scholarly journals Real-World Treatment Patterns and Health Care Resource Utilization in Relapsed or Refractory Multiple Myeloma: Evidence from a Cohort Review in France

Blood ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 128 (22) ◽  
pp. 5945-5945 ◽  
Author(s):  
Huamao Mark Lin ◽  
Keith L Davis ◽  
James A. Kaye ◽  
Katarina Luptakova ◽  
Lu Gao ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
High Risk ◽  
Disease Progression ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Second Line ◽  
Risk Patients ◽  
First Relapse ◽  
Third Line ◽  
Standard Risk ◽  
Third Line Treatment

Abstract INTRODUCTION: Despite the introduction of numerous novel agents and treatment strategies leading to improved response rates and overall survival, virtually all patients with multiple myeloma (MM) eventually relapse. While relapsed and/or refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) remains an area of unmet need, little data have been generated describing typical treatment patterns and resource utilization in these patients. To help address this information gap, we analyzed data from a cohort of RRMM patients in France. METHODS: A retrospective medical record review was conducted in 200 patients with RRMM in France. Patients were selected (based on randomly generated first letter of last name) from the caseloads of 40 hematology/oncology providers across France practicing mainly in academic hospitals. Inclusion criteria were: ≥18 years of age at initial MM diagnosis; first determined to have RRMM between January 1, 2009 and December 31, 2011, where RRMM was defined by (1) first-line (induction) regimen of chemotherapy with or without stem cell transplant (SCT) and with or without other post-induction/SCT therapy and (2) disease progression while on or at any time after completion of first-line therapy. Baseline cytogenetic risk was defined as follows: high-risk: cytogenetic abnormalities del(17p), t(4:14), or t(14;16); unknown/unassessed risk: patients for whom cytogenetics were unavailable or unassessed; or standard-risk: all patients with known cytogenetics not classified as high-risk. Patients were retrospectively assessed on second- and third-line treatment regimens received, treatment duration and reasons for discontinuation, and subsequent health care utilization from date of first relapse (study index date). All analyses were descriptive. RESULTS: Demographic and clinical characteristics are presented in Table 1. Altogether 55 high-risk and 113 standard-risk patients were selected; risk category was unknown for 32 patients. Among the 200 patients studied, 192 (96%) received ≥1 additional line of systemic chemotherapy after first relapse; 114 patients (57%) received ≥2 additional lines of systemic therapy (i.e., at least second- and third-line therapy). The most common second-line regimen was lenalidomide + dexamethasone (54%), followed by bortezomib + dexamethasone with or without a third agent (23%). Median duration of second-line treatment was 9 cycles over 9.4 months. Most patients (92%) discontinued second-line treatment, most commonly due to disease progression (37%), to reaching complete clinical response with no additional benefit expected (33%), to lack/loss of response (13%), or to toxicities/adverse events (8%). Among the 114 patients receiving a third-line treatment, regimens were more varied; bortezomib + dexamethasone with or without other third agents was the most common third-line regimen (27%). Median third-line duration (across all regimens) was 6 cycles over 5.9 months. The leading reason for third-line treatment discontinuation was disease progression (42%), followed by attainment of complete response with no addition benefit expected (21%). During the follow-up period from RRMM diagnosis until death or last medical record, 35% of patients had ≥1 hospitalization, with high-risk patients having a higher hospitalization incidence than standard-risk patients (34 vs. 15 admissions per 100 person-years; p<0.05); a similar disparity was observed for emergency department utilization (25 vs. 15 visits per 100 person-years; p<0.05). Leading clinical burdens included bone pain (58%), fatigue/weakness (75%), impairment of daily activities (59%), anemia (55%), thrombocytopenia (44%), and neutropenia (40%). CONCLUSIONS: Lenalidomide + dexamethasone was the most commonly observed second-line regimen in this medical record review. Second-line treatment duration was generally less than a year, which indicates an unmet need in these patients, particularly in light of the primary reasons cited for unplanned discontinuation (disease progression, loss of response, no perceived additional benefit, and toxicities). Hospitalizations and emergency department visits were common among these patients after first relapse, indicating a potentially high cost burden of disease, particularly for patients with high-risk cytogenetic abnormalities in whom health care utilization was generally higher than for patients with standard-risk disease. Disclosures Lin: Takeda: Employment. Davis:Takeda: Research Funding. Kaye:Takeda: Research Funding. Luptakova:Takeda Oncology: Employment. Gao:Takeda: Employment. Nagar:Takeda: Research Funding. Seal:Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Limited: Employment, Equity Ownership.

