Aortic prosthesis-patient size down to 1.1 cm(2)/m(2) or -3 Z did not reduce intermediate- or long-term survival after aortic valve replacement. However, patient-prosthesis size under 1.2 cm(2)/m(2) or -2.5 Z was associated with a 1% to 2% increase in 30-day mortality. Prosthesis-patient sizes this small or smaller were rarely implanted in patients receiving bioprostheses.

Purpose Obinutuzumab (GA101), a novel glycoengineered type II anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody, demonstrated responses in single-arm studies of patients with relapsed/refractory non-Hodgkin lymphoma. This is the first prospective, randomized study comparing safety and efficacy of obinutuzumab with rituximab in relapsed indolent lymphoma. The primary end point of this study was the overall response rate (ORR) in patients with follicular lymphoma after induction and safety in patients with indolent lymphoma. Patients and Methods A total of 175 patients with relapsed CD20+ indolent lymphoma requiring therapy and with previous response to a rituximab-containing regimen were randomly assigned (1:1) to four once-per-week infusions of either obinutuzumab (1,000 mg) or rituximab (375 mg/m2). Patients without evidence of disease progression after induction therapy received obinutuzumab or rituximab maintenance therapy every 2 months for up to 2 years. Results Among patients with follicular lymphoma (n = 149), ORR seemed higher for obinutuzumab than rituximab (44.6% v 33.3%; P = .08). This observation was also demonstrated by a blinded independent review panel that measured a higher ORR for obinutuzumab (44.6% v 26.7%; P = .01). However, this difference did not translate into an improvement in progression-free survival. No new safety signals were observed for obinutuzumab, and the incidence of adverse events was balanced between arms, with the exception of infusion-related reactions and cough, which were higher in the obinutuzumab arm. Conclusion Obinutuzumab demonstrated a higher ORR without appreciable differences in safety compared with rituximab. However, the clinical benefit of obinutuzumab in this setting remains unclear and should be evaluated within phase III trials.

We evaluated the safety and biologic activity of the BH3 mimetic protein, navitoclax, combined with rituximab, in comparison to rituximab alone. One hundred and eighteen patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) were randomized to receive eight weekly doses of rituximab (arm A), eight weekly doses of rituximab plus daily navitoclax for 12 weeks (arm B) or eight weekly doses of rituximab plus daily navitoclax until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity (arm C). Investigator-assessed overall response rates (complete [CR] and partial [PR]) were 35% (arm A), 55% (arm B, p = 0.19 vs. A) and 70% (arm C, p = 0.0034 vs. A). Patients with del(17p) or high levels of BCL2 had significantly better clinical responses when treated with navitoclax. Navitoclax in combination with rituximab was well tolerated as initial therapy for patients with CLL, yielded higher response rates than rituximab alone and resulted in prolonged progression-free survival with treatment beyond 12 weeks.