Autotransplant for Hodgkin lymphoma after failure of upfront BEACOPP escalated (bleomycin, etoposide, doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide, vincristine, procarbazine and prednisone)

BEACOPP (bleomycin, etoposide, doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide, vincristine, procarbazine and prednisone) escalated is the preferred upfront Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) treatment in a number of countries. Upon failure, high-dose chemotherapy with autologous stem cell support (HDT/ASCT) is performed, but its effectiveness has not been verified in this setting. We analyzed all Swiss cases of chemosensitive HL autografted after failure of BEACOPP escalated (n = 22) and compared outcomes with 22 cases of HDT/ASCT following frontline ABVD (doxorubicin, bleomycin, vinblastine and dacarbazine) failure. Five-year progression-free survival (PFS) was 76% for ABVD and 42% for BEACOPP escalated (p = 0.029). Two- and 5-year overall survival (OS) was 90% and 71% for ABVD and 72% and 65% for BEACOPP escalated, respectively (p = not significant). Three patients in the ABVD and four in the BEACOPP escalated groups underwent allotransplant for relapse after HDT/ASCT. Grade 3-4 toxicities were comparable in both groups. Three cases of therapy-related myelodysplastic syndrome/acute myeloid leukemia (t-MDS/t-AML) were recorded in the BEACOPP escalated group. The acceptable PFS and OS of chemosensitive patients with HL autografted after failure of upfront BEACOPP escalated seem to justify this approach.

Risk factors for invasive aspergillosis in neutropenic patients with hematologic malignancies

Risk factors for invasive aspergillosis (IA) are incompletely identified and may undergo changes due to differences in medical practice. A cohort of 189 consecutive, adult patients with neutropenia hospitalized in the hemato-oncology ward of the University hospital Berne between 1995 and 1999 were included in a retrospective study to assess risk factors for IA. In total, 45 IA cases (nine proven, three probable, 33 possible), 11 patients with refractory fever and 133 controls were analyzed. IA cases had more often acute leukemia or myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) (88 vs 38%, P < 0.001) and a longer duration of neutropenia (mean 20.6 vs 9.9 days, P < 0.001). They also had fewer neutropenic episodes during the preceding 6 months (mean 0.42 vs 1.03, P < 0.001), that is, confirmed (82%) and probable (73%) IA occurred most often during the induction cycle. A short time interval ( < or = 14 days) between neutropenic episodes increased the risk of IA four-fold (P = 0.06). Bacteremia, however, was not related to the number of preceding neutropenic episodes. Therefore, neutropenic patients with leukemia or MDS have the highest risk of IA. The risk is highest during the first induction cycle of treatment and increases with short-time intervals between treatment cycles.

Epoetin and Darbepoetin for Managing Anemia in Patients Undergoing Cancer Treatment: Comparative Effectiveness Update