Real-World Clinical Outcomes By Cytogenetic Risk Category in Relapsed or Refractory Multiple Myeloma: Evidence from a Cohort Review in France

Blood ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 128 (22) ◽  
pp. 4784-4784
Author(s):  
Huamao Mark Lin ◽  
Keith L Davis ◽  
James A. Kaye ◽  
Katarina Luptakova ◽  
Lu Gao ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Partial Response ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Complete Response ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Second Line ◽  
High Risk Patients ◽  
Risk Patients ◽  
Standard Risk

Abstract INTRODUCTION: Multiple Myeloma (MM) is an incurable hematologic cancer characterized by multiple recurrences. With each recurrence, patients have a lower probability of response and duration of response is shorter. Therefore, there is an unmet need to improve outcomes in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). There is a shortage of data describing clinical features and outcomes in these patients in real-world practice, particularly with regard to differences in outcomes by baseline cytogenetic risk. To help address this information gap, this study analyzed data from a cohort of RRMM patients in France. METHODS: A retrospective observational review of medical records was conducted in a cohort of 200 patients with RRMM in France. Patients were selected (based on randomly generated first letter of last name) from the caseloads of 40 hematology/oncology providers across France practicing mainly in academic hospitals. Inclusion criteria were: ≥18 years of age at initial MM diagnosis; first determined to have RRMM between January 1, 2009 and December 31, 2011, where RRMM was defined by (1) first-line (induction) regimen of chemotherapy with or without stem cell transplant (SCT) and with or without other post-induction/SCT therapy and (2) disease progression while on or at any time after completion of first-line therapy. Patients could be alive or deceased at the time of record abstraction. Baseline cytogenetic risk was defined as follows: high-risk: cytogenetic abnormalities del(17p), t(4:14), or t(14;16); unknown/unassessed risk: patients for whom cytogenetics were unavailable; or standard-risk: all patients with known cytogenetics not classified as high-risk. Patients were assessed for treatment response, overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) from date of first relapse (study index date). All analyses were descriptive. Survival was assessed using the Kaplan-Meier (K-M) method. RESULTS: Demographic and clinical characteristics of the study sample are presented in Table 1. A total of 55 high-risk and 113 standard-risk patients were identified; risk category was unknown or unassessed for 32 patients. Among all patients, mean (SD) age at RRMM diagnosis was 66.3 (8.9) years and 62% of the sample was male. Lenalidomide + dexamethasone was the most common second-line systemic regimen initiated (50% of high-risk patients, 59.5% of standard-risk patients receiving second-line treatment). A total of 114 patients (57%) initiated a third-line treatment. Despite clinical response in second-line treatment occurring sooner in high-risk patients (median: 106 days) than in standard-risk patients (median: 237 days), physician-assessed overall response rate (ORR) was lower in high-risk patients (63%: 17% complete response, 46% partial response) than standard-risk patients (91%: 26% complete response, 65% partial response) across all second-line treatments combined (Table 2).. For third-line treatment, ORR was lower in high-risk patients (54%: 12% complete response, 42% partial response) than standard-risk patients (74%: 9% complete response, 65% partial response). Among patients who initiated a second-line treatment (n = 192), 47.4% were deceased at the time of data collection. From second-line initiation, K-M estimates of 1- to 5-year OS and PFS were substantially lower for high-risk patients versus standard-risk. Specifically, the proportions of patients still alive 1, 3, and 5 years after second-line treatment initiation were 73%, 51%, and 36%, respectively, for high-risk patients and 94%, 73%, and 61% for standard-risk patients. The proportions of patients without disease progression at 1, 3, and 5 years after second-line initiation were 48%, 13.5%, and 5% for high-risk patients and 82%, 42%, and 14% for standard-risk patients. CONCLUSIONS: The importance of cytogenetic risk classification as a prognostic factor in RRMM was apparent in this retrospective review, in which patients with high-risk cytogenetics had less favorable outcomes in terms of ORR, OS, and PFS than standard-risk patients. Decreased response rate and lower PFS and OS was documented among patients with high-risk cytogenetics, which is in contrast to shorter time needed to achieve best clinical response in this subgroup. Results from this real-world study provide further confirmation of the unmet medical need presented by RRMM, especially for patients with high-risk cytogenetics. Disclosures Lin: Takeda: Employment. Davis:Takeda: Research Funding. Kaye:Takeda: Research Funding. Luptakova:Takeda Oncology: Employment. Gao:Takeda: Employment. Nagar:Takeda: Research Funding. Seal:Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Limited: Employment, Equity Ownership.

