Search

The Choosing Wisely (CW) campaign, launched in 2012, includes oncology-specific recommendations to promote evidence-based care and deimplementation of low-value practices. However, it is unclear to what extent the campaign has prompted practice change. We systematically reviewed the literature to evaluate the uptake of cancer-specific CW recommendations focusing on the period before the declaration of the COVID-19 pandemic. We used Grimshaw's deimplementation framework to thematically group the findings and extracted information on implementation strategies, barriers, and facilitators from articles reporting on active implementation. In the 98 articles addressing 32 unique recommendations, most reported on passive changes in adherence pre-post publication of CW recommendations. Use of active surveillance for low-risk prostate cancer and reduction in staging imaging for early breast cancer were the most commonly evaluated recommendations. Most articles assessing passive changes in adherence pre-post CW publication reported improvement. All articles evaluating active implementation (10 of 98) reported improved compliance (range: 3%-73% improvement). Most common implementation strategies included provider education and/or stakeholder engagement. Preconceived views and reluctance to adopt new practices were common barriers; common facilitators included the use of technology and provider education to increase provider buy-in. Given the limited uptake of oncology-specific CW recommendations thus far, more attention toward supporting active implementation is needed. Effective adoption of CW likely requires a multipronged approach that includes building stakeholder buy-in through engagement and education, using technology-enabled forced functions to facilitate change along with policy and reimbursement models that disincentivize low-value care. Professional societies have a role to play in supporting this next phase of CW.

There are limited data regarding the combined value of the pretransplant Deauville score (DS) from a positron emission tomography scan and clinical risk factors in patients with relapsed/refractory aggressive non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL). We performed a retrospective analysis to assess the prognostic role of pretransplant DS in patients with relapsed/refractory aggressive NHL who underwent salvage chemotherapy and autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT). We identified 174 eligible patients between January 2013 and March 2019. In multivariable analysis, pretransplant DS, B symptoms, and secondary International Prognostic Index (sIPI) were independent risk factors for event-free survival (EFS). These variables were used to derive an integrated risk score that categorized 166 patients with available information for all risk factors into 3 groups: low (n = 92; 55.4%), intermediate (n = 48; 28.9%), and high (n = 26; 15.7%). The new prognostic index showed a strong association with EFS (low-risk vs intermediate-risk hazard ratio [HR], 3.94; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.16-7.17; P < .001; low-risk vs high-risk HR, 10.83; 95% CI, 5.81-20.19; P < .001) and outperformed models based on clinical risk factors or DS alone. These results were validated in 60 patients from an independent external cohort (low-risk vs intermediate-risk HR, 4.04; 95% CI, 1.51-10.82; P = .005; low-risk vs high-risk HR, 10.49; 95% CI, 4.11-26.73; P < .001). We propose and validate a new prognostic index that risk-stratifies patients undergoing salvage chemotherapy followed by ASCT, thereby identifying patients at high risk for posttransplant treatment failure.

There are limited data regarding the combined value of the pretransplant Deauville score (DS) from a positron emission tomography scan and clinical risk factors in patients with relapsed/refractory aggressive non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL). We performed a retrospective analysis to assess the prognostic role of pretransplant DS in patients with relapsed/refractory aggressive NHL who underwent salvage chemotherapy and autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT). We identified 174 eligible patients between January 2013 and March 2019. In multivariable analysis, pretransplant DS, B symptoms, and secondary International Prognostic Index (sIPI) were independent risk factors for event-free survival (EFS). These variables were used to derive an integrated risk score that categorized 166 patients with available information for all risk factors into 3 groups: low (n = 92; 55.4%), intermediate (n = 48; 28.9%), and high (n = 26; 15.7%). The new prognostic index showed a strong association with EFS (low-risk vs intermediate-risk hazard ratio [HR], 3.94; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.16-7.17; P< .001; low-risk vs high-risk HR, 10.83; 95% CI, 5.81-20.19; P< .001) and outperformed models based on clinical risk factors or DS alone. These results were validated in 60 patients from an independent external cohort (low-risk vs intermediate-risk HR, 4.04; 95% CI, 1.51-10.82; P= .005; low-risk vs high-risk HR, 10.49; 95% CI, 4.11-26.73; P< .001). We propose and validate a new prognostic index that risk-stratifies patients undergoing salvage chemotherapy followed by ASCT, thereby identifying patients at high risk for posttransplant treatment failure.

Autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) is a feasible treatment option for multiple myeloma (MM) patients with renal insufficiency; however, these patients tend to experience higher rates of drug toxicity and transplant-related mortality (TRM) during ASCT. Recent adoption of bortezomib-based induction regimens and dose reduction of melphalan during conditioning may improve outcomes in this population. In this single center retrospective study, we compared the toxicity and survival outcomes of 96 MM patients with renal insufficiency undergoing ASCT between two eras: 1998–2007 and 2008–2016. The proportion of dialysis dependent patients was similar in both groups (49 and 45%). We found no TRM in those transplanted more recently as compared with 13% in the older era of ASCT. There were significantly more high grade (grades 3–4) toxicities in the older era of ASCT including high grade electrolyte abnormalities, mucositis, delirium, and bleeding. Patients transplanted more recently had significantly higher overall response rate (ORR) as well as deeper responses to ASCT (≥VGPR in 79% vs 39%). Progression-free survival (PFS) was prolonged by 26 months in the more recent era compared with the older era. Overall, improvements in treatment regimens have resulted in reduced TRM and toxicities for patients with renal insufficiency undergoing ASCT.

Introduction:

Introduction:

Introduction

Background:The optimal management of patients with primary mediastinal B-cell lymphoma (PMBCL) who experience a partial metabolic response (PMR) on FDG-PET after initial systemic therapy is unclear. This study aimed to investigate different management strategies and outcomes for PMBCL patients who achieved PMR following primary systemic therapy, utilizing a single-center retrospective design.

Background:

The term monoclonal gammopathy of renal significance (MGRS) was introduced by the International Kidney and Monoclonal Gammopathy Research Group (IKMG) in 2012. The IKMG met in April 2017 to refine the definition of MGRS and to update the diagnostic criteria for MGRS-related diseases. Accordingly, in this Expert Consensus Document, the IKMG redefines MGRS as a clonal proliferative disorder that produces a nephrotoxic monoclonal immunoglobulin and does not meet previously defined haematological criteria for treatment of a specific malignancy. The diagnosis of MGRS-related disease is established by kidney biopsy and immunofluorescence studies to identify the monotypic immunoglobulin deposits (although these deposits are minimal in patients with either C3 glomerulopathy or thrombotic microangiopathy). Accordingly, the IKMG recommends a kidney biopsy in patients suspected of having MGRS to maximize the chance of correct diagnosis. Serum and urine protein electrophoresis and immunofixation, as well as analyses of serum free light chains, should also be performed to identify the monoclonal immunoglobulin, which helps to establish the diagnosis of MGRS and might also be useful for assessing responses to treatment. Finally, bone marrow aspiration and biopsy should be conducted to identify the lymphoproliferative clone. Flow cytometry can be helpful in identifying small clones. Additional genetic tests and fluorescent in situ hybridization studies are helpful for clonal identification and for generating treatment recommendations. Treatment of MGRS was not addressed at the 2017 IKMG meeting; consequently, this Expert Consensus Document does not include any recommendations for the treatment of patients with MGRS.

This phase 1/2 study assessed the safety, tolerability, and preliminary efficacy of the oral proteasome inhibitor (PI) ixazomib in patients with relapsed/refractory immunoglobulin light chain (AL) amyloidosis. Ixazomib was administered to adult patients with relapsed/refractory AL amyloidosis after 1 or more prior lines of therapy (including bortezomib) on days 1, 8, and 15 of 28-day cycles, for up to 12 cycles. Patients with less than partial response after 3 cycles received oral dexamethasone (40 mg, days 1-4) from cycle 4. A 3+3 dose-escalation phase was followed by 2 expansion cohorts (PI-naive and PI-exposed patients) at the maximum tolerated dose (MTD). Twenty-seven patients were enrolled: 11 during dose escalation (6 at 4.0 mg and 5 at 5.5 mg) and 16 during dose expansion (4.0 mg). Three patients experienced dose-limiting toxicities: 1 at 4.0 mg and 2 at 5.5 mg; the MTD was determined as 4.0 mg. Most common adverse events (AEs) included nausea, skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders (SSTD), diarrhea, and fatigue; grade 3 or higher AEs included dyspnea, fatigue, and SSTD. Overall, the hematologic response rate was 52% in patients treated at the MTD (n = 21). Organ responses were seen in 56% of patients (5 cardiac, 5 renal). Median hematologic progression-free survival was 14.8 months; 1-year progression-free and overall survival rates were 60% and 85%, respectively (median follow-up, 16.9 months). Weekly oral ixazomib appears to be active in patients with relapsed/refractory AL amyloidosis, with a generally manageable safety profile. The study was registered at clinicaltrials.govas #NCT01318902. A phase 3 study is ongoing (#NCT01659658).

