Fractionated Stereotactic Radiation for Central Nervous System Lymphoma: Retrospective Analysis of Initial Cases.

Primary central nervous system lymphoma (PCNSL) is primarily treated with combination chemotherapy, while whole-brain radiotherapy (WBRT) can be used as consolidative treatment or as a salvage option for central nervous system (CNS) relapse. We investigated whether fractionated stereotactic radiosurgery (fSRS) could replace WBRT in cases where patients had poor performance status or minimal disease at the time of consolidation, to spare patients the adverse effects of WBRT. We retrospectively identified 10 patients who completed 14 courses of fSRS for PCNSL or for CNS relapse of systemic lymphoma. Of 14 fSRS treatments, there were 10 distant brain recurrences among 6 patients, occurring on average 13.6 months after fSRS. A total of 4 of the 10 recurrences were treated with further fSRS, and 4 were treated with WBRT. There was one late in-field recurrence after both fSRS and WBRT, which occurred 27 months after fSRS. The median survival after fSRS was 36 months, and side effects after fSRS were minimal. This case series represents a potential treatment option for patients with CNS lymphoma, for whom WBRT is indicated but where the toxic effects of this treatment would be prohibitive.

A Prospective Economic Analysis of Early Outcome Data From the Alliance A041202/ CCTG CLC.2 Randomized Phase III Trial Of Bendamustine-Rituximab Compared With Ibrutinib-Based Regimens in Untreated Older Patients With Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia.

INTRODUCTION: The Alliance A041202/CCTG CLC.2 trial demonstrated superior progression-free survival with ibrutinib-based therapy compared to chemoimmunotherapy with bendamustine-rituximab (BR) in previously untreated older patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia. We completed a prospective trial-based economic analysis of Canadian patients to study the direct medical costs and quality-adjusted benefit associated with these therapies. METHODS: Mean survival was calculated using the restricted mean survival method from randomization to the study time-horizon of 24 months. Health state utilities were collected using the EuroQOL EQ-5D instrument with Canadian tariffs applied to calculate quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Costs were applied to resource utilization data (expressed in 2019 US dollars). We examined costs and QALYs associated ibrutinib, ibrutinib with rituximab (IR), and BR therapy. RESULTS: A total of 55 patients were enrolled; two patients were excluded from the analysis. On-protocol costs (associated with protocol-specified resource use) were higher for patients receiving ibrutinib (mean $189,335; P < 0.0001) and IR (mean $219,908; P < 0.0001) compared to BR (mean $51,345), driven by higher acquisition costs for ibrutinib. Total mean costs (over 2-years) were $192,615 with ibrutinib, $223,761 with IR, and $55,413 with BR (P < 0.0001 for ibrutinib vs. BR and P < 0.0001 for IR vs. BR). QALYs were similar between the three treatment arms: 1.66 (0.16) for ibrutinib alone, 1.65 (0.24) for IR, and 1.66 (0.17) for BR; therefore, a formal cost-utility analysis was not conducted. CONCLUSIONS: Direct medical costs are higher for patients receiving ibrutinib-based therapies compared to chemoimmunotherapy in frontline chronic lymphocytic leukemia, with the cost of ibrutinib representing a key driver.

Final 5-year findings from the phase 3 HELIOS study of ibrutinib plus bendamustine and rituximab in patients with relapsed/refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia/small lymphocytic lymphoma.

We report final analysis outcomes from the phase 3 HELIOS study (NCT01611090). Patients with relapsed/refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia/small lymphocytic lymphoma without deletion 17p (n = 578) were randomized 1:1 to 420 mg daily ibrutinib or placebo plus ≤6 cycles of bendamustine plus rituximab (BR), followed by ibrutinib or placebo alone. Median follow-up was 63.7 months. Median investigator-assessed progression-free survival was longer with ibrutinib plus BR (65.1 months) than placebo plus BR (14.3 months; hazard ratio [HR] 0.229 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.183-0.286]; p < .0001). Despite crossover of 63.3% of patients from the placebo plus BR arm to ibrutinib treatment upon disease progression, ibrutinib plus BR versus placebo plus BR demonstrated an overall survival benefit (HR 0.611 [95% CI 0.455-0.822]; p = .0010; median not reached in either arm). Long-term follow-up data confirm the survival benefit of ibrutinib plus BR over BR alone. Safety profiles were consistent with those known for ibrutinib and BR.

Safety and efficacy of different lenalidomide starting doses in patients with relapsed or refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia: results of an international multicenter double-blinded randomized phase II trial.