scholarly journals Real-World Treatment Patterns in Relapsed or Refractory Multiple Myeloma: Evidence from a Cohort Review in the United Kingdom

Blood ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 128 (22) ◽  
pp. 5947-5947
Author(s):  
Huamao Mark Lin ◽  
Keith L Davis ◽  
James A. Kaye ◽  
Katarina Luptakova ◽  
Saurabh Nagar ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Disease Progression ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Complete Response ◽  
Additional Benefit ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Second Line ◽  
Line Therapy ◽  
First Relapse ◽  
Third Line

Abstract INTRODUCTION: Despite advancements in induction and maintenance therapies leading to improved response rates and overall survival (OS), virtually all patients with multiple myeloma (MM) eventually relapse. Improvement in outcomes in relapsed and/or refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) remains an area of unmet need, yet there is a shortage of data describing typical treatment patterns in these patients in real-world practice settings. Such data may help inform future health technology assessments and other regulatory evaluations of current and new therapies in RRMM. To help address this information gap, we analyzed retrospective data from a cohort of RRMM patients in the United Kingdom (UK). METHODS: A retrospective medical record review was conducted in a cohort (n = 216) of patients with RRMM in the UK. Patients were selected (based on randomly generated first letter of last name) from the caseloads of 41 hematology/oncology providers across the UK. Specific inclusion criteria were: ≥18 years of age at initial MM diagnosis; first determined to have RRMM between January 1, 2009 and December 31, 2011, where RRMM was defined by (1) receipt of a first-line (induction) treatment regimen of chemotherapy with or without stem cell transplant (SCT) and with or without post-induction/SCT maintenance therapy and (2) disease progression while on or at any time after completion of first-line therapy. Patients were retrospectively assessed on second- and third-line treatment regimens received, treatment duration, and reasons for treatment discontinuation from date of first relapse or progression (study index date). All analyses were descriptive and exploratory in nature. RESULTS: Demographic and clinical characteristics of the study sample are presented in Table 1. Mean (SD) age at study index (first relapse, or RRMM diagnosis) was 65.6 (8.7) years, with approximately half of patients (53%) having advanced age (≥65 years). The study sample was 62.5% male and more than two-thirds of patients (69%) were still alive at the time of the medical record review. Among the 216 patients studied, 208 (97%) received ≥1 additional line of systemic chemotherapy after first relapse (Table 2); 94 patients (43%) received ≥2 additional lines of therapy (i.e., at least second- and third-line therapy) during the observation period. The most common second-line regimen was bortezomib + dexamethasone with or without other agents (66% of second-line initiators), followed by lenalidomide + dexamethasone with or without other agents (20%). Median duration of second-line treatment was 6 cycles over a median of 5.4 months. Among the 98% of patients who discontinued second-line treatment, a majority (62%) stopped therapy due to reaching complete response with no additional benefit expected; 33 patients (16%) discontinued second-line treatment due to disease progression and 8% discontinued due to toxicities. Lenalidomide + dexamethasone with or without other agents was the predominant third-line regimen (67% of third-line initiators); bortezomib + dexamethasone with or without other agents was the next most common third-line regimen (14%). Among the 94 patients receiving third-line treatment, median duration was 6 cycles over a median of 5.7 months. The leading reason for third-line discontinuation was disease progression (48%); 30% of patients discontinued because they reached complete response with no anticipated additional benefit, and 20% discontinued because of loss or lack of response to therapy. CONCLUSIONS: In the RRMM cohort reviewed here, bortezomib-containing regimens were the predominant second-line therapy and lenalidomide + dexamethasone was the most common third-line regimen. The most common reasons for discontinuation of RRMM treatments were disease progression and physician-judged achievement of complete response with no additional benefit expected. While the most common reason for therapy discontinuation in second-line treatment was reaching complete response with no additional benefit expected, in third-line therapy it was disease progression. With growing evidence in the RRMM literature that treatment to progression may be superior to a fixed duration of therapy, as well as evidence of premature discontinuation being associated with inferior outcomes, the relatively short second-line duration reported here (<6 months) further highlights a potential unmet need in this disease area. Disclosures Lin: Takeda: Employment. Davis:Takeda: Research Funding. Kaye:Takeda: Research Funding. Luptakova:Takeda Oncology: Employment. Nagar:Takeda: Research Funding. Seal:Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Limited: Employment, Equity Ownership.