This phase 1/2 study assessed the safety, tolerability, and preliminary efficacy of the oral proteasome inhibitor (PI) ixazomib in patients with relapsed/refractory immunoglobulin light chain (AL) amyloidosis. Ixazomib was administered to adult patients with relapsed/refractory AL amyloidosis after 1 or more prior lines of therapy (including bortezomib) on days 1, 8, and 15 of 28-day cycles, for up to 12 cycles. Patients with less than partial response after 3 cycles received oral dexamethasone (40 mg, days 1-4) from cycle 4. A 3+3 dose-escalation phase was followed by 2 expansion cohorts (PI-naive and PI-exposed patients) at the maximum tolerated dose (MTD). Twenty-seven patients were enrolled: 11 during dose escalation (6 at 4.0 mg and 5 at 5.5 mg) and 16 during dose expansion (4.0 mg). Three patients experienced dose-limiting toxicities: 1 at 4.0 mg and 2 at 5.5 mg; the MTD was determined as 4.0 mg. Most common adverse events (AEs) included nausea, skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders (SSTD), diarrhea, and fatigue; grade 3 or higher AEs included dyspnea, fatigue, and SSTD. Overall, the hematologic response rate was 52% in patients treated at the MTD (n = 21). Organ responses were seen in 56% of patients (5 cardiac, 5 renal). Median hematologic progression-free survival was 14.8 months; 1-year progression-free and overall survival rates were 60% and 85%, respectively (median follow-up, 16.9 months). Weekly oral ixazomib appears to be active in patients with relapsed/refractory AL amyloidosis, with a generally manageable safety profile. The study was registered at clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT01318902. A phase 3 study is ongoing (#NCT01659658).

The presence of certain high-risk cytogenetic abnormalities, such as translocations (4;14) and (14;16) and deletion (17p), are known to have a negative impact on survival in multiple myeloma (MM). The phase 3 study ASPIRE (N = 792) demonstrated that progression-free survival (PFS) was significantly improved with carfilzomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone (KRd), compared with lenalidomide and dexamethasone (Rd) in relapsed MM. This preplanned subgroup analysis of ASPIRE was conducted to evaluate KRd vs Rd by baseline cytogenetics according to fluorescence in situ hybridization. Of 417 patients with known cytogenetic risk status, 100 patients (24%) were categorized with high-risk cytogenetics (KRd, n = 48; Rd, n = 52) and 317 (76%) were categorized with standard-risk cytogenetics (KRd, n = 147; Rd, n = 170). For patients with high-risk cytogenetics, treatment with KRd resulted in a median PFS of 23.1 months, a 9-month improvement relative to treatment with Rd. For patients with standard-risk cytogenetics, treatment with KRd led to a 10-month improvement in median PFS vs Rd. The overall response rates for KRd vs Rd were 79.2% vs 59.6% (high-risk cytogenetics) and 91.2% vs 73.5% (standard-risk cytogenetics); approximately fivefold as many patients with high- or standard-risk cytogenetics achieved a complete response or better with KRd vs Rd (29.2% vs 5.8% and 38.1% vs 6.5%, respectively). KRd improved but did not abrogate the poor prognosis associated with high-risk cytogenetics. This regimen had a favorable benefit-risk profile in patients with relapsed MM, irrespective of cytogenetic risk status, and should be considered a standard of care in these patients. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT01080391.

The presence of certain high-risk cytogenetic abnormalities, such as translocations (4;14) and (14;16) and deletion (17p), are known to have a negative impact on survival in multiple myeloma (MM). The phase 3 study ASPIRE (N = 792) demonstrated that progression-free survival (PFS) was significantly improved with carfilzomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone (KRd), compared with lenalidomide and dexamethasone (Rd) in relapsed MM. This preplanned subgroup analysis of ASPIRE was conducted to evaluate KRd vs Rd by baseline cytogenetics according to fluorescence in situ hybridization. Of 417 patients with known cytogenetic risk status, 100 patients (24%) were categorized with high-risk cytogenetics (KRd, n = 48; Rd, n = 52) and 317 (76%) were categorized with standard-risk cytogenetics (KRd, n = 147; Rd, n = 170). For patients with high-risk cytogenetics, treatment with KRd resulted in a median PFS of 23.1 months, a 9-month improvement relative to treatment with Rd. For patients with standard-risk cytogenetics, treatment with KRd led to a 10-month improvement in median PFS vs Rd. The overall response rates for KRd vs Rd were 79.2% vs 59.6% (high-risk cytogenetics) and 91.2% vs 73.5% (standard-risk cytogenetics); approximately fivefold as many patients with high- or standard-risk cytogenetics achieved a complete response or better with KRd vs Rd (29.2% vs 5.8% and 38.1% vs 6.5%, respectively). KRd improved but did not abrogate the poor prognosis associated with high-risk cytogenetics. This regimen had a favorable benefit-risk profile in patients with relapsed MM, irrespective of cytogenetic risk status, and should be considered a standard of care in these patients. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.govas #NCT01080391.

