scholarly journals Racial and ethnic disparities in hematologic malignancies

Blood ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 130 (15) ◽  
pp. 1699-1705 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kedar Kirtane ◽  
Stephanie J. Lee

Abstract Racial and ethnic disparities in patients with solid malignancies have been well documented. Less is known about these disparities in patients with hematologic malignancies. With the advent of novel chemotherapeutics and targeted molecular, cellular, and immunologic therapies, it is important to identify differences in care that may lead to disparate outcomes. This review provides a critical appraisal of the empirical research on racial and ethnic disparities in incidence, survival, and outcomes in patients with hematologic malignancies. The review focuses on patients with acute myeloid leukemia, acute lymphocytic leukemia, multiple myeloma, non-Hodgkin lymphoma, Hodgkin lymphoma, myeloproliferative neoplasms, and myelodysplastic syndrome. The review discusses possible causes of racial and ethnic disparities and also considers future directions for studies to help decrease disparities.

Blood ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 126 (23) ◽  
pp. 3297-3297
Author(s):  
Aishwarya Ravindran ◽  
Wilson I. Gonsalves ◽  
Shahrukh K. Hashmi ◽  
Prashant Kapoor ◽  
Ariela L. Marshall ◽  
...  

Abstract BACKGROUND: While hematologic cancers comprise only 10% of all malignancies, they are divided into >100 distinct World Health Organization subtypes. It is known that higher volume of care is generally associated with better clinical outcomes. However, such a volume-outcome relationship in the medical management of hematologic cancers has not been rigorously explored. The American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) National Census of Oncology Practices shows that the majority of hematologist-oncologists in the United States (US) have a combined hematology-oncology practice (J Oncol Pract 2013). In this study, we estimated the annual number of new and established patients with major hematologic cancers seen on average by a hematologist-oncologist in the US. METHODS: We estimated the number of hematologist-oncologists working in the US using the ASCO workforce information system data from 2011. We utilized statistics from the Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) Program to determine the incidence and 37-year limited prevalence of hematologic cancers in 2011. We used 'first malignant tumor per site' statistics as the tumor inclusion method. For potentially curable hematologic cancers (acute lymphocytic leukemia, acute myeloid leukemia, Burkitt lymphoma, diffuse large b-cell lymphoma, Hodgkin lymphoma, and marginal zone lymphoma), we used the estimated 1-5 year survival rates from SEER and excluded patients who survived >5 years, since relapses are rare afterwards. Because prevalence estimates of chronic myelomonocytic leukemia, myelodysplastic syndromes, and certain subtypes of non-Hodgkin lymphoma are unavailable, we were unable to calculate the number of annual established cases. For myeloproliferative neoplasms, we obtained the prevalence estimate from Mehta J, et al (Leuk Lymphoma 2014). We derived the distribution of major non-Hodgkin lymphoma subtypes from the National Cancer Data Base (NCDB) Participant User File. RESULTS: The ASCO workforce information reported a total of 13,084 hematologist-oncologists working in the US in 2011. The Table summarizes the average number of specific hematologic cancer cases seen per hematologist-oncologist in 2011. CONCLUSION: Hematologic cancers are relatively rare but complex. In the US, a hematologist-oncologist on average cares for only 1-2 new patients of any subtype of hematologic cancers annually. The number of established patients is correspondingly low. These numbers are expected to vary by practice setting and disease specialization. As the diagnosis and management of hematologic cancers becomes more sophisticated, future research should explore the potential of a volume to clinical outcome relationship for these providers. Table. Hematologic Cancer Average Annual Number of Cases per Hematologist-Oncologist in the US New Cases Established Cases All Cases Acute lymphocytic leukemia 0.4 1.4 1.8 Acute myeloid leukemia 1 1.5 2.5 Chronic lymphocytic leukemia 1.1 10.7 11.8 Chronic myeloid leukemia 0.4 2.7 3.1 Chronic myelomonocytic leukemia 0.1 - - Hodgkin lymphoma 0.7 2.7 3.4 Multiple myeloma 1.6 6.3 7.9 Myelodysplastic syndromes 1.2 - - Myeloproliferative neoplasms 0.6 22.2 22.8 Non-Hodgkin lymphoma 5.1 - - Anaplastic large cell 0.1 - - Burkitt 0.1 0.3 0.4 Diffuse large B-cell 2 6 8 Follicular 1.1 - - Hairy cell leukemia 0.1 - - Lymphoplasmacytic 0.1 - - Mantle-cell 0.3 - - Marginal zone 0.5 2.1 2.6 Peripheral T-cell, not otherwise specified 0.1 - - Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.