Relapsed Hodgkin Lymphoma in Older Patients: A Comprehensive Analysis From the German Hodgkin Study Group

2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (35) ◽  
pp. 4431-4437 ◽  
Author(s):  
Boris Böll ◽  
Helen Goergen ◽  
Nils Arndt ◽  
Julia Meissner ◽  
Stefan W. Krause ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
High Risk ◽  
Older Patients ◽  
Prognostic Score ◽  
Treatment Strategies ◽  
Study Group ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Second Line ◽  
First Line ◽  
Early Relapse ◽  
Risk Patients

Purpose Progression or relapse of Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) is common among older patients. However, prognosis and effects of second-line treatment are thus far unknown. Patients and Methods We investigated second-line treatment and survival in older patients with progressive or relapsed HL. Patients treated within German Hodgkin Study Group first-line studies between 1993 and 2007 were screened for refractory disease or relapse (RR-HL). Patients with RR-HL age ≥ 60 years at first-line treatment were included in this analysis. Results We identified 105 patients (median age, 66 years); 28%, 31%, and 41% had progressive disease, early relapse, or late relapse, respectively. Second-line treatment strategies included intensified salvage regimens (22%), conventional polychemotherapy and/or salvage-radiotherapy with curative intent (42%), and palliative approaches (31%). Median overall survival (OS) for the entire cohort was 12 months; OS at 3 years was 31% (95% CI, 22% to 40%). A prognostic score with risk factors (RFs) of early relapse, clinical stage III/IV, and anemia identified patients with favorable and unfavorable prognosis (≤ one RF: 3-year OS, 59%; 95% CI, 44% to 74%; ≥ two RFs: 3-year OS, 9%; 95% CI, 1% to 18%). In low-risk patients, the impact of therapy on survival was significant in favor of the conventional polychemotherapy/salvage radiotherapy approach. In high-risk patients, OS was low overall and did not differ significantly among treatment strategies. Conclusion OS in older patients with RR-HL can be predicted using a simple prognostic score. Poor outcome in high-risk patients cannot be overcome by any of the applied treatment strategies. Our results might help to guide treatment decisions and evaluate new compounds in these patients.

scholarly journals Cost Effectiveness Analysis of Eribulin Mesylate as a Treatment for Metastatic Breast Cancer in Spain: Management in the Later Line of Therapy

10.36469/9834 ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 180-193
Author(s):  
Gabriel Tremblay ◽  
Unnati Majethia ◽  
Ilias Kontoudis ◽  
Jesús De Rosendo
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Metastatic Breast Cancer ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Metastatic Breast ◽  
Sensitivity Analyses ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Second Line ◽  
Life Years ◽  
Third Line ◽  
Third Line Treatment

Background: Two thirds (62%) of metastatic breast cancer (MBC) patients in Western Europe have human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative disease, for which anthracyclines and taxanes are recommended as first-line treatments, followed by microtubule-targeting agents such as capecitabine, vinorelbine and/or eribulin. The study objective was to compare the cost-effectiveness of eribulin in Spain as a second-line treatment for HER2-negative MBC with its current status as a third-line treatment for patients who have received capecitabine. Methods: A Markov model was developed from the perspective of the Spanish healthcare system. The model had three health states: Stable; Progression and Death. In Stable, patients received eribulin or: capecitabine and vinorelbine for HER2-negative patients; primary treatment of physician’s choice (TPC) for post-capecitabine patients. In Progression, all patients received secondary TPC. Model inputs were overall survival, progression-free survival and costs relating to chemotherapies, grade 3/4 adverse events and healthcare utilization. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to identify uncertainty. Results: As second-line treatment, Eribulin was associated with a greater incremental benefit in life years (LYs) and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) than capecitabine and vinorelbine. Erubilin as third-line treatment was associated with greater benefit in life years (LYs) and QALYs than TPC. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) for eribulin were higher in the second-line than the third-line setting in terms of LYs (€35,149 versus €24,884) and QALYs (€37,152 versus €35,484). In both settings, deterministic sensitivity analyses demonstrated that the ICER is most sensitive to the eribulin price. Conclusion: Eribulin is cost-effective as second-line treatment for HER2-negative MBC patients in Spain; albeit, slightly less so than as third-line treatment for MBC patients who have received capecitabine (an ICER per QALY difference of €1,668). This difference may fall within the margin of error for the model and could potentially be addressed by a minor reduction in the eribulin price.