The majority of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) tumors contain mutations in histone-modifying enzymes (HMEs), indicating a potential therapeutic benefit of histone deacetylase inhibitors (HDIs), and preclinical data suggest that HDIs augment the effect of rituximab. In this randomized phase 2 study, we evaluated the response rate and toxicity of panobinostat, a pan-HDI administered 30 mg orally 3 times weekly, with or without rituximab, in 40 patients with relapsed or refractory de novo (n = 27) or transformed (n = 13) DLBCL. Candidate genes and whole exomes were sequenced in relapse tumor biopsies to search for molecular correlates, and these data were used to quantify circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) in serial plasma samples. Eleven of 40 patients (28%) responded to panobinostat (95% confidence interval [CI] 14.6-43.9) and rituximab did not increase responses. The median duration of response was 14.5 months (95% CI 9.4 to “not reached”). At time of data censoring, 6 of 11 patients had not progressed. Of the genes tested for mutations, only those in MEF2B were significantly associated with response. We detected ctDNA in at least 1 plasma sample from 96% of tested patients. A significant increase in ctDNA at day 15 relative to baseline was strongly associated with lack of response (sensitivity 71.4%, specificity 100%). We conclude that panobinostat induces very durable responses in some patients with relapsed DLBCL, and early responses can be predicted by mutations in MEF2B or a significant change in ctDNA level at 15 days after treatment initiation. This clinical trial was registered at www.ClinicalTrials.gov (#NCT01238692).

The majority of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) tumors contain mutations in histone-modifying enzymes (HMEs), indicating a potential therapeutic benefit of histone deacetylase inhibitors (HDIs), and preclinical data suggest that HDIs augment the effect of rituximab. In this randomized phase 2 study, we evaluated the response rate and toxicity of panobinostat, a pan-HDI administered 30 mg orally 3 times weekly, with or without rituximab, in 40 patients with relapsed or refractory de novo (n = 27) or transformed (n = 13) DLBCL. Candidate genes and whole exomes were sequenced in relapse tumor biopsies to search for molecular correlates, and these data were used to quantify circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) in serial plasma samples. Eleven of 40 patients (28%) responded to panobinostat (95% confidence interval [CI] 14.6-43.9) and rituximab did not increase responses. The median duration of response was 14.5 months (95% CI 9.4 to “not reached”). At time of data censoring, 6 of 11 patients had not progressed. Of the genes tested for mutations, only those in MEF2Bwere significantly associated with response. We detected ctDNA in at least 1 plasma sample from 96% of tested patients. A significant increase in ctDNA at day 15 relative to baseline was strongly associated with lack of response (sensitivity 71.4%, specificity 100%). We conclude that panobinostat induces very durable responses in some patients with relapsed DLBCL, and early responses can be predicted by mutations in MEF2Bor a significant change in ctDNA level at 15 days after treatment initiation. This clinical trial was registered at www.ClinicalTrials.gov(#NCT01238692).

Choosing Wisely® is a medical stewardship initiative led by the American Board of Internal Medicine Foundation in collaboration with professional medical societies in the United States. The American Society of Hematology (ASH) released its first Choosing Wisely® list in 2013. Using the same evidence-based methodology as in 2013, ASH has identified 5 additional tests and treatments that should be questioned by clinicians and patients under specific, indicated circumstances. The ASH 2014 Choosing Wisely® recommendations include: (1) do not anticoagulate for more than 3 months in patients experiencing a first venous thromboembolic event in the setting of major, transient risk factors for venous thromboembolism; (2) do not routinely transfuse for chronic anemia or uncomplicated pain crises in patients with sickle cell disease; (3) do not perform baseline or surveillance computed tomography scans in patients with asymptomatic, early-stage chronic lymphocytic leukemia; (4) do not test or treat for heparin-induced thrombocytopenia if the clinical pretest probability of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia is low; and (5) do not treat patients with immune thrombocytopenia unless they are bleeding or have very low platelet counts.

