The presence of the EPh significantly increased the likelihood of at-risk patients receiving empiric antimicrobial therapy consistent with guideline recommendations.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

Hemophilias A and B are heritable bleeding disorders characterized by deficient baseline levels of factor VIII (fVIII) and factor IX (fIX), respectively. Standard treatment for acute bleeding events and for prophylaxis in patients with severe disease consists of recombinant fVIII and fIX infusions. The development of alloantibodies, or inhibitors, is a serious complication of congenital hemophilia that may impair the effectiveness of fVIII and fIX, leading to increased morbidity and cost of therapy. When inhibitors are present, bypassing agents such as recombinant activated factor VII and factor eight inhibitor bypass agent are available for treatment of bleeding events. Although usually effective, they are costly treatments. Immune-modulatory therapy may reverse inhibitors, allowing fVIII and fIX to be used again. Immune tolerance induction is the chief treatment option to decrease inhibitor levels, but about 20-30% of patients fail this treatment. Alternatively, multiple immune-modulating agents have been tried with limited success. Rituximab, an anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody, is one therapy that has been successful in reducing inhibitor titers in multiple case reports. Although current evidence is limited and questions regarding its use and place in therapy still exist, this agent shows promise for the future.

There were no significant differences in hematologic outcomes in newly diagnosed AML patients who received linezolid for extended gram-positive antimicrobial coverage following induction chemotherapy. This study provides new insight with a primary focus on the effects of hematologic outcomes when using linezolid in a well-defined acute leukemia population. Further study is warranted with larger populations to assess the potential adverse effects linezolid may have in patients with acute leukemia.

Limited guidance exists for dosing melphalan for autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) in the obese patient population, because the current literature reports conflicting clinical outcomes between obese and nonobese patients. In 2014, the American Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation published conditioning chemotherapy dosing guidelines for obese patients and recommended dosing of melphalan using actual body weight (ABW) in the body surface area calculation. The practice at Barnes-Jewish Hospital has consistently been to dose melphalan using adjusted body weight (AdBW), with a 20% correction when a patient weighs ≥120% of his or her ideal body weight (IBW). The purpose of this study was to compare outcomes of melphalan ASCT in patients with multiple myeloma between obese (≥120% IBW) and nonobese (<120% IBW) populations. This retrospective, single-center study included adult patients with multiple myeloma undergoing first ASCT with melphalan conditioning between January 2009 and December 2012. Patient demographic data, transplantation characteristics, and clinical outcomes were collected. The primary outcome was 3-year event-free survival (EFS). Secondary outcomes included response at 100 days post-transplantation, 3-year overall survival, treatment-related mortality (TRM), time to neutrophil engraftment, and hospital length of stay (LOS). To ensure that melphalan dosage adjustment in the obese population did not impact efficacy, the primary outcome was assessed using a noninferiority design, with a predetermined noninferiority margin of 7%. Assuming a 70% 3-year EFS in the nonobese population, a noninferiority margin of 7%, a power of 80%, and an α value of .05, an analysis of 280 patients was required. A total of 270 patients, including 171 (63%) obese patients and 99 (37%) nonobese patients, met our inclusion criteria. Baseline characteristics were well matched between the 2 cohorts, including high-risk cytogenetics, disease severity at diagnosis, and use of maintenance therapy, with the only detectable differences related to weight itself. The 3-year EFS was 41% for the total cohort, with fewer events occurring in the obese cohort compared with the nonobese cohort (51% versus 40%; P = .0025). The 95% lower confidence limit established noninferiority. High-risk cytogenetics, disease severity at diagnosis, and therapy response pre- and post-ASCT were all associated with significantly shorter EFS. No between-group differences in TRM, time to engraftment, or hospital LOS were noted. This retrospective, single-center study found that using AdBW to dose melphalan in obese patients was not inferior to the nonobese population in terms of 3-year EFS. This study adds to the limited evidence on melphalan dosing and suggests that transplantation efficacy is not affected by AdBW dosing in obese patients. Further studies are needed to provide additional insight into the pharmacokinetic differences and best dosing practices for obese patients.

Disclaimer In an effort to expedite the publication of articles, AJHP is posting manuscripts online as soon as possible after acceptance. Accepted manuscripts have been peer-reviewed and copyedited, but are posted online before technical formatting and author proofing. These manuscripts are not the final version of record and will be replaced with the final article (formatted per AJHP style and proofed by the authors) at a later time.