Intravascular Lymphoma - The Creepy Crawler: A Case Series and Brief Literature Review.

BACKGROUND: Intravascular large B-cell lymphoma (IVLBCL) is a rare subtype of extranodal B-cell lymphoma, which has traditionally been associated with poor outcomes. Despite increasing recognition, IVLBCL requires a high degree of clinical suspicion on the part of the clinician for its diagnosis. CASE SERIES: We present four patient cases: A 69-year-old female with constitutional symptoms and cognitive decline; a 78-year-old female with kidney injury and constitutional symptoms whose disease rapidly progressed to multiorgan failure and death; a 70-year-old asymptomatic female with an incidentally found, enlarged thyroid; and a 63-year-old male with cytopenia and constitutional symptoms. Retrospective chart analysis was performed on these four patients diagnosed with IVLBCL at our Institute to identify the pathognomonic features of the disease and compare these to the published evidence. IVLBCL has a heterogeneous presentation, as seen in our four patients. The disease is characterized by the exclusive presence of malignant cells inside the blood vessels and lack of organ infiltration. Traditional preliminary diagnostic modalities such as imaging are usually inconclusive, given the paucity of lymphomatous aggregates. A bone marrow biopsy, random skin biopsies, or a focal organ biopsy in appropriate cases is required for diagnosis. Immunosuppression might play a role in the pathogenesis. Timely initiation of aggressive cancer-directed therapy was associated with improved outcomes. Monitoring for disease response and relapse continues to be a challenge. CONCLUSION: Our mini-series highlights the significance of timely diagnosis and intervention in IVLBCL and emphasizes the importance of further research to determine its association with immunosuppression.

Second primary malignancies in patients with haematological cancers treated with lenalidomide: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Lenalidomide has been standard therapy for multiple myeloma and other haematological malignancies for more than a decade. Previous meta-analyses identified an association between lenalidomide and second primary malignancies (SPM) in patients with multiple myeloma. However, newer randomised controlled trials using lenalidomide for other indications have not reported an increased incidence of SPM. The aim of this study was to investigate the risk of developing SPM with lenalidomide use in all disease settings. METHODS: We did a systematic review of randomised controlled trials that reported SPM in patients treated with lenalidomide. PubMed, Embase, CENTRAL, Europe PubMed Central, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched from Jan 1, 2004, to March 18, 2022. Randomised controlled trials with at least one lenalidomide group and one non-lenalidomide group were selected, regardless of the disease setting. Studies with a median follow-up of less than 12 months were excluded. Summary data were extracted by two reviewers (KS and KL) independently and verified by a third reviewer (JF). We then conducted a meta-analysis to assess the risk ratio (RR) of SPM with lenalidomide use across various disease subtypes using a random-effects model. We chose random effects for the primary analysis because of anticipated heterogeneity between different diseases, but we used fixed effects for stratified meta-analysis of multiple myeloma studies. Risk of bias was assessed with the PROTECT tool. The study was registered with PROSPERO, CRD42021257508. FINDINGS: Our search yielded 9078 studies, and 38 trials that included 14 058 patients were eligible for meta-analysis after screening, 18 of which were in multiple myeloma. The RR across all malignancies was 1·16 (95% CI 0·96-1·39). However, there was heterogeneity across indications (p=0·020). The RR when lenalidomide was used for multiple myeloma was 1·42 (1·09-1·84). There was no increase in SPM in lymphoma or chronic lymphocytic leukaemia (0·90 [0·76-1·08]) and myelodysplastic syndrome (0·96 [0·23-3·97]) trials. In the setting of multiple myeloma, lenalidomide increased both solid and haematological SPM, both in the no-transplantation and post-transplantation settings. From the 38 trials, 21 (55%) had low risk of bias, 12 (32%) had unclear risk of bias, and five (13%) had high risk of bias. INTERPRETATION: Based on the current data, lenalidomide-induced SPM seem to occur exclusively in patients with multiple myeloma. Thus, lenalidomide can be used for other indications without the major concern of a therapy-related neoplasm. In the multiple myeloma setting, lenalidomide is an effective drug, but patients should be monitored both for haematological and solid tumour SPM. This monitoring includes patients that have not received autologous haematopoietic stem-cell transplantation. Further investigations are needed to improve understanding on why lenalidomide only promotes SPM in patients with multiple myeloma. FUNDING: None.

The role of systemic therapy in melanoma brain metastases: a narrative review.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Melanoma is a disease notorious for the development of brain metastases, with consequently poor outcomes for patients who develop melanoma brain metastases (MBM). The treatment options for patients with MBM were limited to radiotherapy and surgery. MBM patients, particularly those with symptomatic disease, were excluded from clinical trials of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) and BRAF/MEK inhibitors. Recent post-approval studies have, demonstrated important roles for existing systemic ICIs and BRAF/MEK inhibitors in untreated MBM, dramatically altering the landscape of melanoma patients in general and MBM in particular. These trials have also identified key areas for which more effective strategies are needed including: symptomatic MBM, and leptomeningeal disease (LMD). METHODS: PubMed, Scopus and Embase databases were systematically queried to obtain records pertaining to the etiology of and treatment for MBM. Clinical trial databases were reviewed to obtain details regarding MBM clinical trials. KEY CONTENT AND FINDINGS: We discuss the etiopathogenesis of MBM and the novel immune, molecular and metabolic features of MBM that make this disease a unique therapeutic challenge. We review advances in systemic therapy with ICIs and BRAF/MEK inhibitors in untreated MBM, along with novel combinations. Finally, we debate challenging situations such as LMD, and delineate novel treatments and new paradigms for therapeutic interventions. CONCLUSIONS: The historically poor outcomes for MBM patients have been transformed with the advent of effective systemic therapies including ICIs and BRAF/MEK inhibitors. An improved understanding of the molecular and immunogenomic characterization of MBMs has provided new targets that are being exploited in the clinic.

Obesity as a Risk Factor for Failure to Wean from ECMO: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Purpose: Obesity has been associated with an increased risk of respiratory complications and other systemic illnesses. Respiratory dynamics in an obese patient, combined with modified lung physiology of ARDS, present a significant challenge in managing obese patients with ARDS. Many physicians think of obesity as a relative contraindication to ECMO. We performed a meta-analysis to see the effect of obesity on weaning from ECMO and survival to hospital discharge. Methods: We searched online databases for studies on ECMO and obesity. The search yielded 49 citations in total; after extensive review, six studies were assessed and qualified to be included in the final analysis. Patients were stratified into BMI >30 kg/m2 (obese) and BMI < 30 kg/m2 (nonobese). Results: In meta-analysis, there was a total sample population of 1285 patients, with 466 in the obese group and 819 in the nonobese group. There was no significant difference in weaning from ECMO when compared between obese and nonobese patients, with a risk ratio of 1.03 and 95% confidence interval (CI) of 0.94-1.13 (heterogeneity: chi2 = 7.44, df = 4 (p=0.11), I 2 = 46%). There was no significant difference in survival rates between obese and nonobese patients who were treated with ECMO during hospitalization, with a risk ratio of 1.04 and 95% CI of 0.86-1.25 (heterogeneity: Tau2 0.03, chi2 = 14.61, df = 5 (p=0.01), I 2 = 66%). Conclusion: Our findings show no significant difference in survival and weaning from ECMO in obese vs. nonobese patients. ECMO therapy should not be withheld from obese patients, as obesity is not a contraindication to ECMO.