scholarly journals P469 Stay in class or switch out of class after anti-TNF failure in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Real-world data from a large district general hospital

2020 ◽  
Vol 14 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. S414-S414
Author(s):  
H Johnson ◽  
S Vythilingam ◽  
S McLaughlin
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Remission ◽  
Disease Type ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Second Line ◽  
Real World Data ◽  
Effective Treatment Option ◽  
Significant Cost ◽  
Third Line ◽  
Biologic Drug ◽  
Third Line Treatment

Abstract Background Biosimilar infliximab (IFX) and adalimumab (ADA) are well-proven cost-effective anti-TNF drugs in IBD; in our practice, the majority of patients with IBD receive IFX or ADA first line. Since the introduction of Vedolizumab (VED) and Ustekinumab (UST) some have recommended switching out of class after failing a single anti-TNF. This practice has significant cost implications. To establish the outcome of treatment response in patients treated with a second anti-TNF agent after anti-TNF failure compared with the outcome of patients treated with VED and UST after anti-TNF failure. Methods We maintain a prospective IBD database. We searched our database for the outcomes of patients who failed their first anti-TNF drug but were in a clinical remission 6 months after changing to a second or third biologic drug. Disease type, age, gender and response to their second and third biologic drug were recorded. Clinical remission was defined as off steroids with calprotectin &lt;250 and no symptoms of active IBD. Results Two hundred and eighty-seven patients were identified. One hundred and forty (48.8%) were male. Mean age was 43.2 (range 18–94). Disease type was 75 (26%) UC, 210 (73.2%) CD, 2 (0.7%) IBD-U. One hundred and ninety-three patients received IFX 1st line, 118 (40%) failed. Of these 84 (72%) received ADA, 28 (24%) VED and 6 (5%) UST second line. Remission with second-line treatment was achieved in 58 (69%); ADA, 18 (64%); VED, 6 (100%); UST. Remission with third line treatment; was achieved in 6 (100%); VED; 5 (100%); UST. Ninety-four patients received ADA 1st line, 33 (35%) failed. Of these 11 (33%) received IFX, 10 (30%) VED and 8 (24%) UST second line. Remission with second-line treatment was achieved in 6 (55%); IFX, 10 (100%); VED and 8 (100%); UST. Remission with third line treatment; was achieved in 1 (100%); VED, 4 (100%); UST. Conclusion Our data suggest that treatment with ADA after IFX failure is an effective treatment option whereas IFX treatment after ADA failure is less effective. It is interesting that the majority of those who failed the anti-integrin treatment second line responded to third line ADA. These data are consistent with earlier anti-TNF studies including GAIN (Gauging Adalimumab efficacy in Infliximab Non-responders) and SWITCH (Switch to adalimumab in patients with Crohn’s disease controlled by maintenance infliximab: prospective randomised SWITCH trial) which demonstrated that anti-TNF failure is not a class effect. We recommend prescribing a second anti-TNF after anti-TNF failure in preference to using an anti-integrin second line. This practice will lead to significant cost savings for the health care economy.

scholarly journals HIV-1 Drug Resistance and Third-Line Therapy Outcomes in Patients Failing Second-Line Therapy in Zimbabwe

2018 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Cleophas Chimbetete ◽  
David Katzenstein ◽  
Tinei Shamu ◽  
Adrian Spoerri ◽  
Janne Estill ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Reverse Transcriptase ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Second Line ◽  
Resistance Mutations ◽  
Reverse Transcriptase Inhibitors ◽  
Cd4 Cell Count ◽  
Line Therapy ◽  
Third Line ◽  
Cd4 Cell ◽  
Third Line Treatment