Author(s):  
David P. Steensma

The hematologic neoplasms include lymphoproliferative disorders (eg, chronic lymphocytic leukemia [CLL]/small lymphocytic lymphoma [SLL], large granular lymphocyte leukemia, hairy cell leukemia [HCL], Hodgkin lymphoma, non-Hodgkin lymphoma), plasma cell disorders (multiple myeloma, light chain amyloidosis, Waldenström macroglobulinemia, POEMS syndrome, heavy chain disease, plasmacytoma), chronic myeloid neoplasms (chronic myeloid leukemia, the BCR/ABL-negative myeloproliferative neoplasms, myelodysplastic syndromes), and acute leukemia (acute myeloid leukemia, acute lymphocytic leukemia). In addition, clonal but not overtly malignant conditions are common in the general population, including monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance (MGUS) and monoclonal B lymphocytosis (MBL).


Blood ◽  
2010 ◽  
Vol 116 (21) ◽  
pp. 1501-1501
Author(s):  
Stephanie A. Gregory ◽  
Steve Abella ◽  
Timothy Moore

Abstract Abstract 1501 Background: Clinical data guiding colony-stimulating factor (CSF) use with emerging regimens that incorporate targeted agents for treating hematologic malignancies are not readily available, even though many of these regimens can produce increased myelosuppressive side-effects. This review assessed the diligence of reporting around neutropenia, febrile neutropenia (FN), and neutropenic complications as well as the use of CSF and antibiotics in published clinical trials evaluating emerging regimens for the treatment of non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL), Hodgkin lymphoma, multiple myeloma (MM), or chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). Methods: English-language reports of randomized controlled phase 3 studies of the selected hematologic malignancies published between January 2005 and June 2009 were identified by searching Medline, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases. Publications that met the inclusion criteria were retrieved and data on the incidence of neutropenia and its complications and CSF/antibiotic use were extracted. The percentage of publications that reported each outcome was then calculated. Results: Fifty seven trials that met the criteria were included in this analysis. Overall, 68% of trials reported on the incidence of grade 3/4 neutropenia (80%, MM; 71% CLL; 63% NHL, and 50%, Hodgkin lymphoma). However, fewer trials (18%) reported on the incidence of FN (57%, CLL; 20%, MM; 8%, NHL; and 0%, Hodgkin lymphoma). Similarly, only a few trials (4%) reported neutropenia-related hospitalizations (8%, NHL; 0% each for Hodgkin lymphoma, MM, and CLL). Primary prophylactic use of CSF was defined in the methods section of 19% of trials and CSF use was reported in the results section of 25% of trials. Use of antibiotics for FN treatment was defined in the methods section of 2% of trials and was reported in the results section of 9% of trials. Conclusion: In the published phase 3 studies evaluated in this analysis, clinically significant neutropenia and neutropenia-related events (including FN) were poorly or generally not described. Furthermore, the use of CSF and antibiotics was infrequently and inconsistently reported in the published literature of emerging regimens. A standardized approach to reporting neutropenic outcomes and the related use of supportive care measures can assist clinicians to prospectively manage the relevant toxicities associated with emerging regimens for hematologic malignancies. This is essential for the safe and effective transition of these regimens into broad clinical practice. Disclosures: Gregory: Amgen Inc.: Consultancy; Astellas: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Cephalon: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Genentech (Roche): Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; GlaxoSmithKline: Research Funding; Immunomedics: Research Funding; NCIC CTG: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; Onyx: Research Funding; Spectrum Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy. Abella:Amgen Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Moore:Amgen Inc.: Consultancy, Honoraria.


