Management of neutropenic fever during a transition from traditional hematology/oncology service to hospitalist care.

OBJECTIVES: Increasingly, hospitalists across the United States provide primary inpatient care for almost all subspecialty patients, including hematology and medical oncology. Febrile neutropenia (FN) is a serious condition often seen as a complication of cytotoxic chemotherapy or in patients with underlying bone marrow defects. The purpose of this study was to document the change of inpatient management of a common admission diagnosis during a transition of providers from hematologists/oncologists to the use of hospitalists in a tertiary care medical center, and to compare the appropriateness of treatment and outcomes over a period of 5.5 years of this transition. METHODS: The medical records of all patients with neutropenia at a community-based teaching hospital during a period of conversion from hematologist/oncologist to hospitalist coverage were retrospectively reviewed. Patients with fever and absolute neutrophil counts of less than 500/ microL (.5 x 10(9)/L) on admission were included. Study cases were divided into 3 groups by admission date, roughly demarcating the nascent hospitalist era, the era of transition to hospitalist, and the mature hospitalist era. Management of FN during these eras was compared. RESULTS: Three hundred ninety-nine inpatients were identified as neutropenic. Of these, 184 did not meet case-inclusion criteria. The remaining 215 cases were included in the study. The internal medicine hospitalist service admitted less than 10% of this population in 2003, but by 2007-2008 it admitted over 90%. The use of 4th-generation cephalosporins and carbapenems increased over time (P = .027), and the infectious disease service was consulted more frequently over time (P = .007). Outcomes varied due to changes in underlying disease states, use of hospice services, and changes in the types of patients hospitalized with FN. Morbidity decreased due to the change in the type and nonantibiotic therapy of cases, but inappropriate antimicrobial treatment was unusual, and septic morbidity or mortality related to inappropriate therapy was too rare to compare through these eras. CONCLUSION: Over the 3 eras compared, care of most neutropenic fever patients was transferred from specialists to hospitalists. Care became more uniform, guideline based, and used more infectious disease consultation, and mortality decreased. Complex changes in the types and treatments of cancer, neutropenia therapy, and in the types of patients hospitalized with FN prevent any conclusion of added value for this change in the type of primary provider management.

Impact of Prior Inotuzumab Ozogamicin Treatment on Brexucabtagene Autoleucel outcomes in Adults with B-cell ALL.

The effect of prior inotuzumab ozogamicin (InO) treatment on brexucabtagene autoleucel (brexu-cel) outcomes remains unclear in adults with acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL), particularly the influence off previous InO response and the timing of administration. We conducted a retrospective multicenter analysis of 189 patients with relapsed/refractory (r/r) ALL treated with brexu-cel. Over half of the patients received InO before brexu-cel (InO-exposed). InO-exposed patients were more heavily pretreated (p= 0.02) and frequently had active marrow disease pre-apheresis (p= 0.03). Response rate and toxicity profile following brexu-cel were comparable for InO-exposed and InO-naïve; however, consolidation therapy post brexu-cel response was utilized at a higher rate in InO-naïve patients (p= 0.005). With a median follow up of 11.4 months, InO-exposed patients had inferior progression-free survival (PFS) (p=0.013) and overall survival (OS) (p=0.006) in univariate analyses; however, prior InO exposure did not influence PFS (HR 1.20, 95%CI, 0.71-2.03) in multivariate models. When InO-exposed patients were stratified according to prior InO response, InO responders had superior PFS (p=0.002) and OS (p<0.0001) relative to InO-refractory. The timing of administering InO did not affect brexu-cel outcomes, with comparable PFS (p=0.51) and OS (p=0.86) for patients receiving InO as bridging therapy or pre-apheresis. In conclusion, while InO exposure was associated with inferior survival outcomes following brexu-cel in unadjusted analyses, these associations were no longer significant in multivariate analyses, suggesting it is unlikely that InO negatively impacts brexu-cel efficacy. Our data instead imply that InO-exposed recipients of brexu-cel tend to be higher-risk patients with intrinsic adverse leukemia biology.