Abstract Objectives To analyze the patterns and risk factors of HIV drug resistance mutations among patients failing second-line treatment and to describe early treatment responses to recommended third-line antiretroviral therapy (ART) in a national referral HIV clinic in Zimbabwe. Methods Patients on boosted protease inhibitor (PI) regimens for more than 6 months with treatment failure confirmed by 2 viral load (VL) tests &gt;1000 copies/mL were genotyped, and susceptibility to available antiretroviral drugs was estimated by the Stanford HIVdb program. Risk factors for major PI resistance were assessed by logistic regression. Third-line treatment was provided as Darunavir/r, Raltegravir, or Dolutegravir and Zidovudine, Abacavir Lamivudine, or Tenofovir. Results Genotypes were performed on 86 patients who had good adherence to treatment. The median duration of first- and second-line ART was 3.8 years (interquartile range [IQR], 2.3–5.1) and 2.6 years (IQR, 1.6–4.9), respectively. The median HIV viral load and CD4 cell count were 65 210 copies/mL (IQR, 8728–208 920 copies/mL) and 201 cells/mm3 (IQR, 49–333 cells/mm3). Major PI resistance-associated mutations (RAMs) were demonstrated in 44 (51%) non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor RAMs in 72 patients (83%) and nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors RAMs in 62 patients (72%). PI resistance was associated with age &gt;24 years (P = .003) and CD4 cell count &lt;200 cells/mm3 (P = .007). In multivariable analysis, only age &gt;24 years was significantly associated (adjusted odds ratio, 4.75; 95% confidence interval, 1.69–13.38; P = .003) with major PI mutations. Third-line DRV/r- and InSTI-based therapy achieved virologic suppression in 29/36 patients (81%) after 6 months. Conclusions The prevelance of PI mutations was high. Adolescents and young adults had a lower risk of acquiring major PI resistance mutations, possibly due to poor adherence to ART. Third-line treatment with a regimen of Darunavir/r, Raltegravir/Dolutegravir, and optimized nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors was effective.

Outcome of Adult AML at First Relapse Following a Risk-Oriented Strategy: An Update of the Northern Italy Leukemia Group (NILG) Experience

Blood ◽  
2008 ◽  
Vol 112 (11) ◽  
pp. 4385-4385 ◽  
Author(s):  
Irene Cavattoni ◽  
Enrico Morello ◽  
Elena Oldani ◽  
Tamara Intermesoli ◽  
Ernesta Audisio ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prognostic Factors ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Risk Category ◽  
High Dose ◽  
High Risk Patients ◽  
Risk Patients ◽  
First Relapse ◽  
Group 2 ◽  
Standard Risk ◽  
Group 1

Abstract INTRODUCTION The impact on post-relapse survival of selected prognostic factors and salvage therapy (finalized to perform an allo-SCT) was retrospectively analyzed in 172 patients (patients) with relapsed non-APL AML, who had been initially treated with standard induction and risk-adapatiented consolidation. The aim was to identify factors associated with a better outcome at first relapse. METHODS All 172 patients were at first recurrence following consolidation of CR1 with high-dose Ara-C (HiDAC) multicycle therapy supported by blood stem cells (standard risk, as defined by mixed clinical-cytogenetic criteria) or allo-SCT in case of high-risk prognostic profile. Median age at relapse was 55 y (range 21–70). CR1 duration was &lt;6 months in 50 patients (29%), ranging from 0.6 to 52,7 mo (median 9,1). High risk patients were 128/172 (74%) and 43/172 patients (25%) had an unfavourable cytogenetics (CG). One hundred-eleven patients (64%) received HiDAC and 24 (14%) an allo-SCT according to study design. RESULTS 140 patients (81%) received salvage treatment. The remaining 32 patients (19%) received palliation and all of them died. The median OS was 17.1 mo, with a 2yOS of 34%. Favorable prognostic factors identified by univariate analisys were: favourable or intermediate CG (p=0,007), standard risk category according to first line protocol (p=0.004), availibility of a HLA matched donor (p= 0.048), achievement of an early CR1(p=0,000), HiDAC as first line therapy(p=0,000), alloHSCT perfomed at relapse (p=0,000) and a DFS from CR1&gt;12 mo (p=0,000). In multivariate analysis favourable or intermediate CG and DFS &gt;12 mo were confirmed as independent prognostic factors (p=0,036 and p=0,001 respectively). Among the 140 patients, 50 received an allo-SCT following relapse (36%, group 1), and the remaining 90 (64%, group 2) received high dose chemotherapy alone (85), autologous SCT (2), or DLI (3, in case of previous alloSCT). Both groups were comparable regarding age &gt;55 y, prior allo-SCT and risk class at diagnosis. After salvage therapy, 44 patients(88%) in the group 1 achieved CR2, compared to 26 patients (29%) in the group 2. The median duration of CR2 was 9 mo (range 2–64) and 3 mo (range 1–34) in group 1 and 2 respectively. NRM was 17/140: 12 patients (24%) in the allo-SCT group and 5 (6%) in group 2. The 2yOS was 57% and 23% respectively (p=0,000). Moreover, among 50 alloSCT patients, survival was affected by risk category at diagnosis: 2yOS of 19 (38%) standard risk patients was 83% compared to 42% in 31 high risk patients (62%) (p=0.01). This risk stratification has no impact on OS in the group 2. CONCLUSIONS DFS &gt; 12 mo and standard risk category at diagnosis, according to NILG protocol, are the most important independent positive prognostic factors impacting OS of AML relapsed patients. The availibility of a HLA matched donor and a subsequent intensification with alloSCT may offer substantial salvage rates and its outcome is affected by the risk stratification at diagnosis. Nevertheless, high risk patients could benefit from alloSCT, reaching an 2yOS of 42%.