Choosing Wisely® is a medical stewardship initiative led by the American Board of Internal Medicine Foundation in collaboration with professional medical societies in the United States. The American Society of Hematology (ASH) released its first Choosing Wisely® list in 2013. Using the same evidence-based methodology as in 2013, ASH has identified 5 additional tests and treatments that should be questioned by clinicians and patients under specific, indicated circumstances. The ASH 2014 Choosing Wisely® recommendations include: (1) do not anticoagulate for more than 3 months in patients experiencing a first venous thromboembolic event in the setting of major, transient risk factors for venous thromboembolism; (2) do not routinely transfuse for chronic anemia or uncomplicated pain crises in patients with sickle cell disease; (3) do not perform baseline or surveillance computed tomography scans in patients with asymptomatic, early-stage chronic lymphocytic leukemia; (4) do not test or treat for heparin-induced thrombocytopenia if the clinical pretest probability of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia is low; and (5) do not treat patients with immune thrombocytopenia unless they are bleeding or have very low platelet counts.

Choosing Wisely® is a medical stewardship initiative led by the American Board of Internal Medicine Foundation in collaboration with professional medical societies in the United States. The American Society of Hematology (ASH) released its first Choosing Wisely® list in 2013. Using the same evidence-based methodology as in 2013, ASH has identified 5 additional tests and treatments that should be questioned by clinicians and patients under specific, indicated circumstances. The ASH 2014 Choosing Wisely® recommendations include: (1) do not anticoagulate for more than 3 months in patients experiencing a first venous thromboembolic event in the setting of major, transient risk factors for venous thromboembolism; (2) do not routinely transfuse for chronic anemia or uncomplicated pain crises in patients with sickle cell disease; (3) do not perform baseline or surveillance computed tomography scans in patients with asymptomatic, early-stage chronic lymphocytic leukemia; (4) do not test or treat for heparin-induced thrombocytopenia if the clinical pretest probability of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia is low; and (5) do not treat patients with immune thrombocytopenia unless they are bleeding or have very low platelet counts.

CAN2007 was a phase 1/2 study of once- and twice-weekly single-agent bortezomib in relapsed primary systemic amyloid light chain amyloidosis (AL) amyloidosis. Seventy patients were treated, including 18 and 34 patients at the maximum planned doses on the once- and twice-weekly schedules. This prespecified final analysis provides mature response and long-term outcomes data after 3-year additional follow-up since the last report. In the once-weekly 1.6 mg/m2 and twice-weekly 1.3 mg/m2 bortezomib groups, final hematologic response rates were 68.8% and 66.7%; 80% of patients in each group sustained their response for ≥1 year. One-year progression-free rates were 72.2% and 76.8%. Median overall survival (OS) was 62.1 months and not reached; 4-year OS rates were 75.0% and 63.0%. Low baseline difference in κ/λ free light-chain level was associated with higher hematologic complete response rates and longer OS. At data cutoff, 40 (57%) patients had received subsequent therapy, including 19 (27%) retreated with bortezomib, 11 (58%) of whom achieved complete or partial hematologic responses. Four patients received prolonged bortezomib for between 3.5 and 5.6 years, with no new safety concerns, highlighting the feasibility of long-term therapy. Single-agent bortezomib produced durable hematologic responses and promising long-term OS in relapsed AL amyloidosis. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT00298766.

CAN2007 was a phase 1/2 study of once- and twice-weekly single-agent bortezomib in relapsed primary systemic amyloid light chain amyloidosis (AL) amyloidosis. Seventy patients were treated, including 18 and 34 patients at the maximum planned doses on the once- and twice-weekly schedules. This prespecified final analysis provides mature response and long-term outcomes data after 3-year additional follow-up since the last report. In the once-weekly 1.6 mg/m2and twice-weekly 1.3 mg/m2bortezomib groups, final hematologic response rates were 68.8% and 66.7%; 80% of patients in each group sustained their response for ≥1 year. One-year progression-free rates were 72.2% and 76.8%. Median overall survival (OS) was 62.1 months and not reached; 4-year OS rates were 75.0% and 63.0%. Low baseline difference in κ/λ free light-chain level was associated with higher hematologic complete response rates and longer OS. At data cutoff, 40 (57%) patients had received subsequent therapy, including 19 (27%) retreated with bortezomib, 11 (58%) of whom achieved complete or partial hematologic responses. Four patients received prolonged bortezomib for between 3.5 and 5.6 years, with no new safety concerns, highlighting the feasibility of long-term therapy. Single-agent bortezomib produced durable hematologic responses and promising long-term OS in relapsed AL amyloidosis. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.govas #NCT00298766.

