the 7th cohort (11 patients) one previously well-tolerated rituximab infusion was required. Patients did not receive steroid premedication and were monitored with electrocardiograms (ECG), echocardiograms, Holter ECGs, troponin, and brain natriuretic peptide (BNP). RESULTS: Thirty-two patients were included and 128 cycles were done, 85 at a rate of 700 mg/h. Patients tolerated infusion rates without major side effects. There were no new clinically relevant ECG alterations. Troponin (< 0.1 ng/L) and mean cardiac ejection fraction (65%) remained in the reference range; BNP baseline level increased significantly 24 hours after rituximab administration (from 30.4 to 64.1 ng/L; P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Rituximab can be administered safely at 700 mg/h without steroid premedication in patients having received at least one rituximab dose in the previous 3 months.

Prognosis of acute myeloid leukemia in the general population: data from southern Switzerland.

AIMS AND BACKGROUND: To evaluate the outcome of adult patients with de novo acute myeloid leukemia in the Italian-speaking part of Switzerland and to identify prognostic factors, time to progression and overall survival. METHODS AND STUDY DESIGN: Data of all adult patients diagnosed with acute myeloid leukemia from January 1984 to December 2003 were collected retrospectively. Univariate and multivariate analysis for time to progression and overall survival were performed. RESULTS: The incidence of acute myeloid leukemia in the adult population in southern Switzerland is 2.6/100,000 per year. Complete clinical and pathological data and follow-up information were available for 128 patients. The median age was 67 years (range, 18 to 94). The median follow-up was 97 months. Median overall survival was 6 months, with a 2-year overall survival of 16%. Median time to progression was 3 months. Thirty-five patients (median age, 80 years) were given best supportive care and/or palliative chemotherapy. The median survival in this subset was 2 months. Of the 93 patients treated with a curative intent, 48 were older than 60 years. The complete remission rate after induction chemotherapy was 80% for patients younger than 60 years and 31% for those older than 60 years (P < 0.0001). Overall survival at 2 years was 40% and 12%, respectively (P < 0.0005). The relapse rate was 61%, and only 28% of the patients who were given reinduction chemotherapy reached a second complete remission. Of the patients treated with curative intent, 52% were treated in a clinical trial. Their median age was significantly lower than those not included in a trial: 57 vs 66 years (P < 00001). Patients treated in a trial had a significantly better prognosis than those not so treated (median survival, 12 vs 6 months). Patients treated with high-dose cytarabine as first-line therapy (given to 25 of 93 patients treated with a curative intent) had a better survival than those given standard cytarabine doses (P < 0.0005). The outcome of the patients treated after 1993 was significantly better (P = 0.026) than that of the previously treated cohort. In multivariate analysis (not including cytogenetic data), only age (P = 0.005), performance status > 1 (P = 0.001) and treatment given before/after 1993 (P = 0.044) were found to be independent prognostic factors for both overall survival and time to progression. CONCLUSIONS: Most patients with acute myeloid leukemia are older than 60 years, and their outcome is still disappointing. For younger patients, the prognosis is better if they receive high-dose cytarabine as post-remission therapy and if they are treated in the setting of a clinical trial.

Patient-reported outcomes of patients with advanced biliary tract cancers receiving gemcitabine plus capecitabine: a multicenter, phase II trial of the Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the effects of palliative chemotherapy with gemcitabine plus capecitabine (GemCap) on patient-reported outcomes measured using clinical benefit response (CBR) and quality-of-life (QOL) measures in patients with advanced biliary tract cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients had to manifest symptoms of advanced biliary tract cancer and have at least one of the following: impaired Karnofsky performance score (60 to 80), average analgesic consumption >or= 10 mg of morphine equivalents per day, and average pain intensity score of >or= 20 mm out of 100 mm. Treatment consisted of oral capecitabine 650 mg/m(2) twice daily on days 1 through 14 plus gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m(2) as a 30-minute infusion on days 1 and 8 every 3 weeks until progression. The primary end point was the number of patients categorized as having a CBR or stable CBR (SCBR) during the first three treatment cycles. RESULTS: Forty-four patients were enrolled (bile duct cancer, n = 36; gallbladder cancers, n = 8). The main grade 3 or 4 adverse events included hematologic toxicity and fatigue. After three cycles, 36% of patients achieved a CBR, and 34% achieved an SCBR. Over the full course of treatment, 57% of patients achieved a CBR, and 18% achieved an SCBR. Improved QOL was observed in patients with a CBR or SCBR. The objective response rate was 25%. Median time to progression and overall survival times were 7.2 months and 13.2 months, respectively. CONCLUSION: Chemotherapy with GemCap is well tolerated and effective and leads to a high CBR rate. Patient-reported outcomes are useful for evaluating the effects of palliative chemotherapy in patients with biliary tract cancer.