SummaryThe efficacy of azacitidine in the treatment of high-risk myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS), chronic myelomonocytic leukaemia (CMML) and acute myeloid leukaemia (AML) (20-30% blasts) has been demonstrated. To investigate the efficacy of azacitidine in daily clinical practice and to identify predictors for response, we analysed a cohort of 90 MDS, CMML and AML patients who have been treated in a Dutch compassionate named patient programme. Patients received azacitidine for a median of five cycles (range 1-19). The overall response rate (complete/partial/haematological improvement) was 57% in low risk MDS, 53% in high risk MDS, 50% in CMML, and 39% in AML patients. Median overall survival (OS) was 13AE0 (9AE8-16AE2) months. Multivariate analysis confirmed circulating blasts [Hazard Ratio (HR) 0AE48, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0AE24-0AE99; P = 0AE05] and poor risk cytogenetics (HR 0AE45, 95% CI 0AE22-0AE91; P = 0AE03) as independent predictors for OS. Interestingly, this analysis also identified platelet doubling after the first cycle of azacitidine as a simple and independent positive predictor for OS (HR 5AE4, 95% CI 0AE73-39AE9; P = 0AE10). In conclusion, routine administration of azacitidine to patients with variable risk groups of MDS, CMML and AML is feasible, and subgroups with distinct efficacy of azacitidine treatment can be identified.
Key Points• In a multicenter, randomized phase 3 trial, MPR-R was not superior over MPT-T with respect to response rate, PFS, and OS.• Grade 3/4 hematologic toxicity requiring growth factor support occurred with MPR-R vs clinically significant neuropathy with MPT-T.The combination of melphalan, prednisone, and thalidomide (MPT) is considered standard therapy for newly diagnosed patients with multiple myeloma who are ineligible for stem cell transplantation. Long-term treatment with thalidomide is hampered by neurotoxicity. Melphalan, prednisone, and lenalidomide, followed by lenalidomide maintenance therapy, showed promising results without severe neuropathy emerging. We randomly assigned 668 patients between nine 4-week cycles of MPT followed by thalidomide maintenance until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity (MPT-T) and the same MP regimen with thalidomide being replaced by lenalidomide (MPR-R). This multicenter, open-label, randomized phase 3 trial was undertaken by Dutch-Belgium Cooperative Trial Group for Hematology Oncology and the Nordic Myeloma Study Group (the HOVON87/ NMSG18 trial). The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS). A total of 318 patients were randomly assigned to receive MPT-T, and 319 received MPR-R. After a median follow-up of 36 months, PFS with MPT-T was 20 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 18-23 months) vs 23 months (95% CI, 19-27 months) with MPR-R (hazard ratio, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.72-1.04; P 5 .12). Response rates were similar, with at least a very good partial response of 47% and 45%, respectively. Hematologic toxicity was more pronounced with MPR-R, especially grades 3 and 4 neutropenia: 64% vs 27%. Neuropathy of at least grade 3 was significantly higher in the MPT-T arm: 16% vs 2% in MPR-R, resulting in a significant shorter duration of maintenance therapy (5 vs 17 months in MPR-R), irrespective of age. MPR-R has no advantage over MPT-T concerning efficacy. The toxicity profile differed with clinically significant neuropathy during thalidomide maintenance vs myelosuppression with
Objective To study whether stopping elastic compression stockings (ECS) after 12 months is non-inferior to continuing them for 24 months after proximal deep venous thrombosis.Design Multicentre single blind non-inferiority randomised controlled trial.Setting Outpatient clinics in eight teaching hospitals in the Netherlands, including one university medical centre.Participants Patients compliant with compression therapy for 12 months after symptomatic, ultrasound proven proximal deep venous thrombosis of the leg.Interventions Continuation or cessation of ECS 12 months after deep venous thrombosis.Main outcome measures The primary outcome was the incidence of post-thrombotic syndrome 24 months after diagnosis of deep venous thrombosis, as assessed by the standardised Villalta scale in an intention to treat analysis. The predefined non-inferiority margin was 10%. The main secondary outcome was quality of life (VEINES-QOL/Sym).Results 518 patients compliant with ECS and free of post-thrombotic syndrome were randomised one year after diagnosis of deep venous thrombosis to stop or continue ECS therapy for another year. In the stop-ECS group, 51 of 256 patients developed post-thrombotic syndrome, with an incidence of 19.9% (95% confidence interval 16% to 24%). In the continue-ECS group, 34 of 262 patients developed post-thrombotic syndrome (incidence 13.0%, 9.9% to 17%), of whom 85% used ECS six or seven days a week during the study period, for an absolute difference of 6.9% (95% confidence interval upper limit 12.3%). Because the upper limit of the 95% confidence interval exceeds the predefined margin of 10%, non-inferiority was not reached. The number needed to treat to prevent one case of post-thrombotic syndrome by continuing ECS was 14 (95% confidence interval lower limit 8). Quality of life did not differ between the two groups.Conclusion Stopping ECS after one year in compliant patients with proximal deep venous thrombosis seemed not to be non-inferior to continuing ECS therapy for two years in this non-inferiority trial.Trial registration Netherlands Trial Register NTR1442.
Patients with high- and intermediate-grade NHL carry a considerable risk of CNS relapse. Advanced stage is an additional independent risk factor. The role of CNS prophylaxis seems to be disappointing, but a retrospective analysis cannot be conclusive. Prognosis after CNS relapse is poor.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.