Clinical experience with frontline Hyper-CVAD-based regimens, including Hyper-CVAD plus ponatinib, in patients with acute lymphoblastic leukemia treated at a comprehensive cancer center.

BACKGROUND: Hyper-CVAD is an established regimen for adult ALL that was developed at the MD Anderson Cancer Center (MDACC). However, results can vary across different institutions given the heterogeneity of patient populations and institutional practices. Moreover, while a MDACC study demonstrated that the combination of ponatinib plus hyper-CVAD produced remarkable activity in untreated Ph+ ALL, it remains to be externally validated. We sought to validate those findings in previously untreated adult patients with Ph+ ALL. METHODS: This was a retrospective study analyzing the outcomes of previously untreated adult ALL patients treated with hyper-CVAD, with a focus on Ph+ ALL patients treated with ponatinib plus hyper-CVAD. RESULTS: 82 patients were included. The median age was 51 years. The median follow-up was 2.62 years. The 5-year overall survival (OS) and event-free survival (EFS) were 39.5 % and 28.2 %, respectively. For Ph+ ALL patients (n = 13) receiving ponatinib plus hyper-CVAD, 3-year OS and EFS were both 92.3 %. Univariate analysis showed a high WBC and poor-risk cytogenetics to be associated with inferior outcomes, while CD20 + predicted favorable outcomes in B-ALL patients. On multivariate analysis, CD20 + retained significance for Philadelphia-negative (Ph-) ALL. For Ph+ ALL, ponatinib was associated with better OS and EFS on univariate and multivariate analysis. CONCLUSION: Our data supports the use of ponatinib plus hyper-CVAD as a standard of care regimen for Ph+ ALL. Our outcomes for Ph-ALL and T-cell ALL (T-ALL) show that advances are still needed in the frontline setting, and clinical trial enrollment is recommended.

Retrospective Analysis of Adult Patients With Relapsed/Refractory Acute Myeloid Leukemia Treated with FLAG at a Comprehensive Cancer Center.

BACKGROUND: FLAG ± Ida (fludarabine, cytarabine, granulocyte colony-stimulating factor, and idarubicin), is a salvage chemotherapy regimen for relapsed or refractory (R/R) acute myeloid leukemia (AML), with complete remission (CR) rates historically ranging from 52% to 63%. We review the outcomes for patients with R/R AML treated with FLAG ± Ida at the University of California Davis Comprehensive Cancer Center. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Adult patients (≥ 18 years) with R/R AML who received FLAG or FLAG + Ida from January 1, 2012 to October 31, 2016 were identified via chart review. Outcomes evaluated were CR, CR with incomplete hematologic recovery (CRi), overall response rate, overall survival (OS), relapse-free survival, and adverse events. RESULTS: Forty-two patients were included. The median age was 52 years (range, 23-73 years), and 57% were male. Sixteen (38.1%) patients had relapsed disease, and 26 (61.9%) had refractory disease. Most (n = 35; 83.3%) patients had European LeukemiaNet intermediate-risk AML. Responses were CR in 20 (47.6%) and CRi in 6 (14.3%). The median OS was 10 months (range, 0.8-51 months), and the median relapse-free survival was 12 months (range, 1-51 months) for responders. The median OS for patients who achieved CR was not reached, and the estimated 48-month survival rate was 56%. The median OS after CRi or no response was 3.47 and 2.17 months, respectively. The median OS was not significantly different when censored for stem cell transplant following chemotherapy, nor with use/deferral of idarubicin. The most common adverse effects were pancytopenia and infection. CONCLUSION: Patient outcomes after treatment with FLAG ± Ida for R/R AML remain similar to prior reports, confirming its role as a salvage regimen for these patients.