Blood ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 118 (21) ◽  
pp. 3972-3972
Author(s):  
Dina Gifkins ◽  
Megan McAuliffe ◽  
Amy Matcho ◽  
Jane Porter ◽  
Scott Chavers ◽  
...  

Abstract Abstract 3972 Second hematologic malignancies have been found to occur at a higher rate among multiple myeloma patients compared to the general population. Although alkylating therapy has been suggested to play a role, the underlying causes remain largely unclear. Increased survival benefit has been documented with the introduction of novel agents over the past decade, and, as noted in other cancers, there may also be a higher occurrence of second malignancies in the era of novel therapies. Recently, data from Phase III studies suggest that patients treated with lenalidomide with prior exposure to melphalan may have an increased risk compared to placebo. However, the contribution of other specific agents has not been well characterized. Evaluation of second malignancies in clinical trial and product safety data for bortezomib has not revealed an increased incidence in bortezomib-treated patients. Additionally, our follow-up study of the VISTA clinical trial participants after 5 years showed no elevation in risk (San Miguel, et al. ASH 2011). To expand our current knowledge, we are conducting a population-based study using the NCI SEER-Medicare database (NCI SEER cancer registry linked with diagnostic and treatment claims data of Medicare beneficiaries) to evaluate bortezomib and other standard treatment exposures in relation to second malignancies subsequent to multiple myeloma. Using the NCI SEER-Medicare database, we identified all multiple myeloma patients with their first diagnosis between 1 Jan 2000 and 31 Dec 2007 aged 66 years or older. Exposure to chemotherapy was identified via Medicare claims, and second malignancies, defined as invasive cancers whose onset was after bortezomib-based therapy and occurring at least 2 months after the initial multiple myeloma diagnosis, were identified from the SEER registries. We identified the number of second malignancies among elderly patients with multiple myeloma and following bortezomib exposure; expanded multivariate analyses, adjusted for exposures, will be presented at the meeting. A total of 9,377 multiple myeloma patients were identified (median age 76 years; 50% males). During the study period, 2,285 (21%) patients had any documented exposure to bortezomib (with or without other treatments). Patients with bortezomib exposure had a median age of 73 years, and 55% were male. Among these 2,285 patients with bortezomib exposure, 33 patients (1.4%) developed a second malignancy (4 [0.2%] hematologic and 29 [1.3%] solid tumors) during the study period after their first documented bortezomib exposure. Hematologic tumors were non-Hodgkin lymphoma (n=3) and acute myeloid leukemia (n=1). Solid tumors were prostate (n=4), bladder (n=4), lung and bronchus (n=3), colon (excluding rectum) (n=3), breast (n=3), and other (n=12). Among the 7,092 multiple myeloma patients with no documented exposure to bortezomib, 320 (4.5%) developed a second malignancy (55 [0.8%] hematologic and 265 [3.7%] solid tumors) during the study period. Hematologic tumors were non-Hodgkin lymphoma (n=16), acute myeloid leukemia (n=7), chronic lymphocytic leukemia (n=2), acute lymphocytic leukemia (n=1), chronic myeloid leukemia (n=1), Hodgkin lymphoma (n=1), and other (n=27). Solid tumors were lung and bronchus (n=46), prostate (n=38), colon (excluding rectum) (n=33), melanoma (n=23), bladder (n=21), breast (n=17), and other (n=87). Based on more than 9,000 elderly multiple myeloma patients, we found a lower prevalence of second malignancies among persons exposed to bortezomib compared to those with no documented bortezomib exposure in our unadjusted analysis. To account for survival and adjust for other exposures, expanded analyses will be presented at the meeting, including standardized incidence ratios and calculations of absolute excess risk among patients exposed to bortezomib and other standard treatments compared to the general SEER population, cumulative incidence of second malignancy for each treatment group adjusting for death as a competing risk, and multivariate analyses to assess risk while adjusting for prior and concomitant treatments and other risk factors. Disclosures: Gifkins: Janssen Research & Development: Employment; Johnson & Johnson: Equity Ownership. McAuliffe:Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Employment. Matcho:Janssen Research & Development: Employment; Johnson & Johnson: Equity Ownership. Porter:Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Employment. Chavers:Janssen Research & Development: Employment; Johnson & Johnson: Equity Ownership. Ponsillo:Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Employment. King:Janssen Research & Development: Employment; Johnson & Johnson: Equity Ownership. Desai:Janssen Research & Development: Employment; Johnson & Johnson: Equity Ownership. Cakana:Janssen Research & Development: Employment; Johnson & Johnson: Equity Ownership. Esseltine:Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Employment; Johnson & Johnson: Equity Ownership.