Objectives: To update the 2006 systematic review of the comparative benefits and harms of erythropoiesis-stimulating agent (ESA) strategies and non-ESA strategies to manage anemia in patients undergoing chemotherapy and/or radiation for malignancy (excluding myelodysplastic syndrome and acute leukemia), including the impact of alternative thresholds for initiating treatment and optimal duration of therapy. Data sources: Literature searches were updated in electronic databases (n=3), conference proceedings (n=3), and Food and Drug Administration transcripts. Multiple sources (n=13) were searched for potential gray literature. A primary source for current survival evidence was a recently published individual patient data meta-analysis. In that meta-analysis, patient data were obtained from investigators for studies enrolling more than 50 patients per arm. Because those data constitute the most currently available data for this update, as well as the source for on-study (active treatment) mortality data, we limited inclusion in the current report to studies enrolling more than 50 patients per arm to avoid potential differential endpoint ascertainment in smaller studies. Review methods: Title and abstract screening was performed by one or two (to resolve uncertainty) reviewers; potentially included publications were reviewed in full text. Two or three (to resolve disagreements) reviewers assessed trial quality. Results were independently verified and pooled for outcomes of interest. The balance of benefits and harms was examined in a decision model. Results: We evaluated evidence from 5 trials directly comparing darbepoetin with epoetin, 41 trials comparing epoetin with control, and 8 trials comparing darbepoetin with control; 5 trials evaluated early versus late (delay until Hb ≤9 to 11 g/dL) treatment. Trials varied according to duration, tumor types, cancer therapy, trial quality, iron supplementation, baseline hemoglobin, ESA dosing frequency (and therefore amount per dose), and dose escalation. ESAs decreased the risk of transfusion (pooled relative risk [RR], 0.58; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.53 to 0.64; I2 = 51%; 38 trials) without evidence of meaningful difference between epoetin and darbepoetin. Thromboembolic event rates were higher in ESA-treated patients (pooled RR, 1.51; 95% CI, 1.30 to 1.74; I2 = 0%; 37 trials) without difference between epoetin and darbepoetin. In 14 trials reporting the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy (FACT)-Fatigue subscale, the most common patient-reported outcome, scores decreased by −0.6 in control arms (95% CI, −6.4 to 5.2; I2 = 0%) and increased by 2.1 in ESA arms (95% CI, −3.9 to 8.1; I2 = 0%). There were fewer thromboembolic and on-study mortality adverse events when ESA treatment was delayed until baseline Hb was less than 10 g/dL, in keeping with current treatment practice, but the difference in effect from early treatment was not significant, and the evidence was limited and insufficient for conclusions. No evidence informed optimal duration of therapy. Mortality was increased during the on-study period (pooled hazard ratio [HR], 1.17; 95% CI, 1.04 to 1.31; I2 = 0%; 37 trials). There was one additional death for every 59 treated patients when the control arm on-study mortality was 10 percent and one additional death for every 588 treated patients when the control-arm on-study mortality was 1 percent. A cohort decision model yielded a consistent result—greater loss of life-years when control arm on-study mortality was higher. There was no discernible increase in mortality with ESA use over the longest available followup (pooled HR, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.99 to 1.10; I2 = 38%; 44 trials), but many trials did not include an overall survival endpoint and potential time-dependent confounding was not considered. Conclusions: Results of this update were consistent with the 2006 review. ESAs reduced the need for transfusions and increased the risk of thromboembolism. FACT-Fatigue scores were better with ESA use but the magnitude was less than the minimal clinically important difference. An increase in mortality accompanied the use of ESAs. An important unanswered question is whether dosing practices and overall ESA exposure might influence harms.

Do we need antiplatelet therapy in thrombocytosis? Pro. Diagnostic and pathophysiologic considerations for a treatment choice.

Thrombocytosis (defined as platelets >450 x 10(9)/l) has several aetiologies. After having excluded spurious thrombocytosis (e. g., due to microspherocytes, schistocytes, cryoglobulins, or bacteria), the differential diagnosis of true thrombocytosis encompasses secondary causes (as diverse as inflammation, infection, malignancy, iron deficiency, or asplenia), primary hereditary (rare forms of familial thrombocytosis) and primary acquired entities (either in the context of a myelodysplastic syndrome or more frequently a myeloproliferative neoplasia). This manuscript addresses the following aspects: 1) diagnostic approach to thrombocytosis; 2) various mechanisms leading to a high platelet count; 3) potential of some of these mechanisms to modulate platelet function, producing hyper-reactive platelets and thus exerting a direct impact on the thrombotic risk; 4) indication of anti-thrombotic treatment in patients with thrombocytosis. There is a single prospective randomized clinical trial showing the benefit of acetyl-salicylic acid in polycythaemia vera. For other types of primary thrombocytosis and for secondary forms, treatment decisions have to be individualized according to the patient thrombotic and bleeding risks, taking into account the mechanism causing thrombocytosis. This manuscript discusses experimental and clinical data suggesting that besides patients with essential thrombocythaemia and other forms of primary thrombocytosis also those with thrombocytosis in the context of chronic inflammation, malignancy, or exposure to high altitude might benefit from anti-platelet treatment.