A phase II study of ibrutinib in combination with ixazomib in patients with Waldenström macroglobulinaemia.

This phase II study evaluated time-limited (24 cycles) treatment with ibrutinib and ixazomib in newly diagnosed (NDWM; n = 9) and relapsed/refractory (RRWM; n = 12) Waldenström macroglobulinaemia (WM). The overall response rate (ORR) was 76.2% (n = 16) in 21 evaluable patients with no patient achieving a complete response (CR). The median duration of treatment was 15.6 months, and after a median follow-up time of 25.7 months, the median progression-free survival (PFS) was 22.9 months. While the primary end-point was not met (CR rate at any time) and 28.5% discontinued treatment due to toxicity, ibrutinib plus ixazomib led to a clinically meaningful ORR and PFS. Combined Bruton's tyrosine kinase (BTK) and proteasome inhibition merits further evaluation in WM.

Daratumumab-lenalidomide and daratumumab-pomalidomide in relapsed lenalidomide-exposed or refractory multiple myeloma.

Daratumumab is an anti-CD38 mAb, used frequently in combination with lenalidomide and pomalidomide. No studies compared daratumumab plus lenalidomide and dexamethasone (DRd) to daratumumab plus pomalidomide and dexamethasone (DPd) in lenalidomide-exposed multiple myeloma. We identified 504 consecutive multiple myeloma patients who received daratumumab at Mayo Clinic between January 2015 and April 2019. We excluded patients who received daratumumab in the first line, received more than four lines of therapy prior to daratumumab use, did not receive lenalidomide prior to daratumumab, or had an unknown status of lenalidomide exposure, and patients who received daratumumab combinations other than DRd or DPd. We examined the impact of using DRd compared to DPd on progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma. Out of 504 patients, 162 received DRd or DPd and were included; 67 were lenalidomide-exposed and 95 were lenalidomide-refractory. DRd was used in 76 (47%) and DPd in 86 (53%) patients. In lenalidomide-exposed multiple myeloma, there was no difference in median PFS; 34.2 months [95% confidence interval (CI), 22.8-44.6] for DRd compared to 25.2 months (95% CI, 4.9-35.3) for DPd, P  = 0.2. In lenalidomide-refractory multiple myeloma, there was no difference in median PFS; 18.6 months (95% CI, 13-32) for DRd compared to 9 months (95% CI, 5.2-14.6) for DPd, P  = 0.09. No difference in median OS was observed in DRd compared to DPd. Our study shows combining daratumumab with lenalidomide in patients with prior lenalidomide use is a viable and effective treatment option.

The digital divide: Racial disparities in adoption and utilization of health information technology among patients with lymphoid cancers.

INTRODUCTION: Health information technology (HIT) has the potential to improve healthcare delivery and engagement. Studying racial-ethnic disparities in HIT engagement will help understand and overcome challenges to healthcare utilization. METHODS: We undertook a patient-reported survey among patients with lymphoid malignancies at two campuses of Mayo Clinic, Florida to explore HIT-related disparities. Variables between Whites and non-Whites, and non-Whites from the two campuses were compared. RESULTS: The survey was completed by 1004 respondents, with 71% whites, 27% non-Whites (race-ethnicity not reported by 2%). Non-Whites included 30% responders at the main campus and 64% at an inner-city campus. Whites were significantly older and had higher education, while non-Whites had lesser access to a computer. Only 51% of non-Whites were registered to use electronic medical records (EMR) as compared to 72% Whites (p < 0.001) and significantly lesser number of non-Whites even knew that EMR existed (81% vs. 92%, p < 0.001). Encouragingly, a higher number of non-Whites wanted to engage in EMR. Non-Whites from the main campus were older, more educated and had more access to a computer as compared to those from the inner-city campus. Similar disparate factors were noted among minorities from the two campuses, suggesting impact of socioeconomic backgrounds on EMR usage among non-Whites. Linguistic barriers were more striking among inner-city campus non-Whites. CONCLUSIONS: Non-Whites continue to struggle with suboptimal utilization of the healthcare system and barriers related to integration in HIT, including disparities representing socioeconomic differences. Efforts need to be made at several levels to help racial-ethnic minorities overcome awareness, access, and linguistic barriers to HIT utilization.