3 results on '"Coombs CC"'
Search Results
2. Allogeneic stem cell transplantation for chronic lymphocytic leukemia in the era of novel agents.
- Author
-
Roeker LE, Dreger P, Brown JR, Lahoud OB, Eyre TA, Brander DM, Skarbnik A, Coombs CC, Kim HT, Davids M, Manchini ST, George G, Shah N, Voorhees TJ, Orchard KH, Walter HS, Arumainathan AK, Sitlinger A, Park JH, Geyer MB, Zelenetz AD, Sauter CS, Giralt SA, Perales MA, and Mato AR
- Subjects
- Humans, Retrospective Studies, Graft vs Host Disease etiology, Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation, Leukemia, Lymphocytic, Chronic, B-Cell therapy, Lymphoma, Follicular
- Abstract
Although novel agents (NAs) have improved outcomes for patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL), a subset will progress through all available NAs. Understanding outcomes for potentially curative modalities including allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (alloHCT) following NA therapy is critical while devising treatment sequences aimed at long-term disease control. In this multicenter, retrospective cohort study, we examined 65 patients with CLL who underwent alloHCT following exposure to ≥1 NA, including baseline disease and transplant characteristics, treatment preceding alloHCT, transplant outcomes, treatment following alloHCT, and survival outcomes. Univariable and multivariable analyses evaluated associations between pre-alloHCT factors and progression-free survival (PFS). Twenty-four-month PFS, overall survival (OS), nonrelapse mortality, and relapse incidence were 63%, 81%, 13%, and 27% among patients transplanted for CLL. Day +100 cumulative incidence of grade III-IV acute graft-vs-host disease (GVHD) was 24%; moderate-severe GVHD developed in 27%. Poor-risk disease characteristics, prior NA exposure, complete vs partial remission, and transplant characteristics were not independently associated with PFS. Hematopoietic cell transplantation-specific comorbidity index independently predicts PFS. PFS and OS were not impacted by having received NAs vs both NAs and chemoimmunotherapy, 1 vs ≥2 NAs, or ibrutinib vs venetoclax as the line of therapy immediately pre-alloHCT. AlloHCT remains a viable long-term disease control strategy that overcomes adverse CLL characteristics. Prior NAs do not appear to impact the safety of alloHCT, and survival outcomes are similar regardless of number of NAs received, prior chemoimmunotherapy exposure, or NA immediately preceding alloHCT. Decisions about proceeding to alloHCT should consider comorbidities and anticipated response to remaining therapeutic options., (© 2020 by The American Society of Hematology.)
- Published
- 2020
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
3. A retrospective comparison of venetoclax alone or in combination with an anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody in R/R CLL.
- Author
-
Mato AR, Roeker LE, Eyre TA, Nabhan C, Lamanna N, Hill BT, Brander DM, Barr PM, Lansigan F, Cheson BD, Singavi AK, Yazdy MS, Shah NN, Allan JN, Bhavsar EB, Rhodes J, Kennard K, Schuster SJ, Williams AM, Skarbnik AP, Goy AH, Goodfriend JM, Dorsey C, Coombs CC, Tuncer H, Ujjani CS, Jacobs R, Winter AM, Pagel JM, Bailey N, Schuh A, Shadman M, Sitlinger A, Weissbrot H, Muralikrishnan S, Zelenetz A, Kirkwood AA, and Fox CP
- Subjects
- Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Antibodies, Monoclonal pharmacology, Antineoplastic Agents pharmacology, Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols pharmacology, Bridged Bicyclo Compounds, Heterocyclic pharmacology, Female, Humans, Leukemia, Lymphocytic, Chronic, B-Cell mortality, Male, Middle Aged, Progression-Free Survival, Retrospective Studies, Sulfonamides pharmacology, Antibodies, Monoclonal therapeutic use, Antineoplastic Agents therapeutic use, Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols therapeutic use, Bridged Bicyclo Compounds, Heterocyclic therapeutic use, Leukemia, Lymphocytic, Chronic, B-Cell drug therapy, Sulfonamides therapeutic use
- Abstract
Venetoclax (VEN) is approved for relapsed/refractory (R/R) chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) as monotherapy (VENmono) or in combination with rituximab. Whether VEN plus anti-CD20 (VENcombo) is superior to VENmono is unknown. We conducted a multicenter, retrospective cohort analysis comparing 321 CLL patients treated with VENmono vs VENcombo across the United States and the United Kingdom. We examined demographics, baseline characteristics, dosing, adverse events, response rates, and outcomes. The primary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS), estimated by Kaplan-Meier method, in patients treated with VENmono vs VENcombo. Univariate and bivariate analyses were performed with COX regression. Three hundred twenty-one CLL patients were included (3 median prior treatments, 78% prior ibrutinib). The overall response rates (ORRs) were similar (VENmono, 81% ORR, 34% complete remission [CR] vs VENcombo, 84% ORR, 32% CR). With a median follow-up of 13.4 months, no differences in PFS and OS were observed between the groups. In unadjusted analyses, the hazard ratios (HRs) for PFS and OS for VENmono vs VENcombo were HR 1.0 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.6-1.8; P = .7) and HR 1.2 (95% CI, 0.6-2.3; P = .5), respectively. When adjusting for differences between the cohorts, the addition of an anti-CD20 antibody in combination with VEN did not impact PFS (HR, 1.0; 95% CI, 0.5-2.0; P = .9) or OS (HR, 1.1; 95% CI, 0.4-2.6; P = .8). We demonstrate comparable efficacy between VENmono and VENcombo in a heavily pretreated, high-risk, retrospective cohort, in terms of both response data and survival outcomes. Prospective studies are needed to validate these findings., (© 2019 by The American Society of Hematology.)
- Published
- 2019
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
Catalog
Discovery Service for Jio Institute Digital Library
For full access to our library's resources, please sign in.