The objective of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of different lenalidomide starting doses in patients with relapsed/refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). CLL patients were randomized to receive lenalidomide at initial doses of 5, 10, or 15 mg/d (N = 103). Doses were escalated by 5 mg every 28-d up to a maximum of 25 mg/d; dose reductions in up to 5 mg decrements were permitted. The most common grade ≥3 adverse events (AEs) were neutropenia and thrombocytopenia. Ten patients died during therapy (four deaths considered as related to lenalidomide); 12 patients experienced second primary malignancies. The most common cause for treatment discontinuation was AEs. Overall response rates were similar across arms. Progression-free survival and overall survival rates were longer in patients who escalated treatment (to 15 or 20 mg/d) versus those who did not. Lower starting doses allowed subsequent dose escalation of lenalidomide while maintaining an acceptable tolerability profile in patients with relapsed/refractory CLL.

Principles and Recommendations for the Provision of Healthcare in Canada to Adolescent and Young Adult-Aged Cancer Patients and Survivors.

Adolescents and young adults (AYA) with cancer and survivors of cancer in childhood, adolescence, and young adulthood are a constituency facing disparities of care affecting quality of life and other outcomes in many parts of the world. In Canada, this situation occurs in a nation with population-based cancer control programs and a government-funded healthcare system. The Canadian Task Force on Adolescents and Young Adults with Cancer was established in 2008 with a mission to ensure that AYA-aged Canadians with cancer and AYA survivors of cancer have prompt, equitable access to the best care, and to establish and support research to identify how their health outcomes and quality of life can be optimized. Following a survey of existing services, and in consultation with survivors, healthcare professionals, and policy makers, the Task Force identified principles of care, priority issues for research and the establishment of outcome metrics, and strategies for implementing change that are designed to improve the outcomes and quality of life of this specific cohort of patients and survivors with unique developmental needs. The six broad recommendations highlight the need for age-appropriate psychosocial, survivorship, palliative, and medical care as well as research to redress inequities in the care provided to this group relative to both younger and older cancer patients. Improved care for this group will enable individuals to reach their full potential as productive, functioning members of society, and will provide economic and other societal benefits.

Biomarkers and the design of clinical trials in cancer.

Scientific innovation has promoted the rapid discovery and development of cancer-related biomarkers. This has fostered improved mechanistic understandings of disease biology, facilitated the development of novel targeted therapies and offers the potential to better define the natural history of a disease and to predict response to specific treatment. Clinical trials are evolving, from the use of exploratory 'correlative studies' that assist in the understanding of disease mechanisms, to the use of validated biomarkers that are integral to the design of definitive prospective studies. A rigorous process for biomarker development and validation, followed by evaluation in well-designed, prospective clinical trials that demonstrate improved patient outcomes is required for new biomarkers to change clinical practice. To date, the number of biomarkers considered clinically useful is disappointingly small because of conflicting conclusions generated from trials with practical and methodological limitations. This review will highlight several important aspects related to the design and analysis of clinical trials that incorporate a biomarker as a central component. First, we review biomarker development, how biomarkers may be used as targets and how biomarkers can influence methodology to optimize efficiency of drug development through the use of surrogate outcomes. Second, we focus on issues related to trials evaluating potential prognostic biomarkers and how the predictive properties of biomarkers may be used to determine which patients might optimally benefit from a specific intervention.

Cytomegalovirus prophylaxis and treatment after hematopoietic stem cell transplantation in Canada: a description of current practices and comparison with Centers for Disease Control/Infectious Diseases Society of America/American Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation guideline recommendations.

Prevention and management of cytomegalovirus (CMV) disease after hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) is critically important, but clinical practices have historically been heterogeneous. The Centers for Disease Control (CDC), as part of a larger clinical practice guideline initiative, has published evidence-based recommendations, but their effect on clinical practice has not been assessed. A survey was sent to all Canadian HSCT program directors to describe current practices. Current practices were subsequently compared with CDC guideline recommendations and with a Canadian survey published before the CDC guidelines. When current practices did not conform to guideline recommendations, a literature review was performed to determine whether current practices were supported by evidence published after the CDC guidelines. The survey response rate was 100%. Variability in practices was observed in several aspects of patient care, including (1) indications for CMV-negative blood products, (2) surveillance tests used to detect CMV infection, (3) duration of surveillance testing, (4) duration of maintenance treatment after preemptive therapy was initiated, and (5) treatment of CMV disease. Overall adherence to guideline recommendations was good, especially when they were supported by high-quality data. However, deviations from guideline recommendations were observed: (1) most Canadian allogeneic programs used shorter courses of preemptive therapy; (2) prevention measures aimed at late CMV disease were not systematically applied at most allogeneic programs; and (3) most autologous HSCT programs did not administer preemptive therapy even in high-risk recipients. When deviations occurred, recent evidence supported current practices in some instances (shorter courses of preemptive therapy) but not in others (absence of strategies to prevent late CMV disease). Compared with practices in Canada before publication of the CDC guidelines, a higher proportion of programs used CDC-recommended surveillance tests and treatment for CMV infection. Current practices in Canada remain heterogeneous. Discrepancies between current practices and CDC guideline recommendations occurred in situations either in which practices had changed in response to recently published data or in which evidence supporting a recommendation was poor. These results suggest an urgent need for the development of well-designed clinical trials. Incorporation of recent data into updated guidelines may be appropriate.