Search

The therapy of patients with relapsed or refractory indolent lymphoma relies on the development of new drug combinations. The drugs bendamustine and fludarabine have cytotoxic activity as monotherapy in indolent lymphoma and show synergism in vitro. In this study, we combined both drugs in a multicenter clinical phase I/II trial to evaluate their toxicity and efficacy. Bendamustine was given at 30 or 40 mg/m2/d (dose levels 1 and 2), fludarabine at 30 mg/m2/d, each drug on days 1 to 3. Six cycles were to be given every 4 weeks. A total of 29 patients with relapsed or refractory indolent lymphoma were included in the study. During phase I, 9 patients were treated at dose level 1 and 7 patients at dose level 2. Thirteen patients were added to the study during phase II. Fourteen patients had follicular lymphoma, 11 patients mantle cell lymphoma, 2 patients lymphoplasmocytic and 2 patients nodal marginal zone lymphoma. Median age was 62 years (range 39-74). All patients were in stages III or IV of their disease and had received prior chemotherapy with or without additional radio- or immunotherapy. The dose limiting toxicity was hematotoxicity in all cases and occurred in 3 of 7 evaluable patients at dose level I and in 3 of 7 patients at dose level 2. One patient at dose level 2 died of sepsis in neutropenia with persistent thrombocytopenia. The study was continued at dose level 1 (phase II). Analysis of 19 evaluable patients treated at dose level 1 reveiled hematotoxicity CTC grade III in 47% and grade IV in 26%. Neutropenic fever occurred in 4 patients (21%). On an intent-to-treat basis, 45% or 32% of all patients at dose level 1 reached CR or PR, respectively. Nine of 9 patients with mantle cell lymphoma responded to therapy. The overall response rate was 77%. Eight of 15 responders relapsed after a median follow-up time of 14 months (range 2-43). The major complication of fludarabine in combination with bendamustine is hematotoxicity. Dose level 1 with 30 mg/m2/d of both drugs on days 1 to 3 was defined as the recommended dose. Despite unfavorable prognostic features (histologic subtype, stage of disease, pretreatment) response rates were good with this regimen., (Copyright 2004 Taylor and Francis Ltd)

Systemic delivery of a lentiviral vector carrying a therapeutic gene represents a new treatment for monogenic disease. Previously, we have shown that transfer of the adenosine deaminase (ADA) cDNA in vivo rescues the lethal phenotype and reconstitutes immune function in ADA-deficient mice. In order to translate this approach to ADA-deficient severe combined immune deficiency patients, neonatal ADA-deficient mice and newborn rhesus monkeys were treated with species-matched and mismatched vectors and pseudotypes. We compared gene delivery by the HIV-1-based vector to murine γ-retroviral vectors pseudotyped with vesicular stomatitis virus-glycoprotein or murine retroviral envelopes in ADA-deficient mice. The vesicular stomatitis virus-glycoprotein pseudotyped lentiviral vectors had the highest titer and resulted in the highest vector copy number in multiple tissues, particularly liver and lung. In monkeys, HIV-1 or simian immunodeficiency virus vectors resulted in similar biodistribution in most tissues including bone marrow, spleen, liver, and lung. Simian immunodeficiency virus pseudotyped with the gibbon ape leukemia virus envelope produced 10- to 30-fold lower titers than the vesicular stomatitis virus-glycoprotein pseudotype, but had a similar tissue biodistribution and similar copy number in blood cells. The relative copy numbers achieved in mice and monkeys were similar when adjusted to the administered dose per kg. These results suggest that this approach can be scaled-up to clinical levels for treatment of ADA-deficient severe combined immune deficiency subjects with suboptimal hematopoietic stem cell transplantation options.