Choosing Wisely® is a medical stewardship and quality improvement initiative led by the American Board of Internal Medicine Foundation in collaboration with leading medical societies in the United States. The ASH is an active participant in the Choosing Wisely® project. Using an iterative process and an evidence-based method, ASH has identified 5 tests and treatments that in some circumstances are not well supported by evidence and which in certain cases involve a risk of adverse events and financial costs with low likelihood of benefit. The ASH Choosing Wisely® recommendations focus on avoiding liberal RBC transfusion, avoiding thrombophilia testing in adults in the setting of transient major thrombosis risk factors, avoiding inferior vena cava filter usage except in specified circumstances, avoiding the use of plasma or prothrombin complex concentrate in the nonemergent reversal of vitamin K antagonists, and limiting routine computed tomography surveillance after curative-intent treatment of non-Hodgkin lymphoma. We recommend that clinicians carefully consider anticipated benefits of the identified tests and treatments before performing them.

Choosing Wisely® is a medical stewardship and quality improvement initiative led by the American Board of Internal Medicine Foundation in collaboration with leading medical societies in the United States. The ASH is an active participant in the Choosing Wisely® project. Using an iterative process and an evidence-based method, ASH has identified 5 tests and treatments that in some circumstances are not well supported by evidence and which in certain cases involve a risk of adverse events and financial costs with low likelihood of benefit. The ASH Choosing Wisely® recommendations focus on avoiding liberal RBC transfusion, avoiding thrombophilia testing in adults in the setting of transient major thrombosis risk factors, avoiding inferior vena cava filter usage except in specified circumstances, avoiding the use of plasma or prothrombin complex concentrate in the nonemergent reversal of vitamin K antagonists, and limiting routine computed tomography surveillance after curative-intent treatment of non-Hodgkin lymphoma. We recommend that clinicians carefully consider anticipated benefits of the identified tests and treatments before performing them.

Choosing Wisely® is a medical stewardship and quality improvement initiative led by the American Board of Internal Medicine Foundation in collaboration with leading medical societies in the United States. The ASH is an active participant in the Choosing Wisely® project. Using an iterative process and an evidence-based method, ASH has identified 5 tests and treatments that in some circumstances are not well supported by evidence and which in certain cases involve a risk of adverse events and financial costs with low likelihood of benefit. The ASH Choosing Wisely® recommendations focus on avoiding liberal RBC transfusion, avoiding thrombophilia testing in adults in the setting of transient major thrombosis risk factors, avoiding inferior vena cava filter usage except in specified circumstances, avoiding the use of plasma or prothrombin complex concentrate in the nonemergent reversal of vitamin K antagonists, and limiting routine computed tomography surveillance after curative-intent treatment of non-Hodgkin lymphoma. We recommend that clinicians carefully consider anticipated benefits of the identified tests and treatments before performing them.

Background Use of combination antiretroviral therapy (cART) and cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine and prednisone (CHOP) with or without rituximab for treatment of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) in HIV substantially increases response rates but may also increase toxicity, possibly due to antiretroviral– antineoplastic drug interactions. The objective of this study was to evaluate the frequency of complete remission (CR) of DLBCL in patients treated with CHOP while receiving a protease inhibitor (PI) versus a non-PI-based cART.Methods A retrospective multicentre pilot study was conducted in HIV-infected patients on cART treated for DLBCL with CHOP between 2002–2010 in three academic hospitals.Results A total of 34 patients were included with 65% and 35% of patients receiving a PI and non-PI-based cART, respectively. Baseline characteristics between groups were similar; overall 85% were male, median age was 43 years, 50% had an International Prognostic Index (IPI) of 2–3 and median CD4+T-cell count was 225 cells/mm3. CR was achieved in 77% and 58% of patients in the PI and non-PI groups, respectively (P=0.21), with 65% and 63% of patients achieving 2-year overall survival (P=1.00). A multivariate analysis showed that lower IPI score alone was significantly associated with higher CR rates (P=0.05). Toxicity was similar between both groups.Conclusions Similar efficacy and toxicity of CHOP was observed in patients receiving a PI and non-PI-based cART.

