Search

Multiple Myeloma (MM) typically originates from underlying precursor conditions, known as Monoclonal Gammopathy of Undetermined Significance (MGUS) and Smoldering Multiple Myeloma (SMM). Validated risk factors, related to the main features of the clonal plasma cells, are employed in the current prognostic models to assess long-term probabilities of progression to MM. In addition, new prognostic immunologic parameters, measuring protective MM-specific T-cell responses, could help to identify patients with shorter time-to-progression. In this report, we described a novel Multi-antigenic Myeloma-specific (MaMs) T-cell assay, based on ELISpot technology, providing simultaneous evaluation of T-cell responses towards ten different MM-associated antigens. When performed during long-term follow-up (mean 28 months) of 33 patients with either MGUS or SMM, such deca-antigenic myeloma-specific immunoassay allowed to significantly distinguish between stable vs. progressive disease (p < 0.001), independently from the Mayo Clinic risk category. Here, we report the first clinical experience showing that a wide (multi-antigen), standardized (irrespective to patients’ HLA), MM-specific T-cell assay may routinely be applied, as a promising prognostic tool, during the follow-up of MGUS/SMM patients. Larger studies are needed to improve the antigenic panel and further explore the prognostic value of MaMs test in the risk assessment of patients with monoclonal gammopathies.

BACKGROUND Chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) is a mature B-cell neoplasm and the most common leukemia in adults in Western countries. Novel agents, including BTK inhibitors and the BCL2 inhibitor venetoclax, have dramatically changed the treatment landscape. Moreover, a disease flare, characterized by sudden worsening of clinical symptoms, radiographic findings of rapidly worsening splenomegaly or lymphadenopathy, and laboratory changes (increased absolute lymphocyte count or lactate dehydrogenase), is a phenomenon described in up to 25% of patients with CLL after ibrutinib discontinuation. We describe a patient with CLL with disease flare after ibrutinib discontinuation due to disease progression and describe the subsequent management of venetoclax initial treatment in the course of the disease flare. CASE REPORT We describe the case of an 81-year-old man with a 6-year history of CLL who was treated with multiple lines of therapy and developed worsening of disease-related signs and symptoms with fever, marked increase of lymphocyte count, acute worsening of renal function, and increase in lymph nodes and spleen size following cessation of targeted therapy with ibrutinib at the time of disease progression. There was subsequent overlapping of ibrutinib during the venetoclax dose escalation period to prevent disease flare recurrence. CONCLUSIONS Our report highlights the problem of disease flare after ibrutinib discontinuation in order to avoid associated patient morbidity, underscoring the importance of awareness of this phenomenon and focusing on the addition of venetoclax at time of progression in ibrutinib-treated patients, as a temporary overlap strategy, to prevent disease flare.

Early palliative supportive care has been associated with many advantages in patients with advanced cancer. However, this model is underutilised in patients with haematological malignancies. We investigated the presence and described the frequency of quality indicators for palliative care and end-of-life care in a cohort of patients with acute myeloid leukaemia receiving early palliative supportive care.This is an observational, retrospective study based on 215 patients consecutively enrolled at a haematology early palliative supportive care clinic in Modena, Italy. Comprehensive hospital chart reviews were performed to abstract the presence of well-established quality indicators for palliative care and for aggressiveness of care near the end of life.131 patients received a full early palliative supportive care intervention. All patients had at least one and 67 (51%) patients had four or more quality indicators for palliative care. Only 2.7% of them received chemotherapy in the last 14 days of life. None underwent intubation or cardiopulmonary resuscitation and was admitted to intensive care unit during the last month of life. Only 4% had either multiple hospitalisations or two or more emergency department access. Approximately half of them died at home or in a hospice. More than 40% did not receive transfusions within 7 days of death. The remaining 84 patients, considered late referrals to palliative care, demonstrated sensibly lower frequencies of the same indicators.Patients with acute myeloid leukaemia receiving early palliative supportive care demonstrated high frequency of quality indicators for palliative care and low rates of treatment aggressiveness at the end of life.