Outcomes of Adults With Relapsed/Refractory Acute Myeloid Leukemia Treated With Venetoclax Plus Hypomethylating Agents at a Comprehensive Cancer Center.

Relapsed/refractory acute myeloid leukemia (AML) is a devastating disease with a poor prognosis and represents a major unmet medical need. We report on a real-world academic center experience of treating 25 patients with relapsed/refractory AML using venetoclax in combination with decitabine or azacitidine, which is not otherwise widely evaluated in the current literature. Our patients come from a large, socioeconomically and geographically diverse area including the majority of Northern California. Most had ELN Adverse Risk (52%) or Intermediate Risk (44%) AML, and most had an ECOG Performance Status of 1 (64%). Over half (52%) had prior hypomethylating agent exposure, and 40% had Secondary AML. We observed an overall response rate of 52%, with eight patients (32%) achieving composite complete remission. Median overall survival was 5.5 months, and for patients achieving composite complete remission this was 21.6 months. One-year estimated overall survival was 38%. Three patients were able to proceed directly to stem cell transplant for consolidation, and all three were alive at last follow-up, ranging 13.8-24.0 months. We found venetoclax in combination with hypomethylating agents to be well tolerated and potentially efficacious in securing long-term remissions for patients with relapsed/refractory AML.

A Phase I Study of Everolimus and Bendamustine in Patients With Relapsed/Refractory Lymphoid Hematologic Malignancies.

INTRODUCTION: Everolimus and bendamustine both have single-agent activity against lymphoid hematologic malignancies. We examined this combination in a group of heavily pretreated patients with non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL), Hodgkin lymphoma (HL), and multiple myeloma (MM). PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this phase I trial, 18 patients (8 with NHL, 6 with MM, and 4 with HL) were treated with bendamustine 90 mg/m2 on days 1 and 2 and everolimus from 5 to 10 mg daily on a 28-day cycle, for up to 4 cycles. RESULTS: Adverse events were generally mild and mostly hematologic in nature. The most frequent grade 3/4 adverse events were lymphopenia (61%), thrombocytopenia (22%), leukopenia (22%), neutropenia (17%), and fatigue (17%). Overall response rate varied by malignancy: diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, 20% (1 of 5 patients); HL (2 of 4 patients), 50%; MM, 80% (4 of 5 patients); and indolent lymphomas, 100% (3 of 3 patients). The maximum tolerated dose of everolimus was determined to be 7.5 mg daily. CONCLUSION: The combination of everolimus and bendamustine appeared to be well-tolerated and relatively efficacious.

Publication outcomes of phase II oncology clinical trials.

OBJECTIVES: Translation of evidence-based medicine into oncology practice depends on timely and full publication of clinical trials. We investigated publication outcomes of Phase II trial abstracts from the annual meetings of the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO). METHODS: We searched the 1997, 1999, and 2001 ASCO annual meeting proceedings and identified all Phase II trials, excluding those that reported preliminary results. Literature search was performed using PubMed, EMBASE, and Google for corresponding publications in peer-reviewed journals. We attempted to contact authors of all unpublished trials. RESULTS: Only 60.8% of t he 559 trials identified were published, with a median time to publication of 41 months. At 5 years, 65.9%, 62.7%, and 57.0% of studies from 1997, 1999, and 2001, respectively, were published. Studies with larger samples were associated with a shorter time to publication, as were oral and poster presentations versus print only (P < 0.001). Common reasons for not publishing were uninteresting results, lack of time, and relocation of authors. Among abstracts reporting response rates, 37.7% showed different results in subsequent publications. Though not statistically significant, over the 5-year period, abstracts presented at later years had a lower rate of publication, longer time to publication, and a higher likelihood of showing a better tumor response. CONCLUSIONS: Almost half of Phase II trials presented at ASCO annual meetings within the last 10 years remain unpublished. Over one-third of published trials reported results different from those presented in abstracts. Like Phase I and III trials, Phase II trials often are unpublished.