Sequential Treatment with Rituximab and CHOP Chemotherapy in B-Cell PTLD - Moving Forward to a First Standard of Care: Results From a Prospective International Multicenter Trial.

Blood ◽  
2009 ◽  
Vol 114 (22) ◽  
pp. 100-100 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ralf Trappe ◽  
Sylvain Choquet ◽  
Stephan H.K. Oertel ◽  
Veronique Leblond ◽  
Daan Dierickx ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
High Risk ◽  
Complete Remission ◽  
Risk Stratification ◽  
Disease Progression ◽  
Early Treatment ◽  
Interim Analysis ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Low Risk ◽  
Sequential Treatment ◽  
Risk Patients

Abstract Abstract 100 Purpose: This trial aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of sequential treatment with rituximab and CHOP-21 in patients with PTLD unresponsive to reduction of immunosuppression. Methods: An ongoing prospective, multicenter, international phase II trial was initiated in January 2003. Initially patients were treated with a fixed sequence of rituximab at days 1, 8, 15 and 22 (4R) followed by four cycles of CHOP-21 combined with G-CSF support starting 4 weeks after the last dose of rituximab (sequential treatment, ST). Based on the results of an earlier interim analysis showing that the response to rituximab predicts OS the trial was amended in 2007 introducing risk stratification according to the response to 4R (risk stratified sequential treatment, RSST). In RSST patients achieving a complete remission after 4R (low risk) continue with four 3-weekly courses of rituximab monotherapy while patients in PR, SD or PD (high risk) are followed by four cycles of R-CHOP-21 + G-CSF. Results: This is a scheduled interim analysis after inclusion of a total of 104 patients. The median follow up is 34.0 months for ST (64 pts.) and 9.1 months for RSST (40 pts.). 61 ST and 35 RSST patients were diagnosed with monomorphic PTLD, 3/5 with polymorphic PTLD. 27/23 patients were kidney, 3/0 kidney+pancreas, 15/8 liver, 13/6 heart, 6/3 lung or heart+lung transplant recipients. Median age at diagnosis of PTLD was 53/60 years (mean age: 48/56 years). 59%/58% of patients had an advanced stage of disease (Ann Arbor III/IV) and 49%/47% of tumors were EBV positive. 75%/75% of patients had late PTLD (i.e. later than 1 year after transplantation). LDH was elevated in 71%/64% of patients, respectively. The overall response rate (ORR) to 4 initial courses of rituximab monotherapy (4R, N=104) was 54% with a CR-rate of 32% and the subsequent completion of treatment with CHOP or R-CHOP allowed a clear increase of the response (p<0.0001, Fig. 1). With ST the final ORR was 89% (CR rate: 69%). 86%, 75% and 75% of patients were without disease progression at one, two and three years, respectively (Fig. 2a). Disease free survival was 87%, 78% and 70% at one, two and three years. There were 6 early treatment associated deaths (9%) resulting from infections (1 from CMV-colitis, 1 from PcP-pneumonia, 1 from fulminant hepatitis, 3 from sepsis) and 2/64 patients died from refractory PTLD. Two further patients died due to hemorrhage during treatment. With RSST the ORR was 90% and 73% achieved a complete remission. 90% of patients were without disease progression at one year (Fig. 2a). There was one early treatment related death due to infection (2.5%). This patient died from sepsis secondary to intestinal perforation in response to R-CHOP treatment. 2/40 patients died from refractory PTLD. With 1 event in 16 patients in both, the ST and the RSST-arms, subsequent consolidation with rituximab monotherapy (RSST) seems not to be inferior to consolidation with 4 cycles of CHOP (ST) in patients with a CR after 4R. Up to now there is no difference in toxicity between CHOP and R-CHOP in ST/RSST. Patients failing to achieve a complete remission with 4R (72 patients) seem to benefit from the subsequent escalation from CHOP to R-CHOP (Fig. 2b). Conclusions: This is the largest prospective study in PTLD. Sequential treatment with rituximab and CHOP-21 + G-CSF is well tolerated and highly effective with a treatment related mortality of less than 10% and an efficacy of up to 90%. In comparison to historic series of rituximab monotherapy, significantly more patients achieve a CR with sequential treatment and time to progression (TTP) is very much prolonged. In comparison to historic series of CHOP, sequential treatment is much better tolerated. This may result from a lower tumor burden and a better patient fitness at the time chemotherapy is applied. Introduction of risk stratification according to the response to 4 courses of rituximab monotherapy might further improve these results restricting chemotherapy related toxicity to high risk patients while these data suggest that low risk patients can effectively be treated with extended rituximab monotherapy. Thus, risk stratified sequential treatment (RSST) might further improve OS in this difficult to treat disease. Disclosures: Trappe: Hoffmann La Roche Ltd.: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; AMGEN GmbH: Research Funding. Choquet:Hoffmann La Roche Ltd.: Consultancy, Honoraria. Oertel:Hoffmann La Roche Ltd.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Leblond:Hoffmann La Roche Ltd.: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Ekman:Hoffmann La Roche Ltd.: Honoraria. Dührsen:Hoffmann La Roche Ltd.: Honoraria, Research Funding. Salles:Hoffmann La Roche Ltd.: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Morschhauser:Hoffmann La Roche Ltd.: Honoraria. Riess:Hoffmann La Roche Ltd.: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; AMGEN GmBH: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding.