Carfilzomib is a next-generation, selective proteasome inhibitor being evaluated for the treatment of relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma. In this open-label, single-arm phase 2 study (PX-171-003-A1), patients received single-agent carfilzomib 20 mg/m2 intravenously twice weekly for 3 of 4 weeks in cycle 1, then 27 mg/m2 for ≤ 12 cycles. The primary endpoint was overall response rate (≥ partial response). Secondary endpoints included clinical benefit response rate (≥ minimal response), duration of response, progression-free survival, overall survival, and safety. A total of 266 patients were evaluable for safety, 257 for efficacy; 95% were refractory to their last therapy; 80% were refractory or intolerant to both bortezomib and lenalidomide. Patients had median of 5 prior lines of therapy, including bortezomib, lenalidomide, and thalidomide. Overall response rate was 23.7% with median duration of response of 7.8 months. Median overall survival was 15.6 months. Adverse events (AEs) were manageable without cumulative toxicities. Common AEs were fatigue (49%), anemia (46%), nausea (45%), and thrombocytopenia (39%). Thirty-three patients (12.4%) experienced peripheral neuropathy, primarily grades 1 or 2. Thirty-three patients (12.4%) withdrew because of an AE. Durable responses and an acceptable tolerability profile in this heavily pretreated population demonstrate the potential of carfilzomib to offer meaningful clinical benefit. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT00511238.

Carfilzomib is a next-generation, selective proteasome inhibitor being evaluated for the treatment of relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma. In this open-label, single-arm phase 2 study (PX-171-003-A1), patients received single-agent carfilzomib 20 mg/m2intravenously twice weekly for 3 of 4 weeks in cycle 1, then 27 mg/m2for ≤ 12 cycles. The primary endpoint was overall response rate (≥ partial response). Secondary endpoints included clinical benefit response rate (≥ minimal response), duration of response, progression-free survival, overall survival, and safety. A total of 266 patients were evaluable for safety, 257 for efficacy; 95% were refractory to their last therapy; 80% were refractory or intolerant to both bortezomib and lenalidomide. Patients had median of 5 prior lines of therapy, including bortezomib, lenalidomide, and thalidomide. Overall response rate was 23.7% with median duration of response of 7.8 months. Median overall survival was 15.6 months. Adverse events (AEs) were manageable without cumulative toxicities. Common AEs were fatigue (49%), anemia (46%), nausea (45%), and thrombocytopenia (39%). Thirty-three patients (12.4%) experienced peripheral neuropathy, primarily grades 1 or 2. Thirty-three patients (12.4%) withdrew because of an AE. Durable responses and an acceptable tolerability profile in this heavily pretreated population demonstrate the potential of carfilzomib to offer meaningful clinical benefit. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.govas #NCT00511238.

Carfilzomib is a selective proteasome inhibitor that binds irreversibly to its target. In phase 1 studies, carfilzomib elicited promising responses and an acceptable toxicity profile in patients with relapsed and/or refractory multiple myeloma (R/R MM). In the present phase 2, multicenter, open-label study, 129 bortezomib-naive patients with R/R MM (median of 2 prior therapies) were separated into Cohort 1, scheduled to receive intravenous carfilzomib 20 mg/m2for all treatment cycles, and Cohort 2, scheduled to receive 20 mg/m2for cycle 1 and then 27 mg/m2for all subsequent cycles. The primary end point was an overall response rate (≥ partial response) of 42.4% in Cohort 1 and 52.2% in Cohort 2. The clinical benefit response (overall response rate + minimal response) was 59.3% and 64.2% in Cohorts 1 and 2, respectively. Median duration of response was 13.1 months and not reached, and median time to progression was 8.3 months and not reached, respectively. The most common treatment-emergent adverse events were fatigue (62.0%) and nausea (48.8%). Single-agent carfilzomib elicited a low incidence of peripheral neuropathy—17.1% overall (1 grade 3; no grade 4)—in these pretreated bortezomib-naive patients. The results of the present study support the use of carfilzomib in R/R MM patients. This trial is registered at www.clinicaltrials.govas NCT00530816.

Carfilzomib is a selective proteasome inhibitor that binds irreversibly to its target. In phase 1 studies, carfilzomib elicited promising responses and an acceptable toxicity profile in patients with relapsed and/or refractory multiple myeloma (R/R MM). In the present phase 2, multicenter, open-label study, 129 bortezomib-naive patients with R/R MM (median of 2 prior therapies) were separated into Cohort 1, scheduled to receive intravenous carfilzomib 20 mg/m2 for all treatment cycles, and Cohort 2, scheduled to receive 20 mg/m2 for cycle 1 and then 27 mg/m2 for all subsequent cycles. The primary end point was an overall response rate (≥ partial response) of 42.4% in Cohort 1 and 52.2% in Cohort 2. The clinical benefit response (overall response rate + minimal response) was 59.3% and 64.2% in Cohorts 1 and 2, respectively. Median duration of response was 13.1 months and not reached, and median time to progression was 8.3 months and not reached, respectively. The most common treatment-emergent adverse events were fatigue (62.0%) and nausea (48.8%). Single-agent carfilzomib elicited a low incidence of peripheral neuropathy—17.1% overall (1 grade 3; no grade 4)—in these pretreated bortezomib-naive patients. The results of the present study support the use of carfilzomib in R/R MM patients. This trial is registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as NCT00530816.