Background There is now great interest in using digital health tools to monitor patients' health status in real-world practice. Such tools often include electronic-patient-reported outcome (ePRO) systems in which symptoms questions are included into online interfaces for patient self-reporting, with real-time alerts triggered to the treating physician if severe symptoms or problems are reported. However, there is little information about the clinical utility and user perceptions of these systems, and this is particularly true in the area of hematology. Objectives This study investigates physicians' perceptions of usability and clinical utility of using remote ePROs in routine practice of patients with hematologic malignancies and explored implications in the delivery of patient care. Patients and Methods Remote ePROs are being gathered since December 2020 by the ALLIANCE Digital Health Platform, whose details of the development process have been previously described (Efficace F. et al., JMIR Res Protoc. 2021 Jun 1;10:e25271). Adult patients diagnosed with any hematologic malignancy are eligible to enter the platform, after having provided written informed consent. Aspects related to health-related quality of life (HRQoL), symptoms and medication adherence are assessed via validated PRO measures. The platform allows for real-time graphical presentation to physicians of individual patient symptoms and HRQoL outcomes. Based on a pre-defined algorithm, which includes the presence of clinically important problems and symptoms, the platform triggers automated alerts to the treating haematologists and medical staff. The definition of clinically important problems and symptoms is based on previously defined evidence-based thresholds (Giesinger J. et al., J Clin Epidemiol. 2020 Feb;118:1-8). We asked treating haematologists a feedback about their experience in using the platform, by an ad hoc web-survey consisting of 27 items covering several domains, including: usability and benefits, current use, evaluation of patient health-status, symptoms and adverse events, as well as physician-patient communication. We summarized characteristics of enrolled patients and treating haematologists by proportions, mean, median and range. We also used logistic regression analysis to check the possible association of characteristics of haematologists with survey results. Results Of the 201 patients invited to participate between December 2020 and June 2021 (cut-off date for current analysis), 180 (90%) accepted to enter the ALLIANCE platform, currently activated in 19 centers. The median age of patients was 57 years (range 21-91) and 58% were males. The majority were diagnosed with chronic myeloid leukemia (n=32, 18%) and multiple myeloma (n=31, 17%) and were in stable disease (n=89, 49%). Twenty-three hematologists (44% males) with a median age of 42 years (range 31-63) and an average 17 years (range 5-34) of experience in clinical practice, completed the survey. The majority of physicians (78%) accessed the platform at least once per month (of whom 39% at least once per week), regardless the alerts sent by the system about patients' clinically relevant problems. The frequency of access on a regular basis was also independent of physician sex (p=0.393) and years of experience in clinical practice (p=0.404). Overall, 57% of hematologists discussed often or very often ePROs with their patients, while 83% and 61% deemed this information helpful to better identify symptomatic adverse events (AEs) of grade 1-2 or of grade 3-4, respectively (see figure). Also, 87% and 91% of hematologists found ePROs useful to improve physician-patient communication and the accuracy of documentation of symptomatic AEs (regardless of severity), respectively. Physicians' responses to selected items of the survey are reported in the figure. Conclusions: Current findings support the clinical utility, from the perspective of the treating physician, of integrating ePROs into routine cancer care of patients with hematologic malignancies. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Efficace: Takeda: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy, Other: Grants (to Institution); Amgen: Consultancy, Other: Grants (to Institution). Breccia: Bristol Myers Squibb/Celgene: Honoraria; Pfizer: Honoraria; Abbvie: Honoraria; Incyte: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria. Fazio: Janseen: Honoraria. Petrucci: Karyopharm: Honoraria, Other: Advisory Board; GSK: Honoraria, Other: Advisory Board; Amgen: Honoraria, Other: Advisory Board; Takeda: Honoraria, Other: Advisory Board; BMS: Honoraria, Other: Advisory Board; Janssen-Cilag: Honoraria, Other: Advisory Board; Celgene: Honoraria, Other: Advisory Board. Rigacci: Merck: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel, Accomodations, Expenses; Gilead Science: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Menarini: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Tafuri: Roche: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding. Siragusa: Novartis, CSL, Behring, Amgen, Novonoridsk, SOBI, Bayer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Patriarca: Incyte: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; Pfizer: Honoraria; Argenix: Honoraria. Luppi: Abbvie: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria; Sanofi: Honoraria; MSD: Honoraria; Gilead Science: Honoraria, Other: Travel grant; Daiichi-Sankyo: Honoraria; Jazz Pharma: Honoraria. Vignetti: Novartis: Honoraria; Incyte: Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria.

Acute myeloid leukemia (AML) carrying inv(16)/t(16;16), resulting in fusion transcript CBFB-MYH11, belongs to the favorable-risk category. However, even if most patients obtain morphological complete remission after induction, approximately 30% of cases eventually relapse. While well-established clinical features and concomitant cytogenetic/molecular lesions have been recognized to be relevant to predict prognosis at disease onset, the independent prognostic impact of measurable residual disease (MRD) monitoring by quantitative real-time reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (qRT-PCR), mainly in predicting relapse, actually supersedes other prognostic factors. Although the ELN Working Party recently indicated that patients affected with CBFB-MYH11 AML should have MRD assessment at informative clinical timepoints, at least after two cycles of intensive chemotherapy and after the end of treatment, several controversies could be raised, especially on the frequency of subsequent serial monitoring, the most significant MRD thresholds (most commonly 0.1%) and on the best source to be analyzed, namely, bone marrow or peripheral blood samples. Moreover, persisting low-level MRD positivity at the end of treatment is relatively common and not predictive of relapse, provided that transcript levels remain stably below specific thresholds. Rising MRD levels suggestive of molecular relapse/progression should thus be confirmed in subsequent samples. Further prospective studies would be required to optimize post-remission monitoring and to define effective MRD-based therapeutic strategies.

Nucleophosmin (NPM1) gene mutations rarely occur in non-acute myeloid neoplasms (MNs) with NPM1 mutations in around 2% of myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) cases, mainly belonging to MDS with excess of blasts, and 3% of myelodysplastic/myeloproliferative neoplasm (MDS/MPN) cases, prevalently classified as chronic myelomonocytic leukemia. These uncommon malignancies are associated with an aggressive clinical course, relatively rapid progression to overt acute myeloid leukemia (AML) and poor survival outcomes, raising controversies on their classification as distinct clinico-pathologic entities. Furthermore, fit patients with NPM1-mutated MNs with NPM1-mutated MNs with blast count NPM1-mutated AML cases frequently present dysplastic features and multilineage bone marrow cells showing abnormal cytoplasmic NPM1 protein delocalization by immunohistochemical staining, therefore belonging to NPM1-mutated clone regardless of blast morphology. Further prospective studies are warranted to definitely assess whether NPM1 mutations may become sufficient to diagnose AML, irrespective of blast percentage.

Nucleophosmin 1 (NPM1) gene mutations, resulting in aberrant cytoplasmic delocalization of NPM1 (NPMc+), are detected in about 30% of all de novo acute myeloid leukemia (AML) cases, and in 50–60% o...