Search

• More patients with MCL, BL, and ALL-B/T completed treatment with the current specific regimens (GELA/BURKIMAB/PETHEMA), compared with those under the general H-CVAD protocol. • There were fewer delays in the corresponding chemotherapy cycles with the actual therapeutic schedules. • The response rates—especially CR, and DFS and OS over time—were better, which is an obvious long-term benefit. The hyper-CVAD/methotrexate–cytarabine (H-CVAD/ MTX-AraC) chemotherapy protocol has been one of the standard treatments for hematological malignancies, such as mantle cell lymphoma (MCL), Burkitt lymphoma (BL), and B-cell and T-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia. Because results of this therapy are poor, it has been progressively replaced with new specific regimens with better efficacy profiles (GELA protocol for MCL, BURKIMAB for BL, and PETHEMA for B-cell and T-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia [ALL]). The objective of this study was to analyze the response rates and survival of these therapeutic regimens. This retrospective and descriptive observational study of 81 patients compared 42 patients treated with hyper-CVAD/methotrexate–cytarabine (group A) with 39 patients treated with GELA/BURKIMAB/PETHEMA (group B). More patients in group B than in group A completed the treatment (89.7% vs. 47.6%, p < 0.001). In group A, 14.3% did not complete treatment because of death compared with 7.7% in group B, and 29% in group A had cycle delays versus 6.7% in group B (p < 0.001). In group A, 78.6% of group A achieved a complete response (CR) compared with 94.9% of group B (p = 0.050). Disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) were significantly higher in group B (p < 0.001 in both cases). Data for current therapeutic protocols have indicated superior efficacy, with higher complete response rates, as well as better disease-free survival and overall survival results. This article provides the best results in terms of the efficacy of treatment of four hematological malignancies (MCL, BL, B-cell ALL, and T-cell ALL) with the most current specific therapeutic regimens (GELA for MCL, BURKIMAB for BL, and PETHEMA for B-cell ALL and T-cell ALL) with respect to a classic general protocol (H-CVAD/MTX-AraC for all four). These results may represent a great advance in the treatment of these blood cancers, achieving an important long-term benefit for these hematological patients. [Display omitted] [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents a case study of 75-year-old male with chronic kidney disease of unknown aetiology who was inserted with a cylinder of plastic, which is a straw he had found in his home in order to not interrupt the drainage.

Background and Objective: The Hyper-CVAD/Methotrexate-Cytarabine (H-CVAD/MTX-AraC) chemotherapy protocol has been one of the standard treatments for blood cancers, such as Mantle cell lymphoma (MCL), Burkitt's lymphoma (BL) and B-cell and T-cell acute lymphoblastic leukaemia (ALL). Due to high toxicity, it has been progressively replaced with new specific regimens with a better safety profile (GELA protocol for MCL, BURKIMAB for BL and PETHEMA for B-cell and T-cell ALL). The objective of this study is to analyse the toxicity and infectious complications of these therapeutic regimens, as well as the event free survival (EFS)., Patients and Methods: This is a retrospective and descriptive observational study of 81 patients, comparing 42 patients treated with H-CVAD/MTX-AraC (group A) versus 39 patients treated with GELA/BURKIMAB/PETHEMA (group B)., Results: All patients in group A developed pancytopenia, but in group B 74.4% neutropenia, 51.3% thrombocytopenia and 69.2% anaemia. The total number of infections in group A was higher than in group B: 154 versus 48, 3.67 versus 1.23 per patient and 0.59 versus 0.25 per cycle. Likewise, febrile neutropenia happened: 106 versus 21 cases, 2.52 versus 0.52 per patient and 0.41 versus 0.11 per cycle. EVS is higher in group B: 33% versus 79% (2-year), and 24% versus 69% (5-year)., Conclusions: Current therapeutic protocols have shown higher EFS due to better safety profile, with less haematological, neurological and haemorrhagic toxicity, as well as lower rates of infectious complications., Competing Interests: The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest., (© the authors; licensee ecancermedicalscience.)

Introduction: Knowing total body volume (V) is crucial in patients on peritoneal dialysis (PD). It is usually calculated by the Watson anthropometric formula, although the use of bioimpedance spectroscopy (BIS) is becoming increasingly widespread. Measuring V with both methods can at times produce quite different results., Objective: We aimed to identify differences between the 2 forms of measuring volume in a PD unit and determine which clinical factors are associated with these differences., Methods: Ours is an observational study of 74 patients on PD. We measured V using BIS (Vbis) and the Watson formula (Vw); 271 measurements were made with each method. We calculated the difference between Vbis and Vw in each patient and classified them into 2 groups: Difference between volumes ≥10% or <10% Vbis. We assessed the presence of several clinical parameters in our patients. We assessed whether there were any differences between Vbis and Vw (Student t-test). We determined whether there was any association between the difference in volumes and the presence of the clinical parameters analysed (chi square test)., Results: V was 2.15 l higher measured by the Watson formula than with BIS (P<.01). In 58.67% of the measurements, the difference between Vbis and Vw was ≥10%. Significant differences were found when comparing the presence of difference between volumes and the presence or not of diabetes mellitus (DM) (p=0,03), hypertension (HTN) (p=0,036), hypoalbuminemia (p<0,01), hypoprealbuminemia (p<0,01), low phase angle at 50 Hz (p<0,01), high C reactive protein (p<0,01), obesity (p=0,027), E/I ratio (ratio between extracellular and intracellular water) ≥1 (p<0.01) and residual diuresis (p=0.029)., Conclusions: There are significant differences in the V of PD Unit patients when obtained by Watson formula or by BIS. A difference between the measurements is associated with the presence of DM, HTN, hypoalbuminaemia, obesity, malnutrition, inflammation, E/I ratio ≥1 and the absence of residual diuresis., (Copyright © 2015 Sociedad Española de Nefrología. Published by Elsevier España, S.L.U. All rights reserved.)