2015 ◽  
Vol 139 (9) ◽  
pp. 1129-1136 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xin Li ◽  
Noel A. Brownlee ◽  
Thomas A. Sporn ◽  
Annabelle Mahar ◽  
Victor L. Roggli

Context Ionizing radiation has a role in the development of malignant mesothelioma, in several epidemiologic studies, including patients with hematologic malignancies. Objective To study the clinicopathologic characteristics of patients with malignant mesothelioma and hematologic malignancies with and without a history of radiotherapy. Design From a database of approximately 3600 patients with malignant mesothelioma, we identified 45 patients (1%) who also had hematologic malignancies. We examined clinicopathologic features and noted whether the patient had received radiotherapy for malignancy, comparing those with and those without such exposure. Results Among the 45 cases, 18 (40%) had Hodgkin lymphoma, 15 (33%) had non-Hodgkin lymphoma, 10 (4%) had chronic lymphocytic leukemia, and 2 (22%) had chronic myelogenous leukemia; 20 patients (44%) had a history of radiotherapy, and 23 (51%) did not. Most patients with Hodgkin lymphoma (16 of 18; 90.0%) received radiation, whereas none of the patients with leukemia (0 of 12) and only 20% (3 of 15) of the patients with non-Hodgkin lymphoma did so. Patients without radiation were older than patients who received radiotherapy (median, 73 versus 54 years, respectively; P < .001), had a shorter interval from diagnosis of hematologic malignancy to that of mesothelioma (median, 2 versus 24 years, respectively; P < .001), and had a shorter survival period (median, 6.0 versus 14.0 months, respectively; P = .02). Epithelial mesotheliomas were proportionately more common in patients with a history of radiotherapy. Conclusions Patients with mesothelioma and hematologic malignancies with a history of radiation tended to be younger, had a longer interval from diagnosis of hematologic malignancy to that of mesothelioma, had a longer survival period, and were more likely to have the epithelial variant compared with patients without radiotherapy.


Blood ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 136 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 25-25
Author(s):  
Emily J. Labudde ◽  
Nicholas P. DeGroote ◽  
Susie Smith ◽  
Jonathan Ebelhar ◽  
Sharon M. Castellino ◽  
...  

