ABSTRACT
Sixteen cycles of Brentuximab vedotin (BV) after autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) in high-risk relapsed/refractory classical Hodgkin lymphoma demonstrated an improved 2-year progression-free survival (PFS) over placebo. However, most patients are unable to complete all 16 cycles at full dose due to toxicity. This retrospective, multicenter study investigated the effect of cumulative maintenance BV dose on 2-year PFS. Data were collected from patients who received at least one cycle of BV maintenance after ASCT with one of the following high-risk features: primary refractory disease (PRD), extra-nodal disease (END), or relapse <12 months (RL<12) from the end of frontline therapy. Cohort 1 had patients with >75% of the planned total cumulative dose, cohort 2 with 51-75% of dose, and cohort 3 with ≤50% of dose. The primary outcome was 2-year PFS. A total of 118 patients were included. Fifty percent had PRD, 29% had RL<12, and 39% had END. Forty-four percent of patients had prior exposure to BV and 65% were in complete remission before ASCT. Only 14% of patients received the full planned BV dose. Sixty-one percent of patients discontinued maintenance early and majority of those (72%) were due to toxicity. The 2-year PFS for the entire population was 80.7%. The 2-year PFS was 89.2% for cohort 1 (n=39), 86.2% for cohort 2 (n=33), and 77.9% for cohort 3 (n=46) (P=0.70). These data are reassuring for patients who require dose reductions or discontinuation to manage toxicity.
Subject(s)
Hodgkin Disease , Immunoconjugates , Humans , Brentuximab Vedotin , Hodgkin Disease/drug therapy , Hodgkin Disease/pathology , Retrospective Studies , Immunoconjugates/adverse effects , Neoplasm Recurrence, Local/drug therapy , Stem Cell Transplantation , Chronic Disease , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Cytomegalovirus (CMV) is one of the most common and clinically significant viral infections following allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT). Currently available options for CMV prophylaxis and treatment present challenges related to side effects and cost. METHODS: In this retrospective medical record review, the incidence of clinically significant CMV infection (CMV disease or reactivation requiring preemptive treatment) following allogeneic HCT was compared in patients receiving valacyclovir 1â g three times daily versus acyclovir 400â mg every 12â h for viral prophylaxis. RESULTS: Forty-five patients who received valacyclovir were matched based on propensity scoring to 35 patients who received acyclovir. All patients received reduced-intensity conditioning regimens containing anti-thymocyte globulin. Clinically significant CMV infection by day + 180 was lower in the valacyclovir group compared to the acyclovir group (18% vs. 57%, p = 0.0004). Patients receiving valacyclovir prophylaxis also had less severe infection evidenced by a reduction in CMV disease, lower peak CMV titers, delayed CMV reactivation, and less secondary neutropenia. CONCLUSION: Prospective evaluation of valacyclovir 1â g three times daily for viral prophylaxis following allogeneic HCT is warranted. Due to valacyclovir's favorable toxicity profile and affordable cost, it has the potential to benefit patients on a broad scale as an option for CMV prophylaxis.