Heparin versus aspirin thromboprophylaxis adds independent value to IMPEDE-VTE score for venous thrombosis prediction in multiple myeloma.

Multiple myeloma (MM) is associated to an increased incidence of venous thromboembolism (VTE). IMPEDE-VTE score constitutes a valuable risk assessment tool for VTE prediction in first-line MM patients. Nevertheless, refinement of the primary thromboprophylaxis category of this score (which pools aspirin and heparin) seems desirable. To investigate the role of the type of thromboprophylaxis, within IMPEDE-VTE score, for VTE prediction in MM patients. Retrospective analysis of a single-center cohort of 438 MM patients receiving first-line antimyeloma treatment (1991-2020). IMPEDE-VTE score was calculated. Primary thromboprophylaxis was additionally stratified into aspirin- and heparin-based regimen subgroups. VTE risk was analyzed by Cox regression. Median follow-up during first-line antimyeloma treatment was 6.0 months (IQR 4.1-9.0 months). Twenty-three patients developed VTE (5.3%, 95%CI 3.4-7.8%). IMPEDE-VTE score showed a notable predictive value (area under the ROC curve: 0.70, 95%CI 0.60-0.80). Cox analysis confirmed that 1-point increase in the score resulted in a 1.3-fold increase in VTE risk (HR 1.30, 95%CI 1.13-1.53, p < 0.001). In the multivariable analysis, the type of primary thromboprophylaxis (heparin versus aspirin) was an independent predictive factor (HR 0.15, 95% CI 0.05-0.47, p = 0.001). The combined model showed a higher goodness-of-fit (Akaike Information Criterion [AIC]: 99) than IMPEDE-VTE separately (AIC:235). Our analysis contributes to the external validation of IMPEDE-VTE score for the prediction of VTE in MM. But more interestingly, our results demonstrate that among those patients receiving thromboprophylaxis, the type of regimen (heparin versus aspirin) adds independent predictive value and should be explored for a more accurate risk assessment.

Results of R-ESHAP as salvage therapy in refractory/relapsed follicular lymphoma: a real-world experience on behalf of GELCAB group.

There is no standard treatment for relapsed follicular lymphoma (FL). Although platinum-based combinations are one of the most used treatments, few data have been reported in this setting. Our aim was to analyse R-ESHAP efficacy in relapsed FL patients. We retrospectively analysed 80 FL patients treated with R-ESHAP in the first or successive relapses. Responding patients received a stem cell transplantation following R-ESHAP. Seventeen histologically transformed patients were included. Median age was 50 years. At R-ESHAP initiation, 85% of the patients were in an advanced stage, 28% had a bulky disease and 40% had increased LDH. There were no statistically significant differences between POD24 and non-POD24 patients in terms of response to R-ESHAP (ORR 72% vs. 93%, p = 0.109). When analyzing R-ESHAP efficacy according to the response to the immediately previous line, patients achieving CR or PR had better CR rates to R-ESHAP than those who did not respond (CR of 57% vs. 15%, respectively, p = 0.009), as well as differences in OS (7.2 vs. 1.4 years, p < 0.0001) and in PFS (2.1 vs. 0.3 years, p < 0.0001). R-ESHAP is an effective treatment in relapsed FL patients who respond to the previous line and has to be considered as an adequate alternative for some patients.