Background: Due to relatively more favorable survival rates, parents and providers of children with hematologic malignancies maintain high hopes for cure, resulting in more cure-directed therapy and hospitalizations at the end-of-life (EOL), as well as delayed palliative care (PC) involvement. Pediatric patients with hematologic malignancies are less likely to receive PC and die at home versus patients with solid tumors, and often undergo intensive EOL care. Despite favorable prognoses, patients still relapse and experience other challenging events throughout their disease. A "palliative opportunity" is an event during a patient's disease course at which time subspecialty PC, or care provided by clinicians with subspecialty training or board certification in PC, could be provided to improve the overall care of the patient or family. It is important to explore palliative opportunities to better understand the disease course, as well as how and when to introduce PC to patients and families. Objectives: Examine the palliative opportunities present during a patient's course with a hematologic malignancy and relevant demographic, disease, or EOL associations. Methods: A single-center retrospective review was conducted on patients aged 0-18 years with leukemia or lymphoma who died from 1/1/12-11/30/17. Demographic, disease, and treatment data were collected. A priori, nine palliative opportunity categories were defined: (1) relapse of disease, (2) disease progression, (3) receipt of bone marrow transplant (BMT) or chimeric antigen receptor T-cell (CAR-T) therapy, (4) Phase 1 trial enrollment, (5) admission for symptoms (pain or dyspnea requiring IV opioids, nausea/vomiting requiring IV anti-emetics, fatigue, neurologic symptoms, or social concerns), (6) intensive care unit (ICU) admission, (7) admission for EOL care, (8) hospice enrollment, (9) do-not-resuscitate (DNR) status. Opportunities were evaluated overall and temporally over quartiles from diagnosis to death, independent of PC consultation. Descriptive and inferential statistics were performed using SAS Enterprise Guide 7.1. Results: During the study period, 92 patients with hematologic malignancies died, including 55 with B or T-cell lymphoid leukemia/lymphoma, 33 with acute/chronic myeloid leukemia, and 4 with Hodgkin/Non-Hodgkin lymphoma. These patients incurred 522 total opportunities with a median of 5.0 (Interquartile Range (IQR)=6.0) palliative opportunities per patient throughout their disease course. The majority of opportunities occurred in the last quartile of the disease course. Of the 522 opportunities, 64.9% occurred prior to or without PC support. Except for religion (p=0.0002), number and type of opportunities did not differ by demographics. 44 patients (47.9%) received PC consultation, occurring a median of 1.8 months (IQR=4.1) prior to death. PC consultation was most common in patients with lymphoid leukemia (63.6%) vs myeloid leukemia (36.4%) or Hodgkin/Non-Hodgkin lymphoma (0%, p=0.14). Receipt of PC was associated with BMT status and a higher number of palliative opportunities (p=0.0018 and p=0.0005, respectively). The most common documented reason for PC consultation was disease-related relapse or progression (30, 68.2%), followed by EOL (7, 15.9%), and symptom management (7, 15.9%). The palliative opportunities that immediately preceded PC consultation were most commonly ICU admission (15, 34.1%), relapse (8, 18.2%), disease progression (6, 13.6%), and DNR order placement (5, 11.4%). Patients who received PC consultation were more likely to have also enrolled in hospice (19/44, 43.2%) compared to those that did not receive PC consultation (6/48, 12.5%, p=0.001). Conclusion: Patients with hematologic malignancies experience many events warranting PC support, which increase toward the EOL. However, less than half of patients in this cohort received PC consultation, and often late in their disease course. This demonstrates potential missed opportunities for discussion of goals of care or improving quality of life through relief of physical, psychological, and psychosocial symptoms. The integration of PC into cancer care improves symptom management, emotional and psychosocial wellbeing, and EOL decisions. Defining palliative opportunities together with the disease program helps identify ideal timing and candidates for PC involvement. Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.


2017 ◽  
Vol 2 (s4) ◽  
pp. 39-41
Author(s):  
Eszter Mild ◽  
Erzsébet Lázár ◽  
Judit-Beáta Köpeczi ◽  
Enikő Kakucs ◽  
Marius Găzdac ◽  
...  

AbstractBackground:High-dose chemotherapy and autologous stem cell transplantation have become a standard curative treatment in various hematologic malignancies. Many factors can affect the success of mobilization and hematopoietic stem cell harvesting.Aim:The aim of this study was to analyze factors that lead to mobilization failure.Material and Methods:We conducted a retrospective study on 19 patients with failure of stem cell harvesting. All patients were administered high doses of GCS-F (filgrastim, 15 μg/kg/day) and 0.24 mg/kg of plerixafor on day +5 or +10 of harvesting.Results:The median age of the study population was 51 years (range 35–67) and 52.6% (n = 10) were males. The study group included 4 (21%) subjects with multiple myeloma, 6 (31.5%) with Hodgkin lymphoma, 8 cases (42.1%) with non-Hodgkin lymphoma and 1 patient with chronic lymphocytic leukemia. Each patient received 2.78 (range 1–5) lines of chemotherapy, administered in 11.57 (range 2 to over 20) cycles of treatment.Conclusion:In hematologic malignancies it is very important to collect stem cells in time, in order to reduce mobilization failure. As we have shown in our studied cases, multiple lines of polychemotherapy with or without radiotherapy lead to mobilization failure.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document