Relapse of acute leukemia is a frequent complication with uncertain outcome and poorly defined risk factors. From 1621 patients entered into two prospective clinical trials (AML02; n = 740 and AML04; n = 881), 74.2% reached complete remission (CR) 1 after induction(s) and 59 patients after additional induction ± hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT). Of the non-refractory patients, 48.4% with a median age of 63 (range 17-85) years relapsed. Relapses occurred within 6 months after CR in 46.5%, between 7 and 18 months in 38.7%, and after 18 months in 14.8% of patients. Relapse treatment resulted in CR2 in 39% of patients depending upon age (54.5% of ≤ 60 and 28.6% of > 60 years), duration of CR1, and treatment of relapse. Overall survival (OS) was 10.9 (7.4-16.2) %, but OS after HCT ± intensive chemotherapy (ICT) was 39.3% (31.8-48.6) at 5 years and not different in younger and older patients. Donor lymphocyte infusion ± chemotherapy and ICT alone resulted only in OS of 15.4% and of 5%, respectively. Independent favorable factors for OS were long CR1 duration, and HCT, while non-monosomal disease was beneficial for OS in elderly patients. Leukemia-free survival [LFS; 24.9 (19.5-31.7) % at 10 years] was affected by similar risk factors. In a competing risk model, the relapse incidence at 5 years was 53.5 ± 3.5% and the non-relapse mortality rate 21.7 ± 2.9%. Lower relapse incidence was observed in patents with HCT, long CR1 duration, and female gender. Risk factors for non-relapse mortality were HCT in younger and type of AML in elderly patients. In conclusion, allogeneic HCT ± IC improved the results in relapsed AML in younger and elderly patients. Increasing CR2 rates and HCT frequency will be the challenge for the next years. Relapse of the disease remains the major problem. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Correction to: Allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation improves long-term outcome for relapsed AML patients across all ages: results from two East German Study Group Hematology and Oncology (OSHO) trials A Overall survival (OS) of patients with AML after frst relapse according to age. C Overall survival (OS) of patients with AML after frst relapse according to favorable, intermediate, and unfavorable cytogenetics. [Extracted from the article]

Rationale: There is a paucity of data on the incidence of neuroendocrine tumors (NET) outside pulmonary primaries and on treatment modalities applied to patients with NET in clinical practice. Only very little therapeutic progress has been made with respect to response and overall survival, particularly among patients with poorly differentiated, WHO grade 3 neuroendocrine carcinomas (G3-NEC). We sought to document the incidence and treatment modalities in patients with NET/NEC within a period of 2 years. Methods: We conducted a retrospective data analysis using a simple documentation file to be completed in written form or electronically, including localization, WHO grading, treatment modalities, and specific therapeutic regimens applied. Primary lung cancer was excluded. The time period to be covered was 2010 through 2012. Individual patient data such as names or age were not documented, so that no ethics committee approval was required. Results: Ten different hospital- or practice-based institutions contributed their data. One to 35 patients were documented per institution, summing up to 149 patients with 154 tumor localizations. Midgut ( n = 46), foregut ( n = 42), hindgut ( n = 17), lung ( n = 9), bladder ( n = 8), unknown primary ( n = 11), and other including prostate and liver ( n = 21) were documented as tumor sites. Histological gradings were G1 ( n = 71), G2 ( n = 27), G3 ( n = 34), undifferentiated 'G4' ( n = 4), and not specified ( n = 13). Treatment modalities were surgical resection ( n = 102), chemotherapy ( n = 49), somatostatin analogs ( n = 39), radiotherapy ( n = 22), receptor-directed radionuclide therapy ( n = 12), and systemic tyrosine kinase inhibition ( n = 5). Chemotherapy was given to patients not only with G3-NEC ( n = 31), but also with G2 ( n = 12) and G1 NET ( n = 7). Somatostatin analogs as well as receptor-directed radionuclides were applied to patients throughout all gradings. Conclusions: NET and NEC are not very rare tumor entities, but are diagnosed with very different frequencies, possibly depending upon the alertness of pathologists and clinicians. Chemotherapy, receptor-directed radionuclide application, and somatostatin analog therapy are applied without a clear correlation to different histologic gradings. Diagnostic and therapeutic progress in the field of NETs/carcinomas is urgently needed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]