Activity of new agents (NAs) as third-line treatment in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) patients (pts) showing a primary resistance (PRes) to NAs-based second line therapy after docetaxel (DOC): Preliminary results from a multicenter Italian study.

2015 ◽  
Vol 33 (7_suppl) ◽  
pp. 216-216
Author(s):  
Orazio Caffo ◽  
Ugo De Giorgi ◽  
Gaetano Facchini ◽  
Lucia Fratino ◽  
Donatello Gasparro ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Consecutive Series ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Second Line ◽  
Castration Resistant Prostate Cancer ◽  
Primary Resistance ◽  
Third Line ◽  
Third Line Treatment

216 Background: The androgen receptor machinery remains the ultimate target of NAs in mCRPC post-DOC, abiraterone acetate (AA), cabazitaxel (CAB), and enzalutamide (ENZ). It is postulated that some mechanisms of resistance may be common to all NAs. This may be crucial in planning their sequential use, mainly when a PRes to one of them is observed. The present study assessed the activity of NAs in pts who previously experienced a PRes to another NA administered after DOC. Methods: We collected data of pts who received sequentially two NAs after DOC in 32 Italian hospital. For each pt we recorded the clinical outcomes of all treatments received after DOC. For the study purpose, we consider with PRes all pts progressing within 3 months after second line NA start. All other pts were considered as without PRes. Results: A consecutive series of 271 mCRPC pts, median age 71 yrs (46-91), with bone (89%), nodal (56%) or visceral (19%) mets, was collected. All pts received NAs as second line after DOC (AA 54% – CAB 34%– ENZ 12%) and 54 (20%) showed a PRes. Among these, third line treatment [AA (31%), CAB (42%), and ENZ (27%)], produced a biochemical and an objective response rate of 11% in both cases, with a median progression free survival (PFS) and a median overall survival (OS) of 4 mos and 8 mos, respectively. No statistically significant differences were observed in terms of clinical outcomes on the basis of NA sequences (see Table). Conclusions: It appears from this preliminary data, that the activity of NAs in pts showing a PRes to second line NAs is very limited, regardless the NA is administered. [Table: see text]

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document