Introduction

Introduction

Introduction:Peripheral blood samples of healthy individuals may harbour detectable mutations in genes recurrently mutated in myeloid malignancies, a situation referred to as clonal hematopoiesis (CH). Risk factors for CH include increasing age as well as previous exposure to cytotoxic therapy. CH has been associated with an increased risk of overall mortality, including in the setting of autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) for non-Hodgkin lymphoma (Gibson et al, JCO, 2017). The excess mortality is largely driven by cardio-vascular disease, but may also be additionally attributable to an increased risk of myeloid malignancies that arise through the selection of CH subclones. Herein, we aimed to investigate the prognostic implications of CH after ASCT in an independent and diversified, large cohort of lymphoma patients using ultra-deep, highly sensitive error-correction sequencing.

Introduction

Introduction:Burkitt lymphoma (BL) is an aggressive B cell lymphoma with a distinct morphology, immunophenotype and characteristic C-MYC gene rearrangement. When treated with intensive chemotherapy, outcomes are excellent with a reported overall survival of greater than 80% at 3 years. A small subset of patients have primary refractory or relapsed disease, but there have been few reports of treatment and outcomes of these patients due to the rarity of this lymphoma and its otherwise good prognosis.

Introduction:Autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) is standard therapy for selected patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (MM). Studies in MM and lymphoma have suggested that ability to mobilize and collect a higher yield of CD34 +cells predicts for improved survival outcomes, perhaps reflecting better bone marrow reserve (Bolwell 2007, Raschle 2011). We aimed to validate this hypothesis by correlating high CD34 +cell collection (“supermobilizers”) and survival outcomes in a large myeloma cohort with long follow-up.

Prica: Kite Gilead: Honoraria; Astra-Zeneca: Honoraria. Chen: Astrazeneca: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Beigene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gilead: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Consultancy. Crump: Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Kyte/Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Epizyme: Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding. Kridel: Gilead Sciences: Research Funding. Kuruvilla: AbbVie: Honoraria; Incyte: Honoraria; Medison Ventures: Honoraria; Merck: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria; Gilead: Honoraria; Seattle Genetics: Honoraria; Karyopharm: Honoraria, Other: Data and Safety Monitoring Board; Roche: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Honoraria, Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; Pfizer: Honoraria; BMS: Honoraria; Antengene: Honoraria. Reece: Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; BMS: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Sanofi: Honoraria; Millennium: Research Funding; Karyopharm: Consultancy, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; GSK: Honoraria.

Gerrie: Astrazeneca: Honoraria, Research Funding; Sandoz: Honoraria; Roche: Research Funding; AbbVie: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding. Chua: Merck: Honoraria; Pfizer: Honoraria; Eisai: Honoraria; Gilead: Honoraria. Stewart: Roche: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; Abbvie: Honoraria; Gilead: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria; AstraZeneca: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; Sandoz: Honoraria; Teva: Honoraria. Kuruvilla: Seattle Genetics: Honoraria; TG Therapeutics: Honoraria; Medison Ventures: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; Karyopharm: Honoraria, Other: Data and Safety Monitoring Board; Gilead: Honoraria; Pfizer: Honoraria; Incyte: Honoraria; AstraZeneca: Honoraria, Research Funding; AbbVie: Honoraria; Antengene: Honoraria; Merck: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria; Roche: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding; BMS: Honoraria. Crump: Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Kyte/Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Epizyme: Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding.

Prica: Astra-Zeneca: Honoraria; Kite Gilead: Honoraria. Reece: Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Millennium: Research Funding; Sanofi: Honoraria; BMS: Honoraria, Research Funding; Karyopharm: Consultancy, Research Funding; GSK: Honoraria. Trudel: Amgen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding; GlaxoSmithKline: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; BMS/Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Roche: Consultancy; Sanofi: Honoraria; Pfizer: Honoraria, Research Funding. Chen: Beigene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Astrazeneca: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gilead: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Consultancy.