Search

Refractoriness to induction therapy and relapse after complete remission are the leading causes of death in patients with acute myeloid leukaemia (AML). This study focussed on the prediction of response to standard induction therapy and outcome of patients with AML using a combined strategy of mutational profiling by next-generation sequencing (NGS, n = 190) and ex vivo PharmaFlow testing (n = 74) for the 10 most widely used drugs for AML induction therapy, in a cohort of adult patients uniformly treated according to Spanish PETHEMA guidelines. We identified an adverse mutational profile (EZH2, KMT2A, U2AF1 and/or TP53 mutations) that carries a greater risk of death [hazard ratio (HR): 3·29, P < 0·0001]. A high correlation was found between the ex vivo PharmaFlow results and clinical induction response (69%). Clinical correlation analysis showed that the pattern of multiresistance revealed by ex vivo PharmaFlow identified patients with a high risk of death (HR: 2·58). Patients with mutation status also ran a high risk (HR 4·19), and the risk was increased further in patients with both adverse profiles (HR 4·82). We have developed a new score based on NGS and ex vivo drug testing for AML patients that improves upon current prognostic risk stratification and allows clinicians to tailor treatments to minimise drug resistance., (© 2020 British Society for Haematology and John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Treatment with azacitidine (AZA) has been suggested to be of benefit for higher-risk myelodysplastic syndrome (HR-MDS) patients with chromosome 7 abnormalities (Abn 7). This retrospective study of 235 HR-MDS patients with Abn 7 treated with AZA (n = 115) versus best supportive care (BSC; n = 120), assessed AZA treatment as a time-varying variable in multivariable analysis. A Cox Regression model with time-interaction terms of overall survival (OS) at different time points confirmed that, while chromosome 7 cytogenetic categories (complex karyotype [CK] versus non-CK) and International Prognostic Scoring System risk (high versus intermediate-2) retained poor prognosis over time, AZA treatment had a favourable impact on OS during the first 3 years of treatment compared to BSC (Hazard ratio [HR] 0·5 P < 0·001 at 1 year, 0·7 P = 0·019 at 2 years; 0·73 P = 0·029 at 3 years). This benefit was present in all chromosome 7 categories, but tended to be greater in patients with CK (risk reduction of 82%, 68% and 53% at 1, 3 and 6 months in CK patients; 79% at 1 month in non-CK patients, P < 0·05 for all). AZA also significantly improved progression-free survival (P < 0·01). This study confirms a time-dependent benefit of AZA on outcome in patients with HR-MDS and cytogenetic abnormalities involving chromosome 7, especially for those with CK., (© 2018 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Gram-positive pathogens can cause serious infections in neutropenic patients with cancer, and vancomycin therapy is often initiated empirically. Linezolid may offer an option for these patients., Methods: To compare the safety and efficacy of linezolid and vancomycin in febrile, neutropenic patients with cancer, we conducted a double-blind, multicenter equivalence study. Eligible patients with proven or suspected infection due to a gram-positive pathogen were randomized to receive linezolid or vancomycin., Results: Clinical success rates 7 days after completion of therapy (primary end point) were equivalent between groups in the intent-to-treat (ITT) analysis (linezolid, 219 [87.3%] of 251 patients; vancomycin, 202 [85.2%] of 237 patients; 95% CI, -4.1 to 8.1; P=.52), modified ITT analysis, clinically evaluable analysis, and microbiologically evaluable analysis, as well as between subsets analyzed by malignancy and infection type. Mean time to defervescence was shorter for linezolid than vancomycin in the modified ITT (6.6 vs. 8.5 days; P=.04) and microbiologically evaluable subsets (5.9 vs. 9.1 days; P=.01), although post hoc analyses revealed delayed recovery of absolute neutrophil counts for linezolid in these subsets (P<.05). There were no between-group differences in microbiologic success rates in the modified ITT subset (41 [57.7%] of 71 patients vs. 29 [50.0%] of 58 patients; P=.38) and microbiologically evaluable subsets, as well as in mortality rates in the ITT subset (17 [5.6%] of 304 patients vs. 23 [7.6%] of 301 patients; P=.31) and all subsets. Distribution of adverse events, including reported hematologic events, was similar between groups, except that linezolid was associated with fewer drug-related adverse events (52 [17.2%] of 303 patients vs. 72 [24.0%] of 300 patients; P=.04) and fewer cases of drug-related renal failure (1 [0.3%] of 303 patients vs. 7 [2.3%] of patients; P=.04)., Conclusions: Linezolid demonstrated efficacy and similar safety outcomes equivalent to those for vancomycin in febrile neutropenic patients with cancer.