No abstract

Chemomodulation of cytarabine by fludarabine has been attributed with a higher antileukemic efficacy, but randomized trials to address this question are rare. We therefore conducted a multicenter, randomized phase III study to evaluate the antileukemic efficacy of adding fludarabine to sequential high-dose cytarabine+idarubicin (SHAI) re-induction chemotherapy in relapsed or refractory acute myeloid leukemia (AML). Patients (n=326, of which 281 were evaluable) were randomly assigned to SHAI (cytarabine, 1 g/m(2) bid, days 1-2 and 8-9 (3 g/m(2) for patients ≤ 60 years with refractory AML or ≥ 2nd relapse); idarubicin 10 mg/m(2) daily, days 3-4 and 10-11) or F-SHAI (SHAI with fludarabine, 15 mg/m(2), 4 h before cytarabine). Although complete remission (CR) rates (35% SHAI and 44% F-SHAI) and overall survival did not differ between both regimens, fludarabine prolonged time to treatment failure from 2.04 to 3.38 months (median, P<0.05). Twenty-seven percent of patients proceeded to allogeneic stem cell transplantation, with a significantly higher number of patients in CR or incomplete remission in the F-SHAI group (22 vs 10%, P<0.01). In conclusion, fludarabine has a beneficial, although moderate, impact on the antileukemic efficacy of high-dose cytarabine-based salvage therapy for relapsed and refractory AML.

Background: Internal tandem duplications (ITD) in the receptor tyrosine kinase FLT3 occur in roughly 25% of younger adult patients (pts) with acute myeloid leukemia (AML). The multi-targeted kinase inhibitor midostaurin combined with intensive chemotherapy has shown activity against AML with FLT3 mutations. However, toxicity and potential drug-drug interactions with strong CYP3A4 inhibitors such as posaconazole may necessitate dose reduction. Aims: To evaluate the impact of age and midostaurin dose-adaptation after intensive induction chemotherapy on response and outcome in AML with FLT3-ITD within the AMLSG 16-10 trial (NCT01477606). Methods: The study included adult pts (age 18-70 years (yrs)) with newly diagnosed FLT3-ITD positive AML enrolled in the ongoing single-arm phase-II AMLSG 16-10 trial. Pts with acute promyelocytic leukemia were not eligible. The presence of FLT3-ITD was analyzed within our diagnostic study AMLSG-BiO (NCT01252485) by Genescan-based DNA fragment-length analysis. Induction therapy consisted of daunorubicin (60 mg/m², d1-3) and cytarabine (200 mg/m², continuously, d1-7); midostaurin 50 mg bid was applied from day 8 until 48h before start of the next treatment cycle. A second cycle was allowed in case of partial remission (PR). For consolidation therapy, pts proceeded to allogeneic hematopoietic-cell transplantation (HCT) as first priority; if alloHCT was not feasible, pts received three cycles of age-adapted high-dose cytarabine (HDAC) in combination with midostaurin starting on day 6. In all pts one-year maintenance therapy with midostaurin was intended. The first patient entered the study in June 2012 and in April 2014, after recruitment of n=147 pts, the study was amended including a sample size increase to 284 pts and a dose reduction to 12.5% of the initial dose of midostaurin in case of co-medication with strong CYP3A4 inhibitors (e.g. posaconazole). This report focuses on age and the comparison between the first (n=147) and the second cohort (n=137) of the study in terms midostaurin dose-adaptation. Results: Patient characteristics were as follows: median age 54 yrs (range, 18-70; younger, 68% < 60 yrs; older, 32% ≥ 60 yrs); median white cell count 44.7G/l (range 1.1-1543 G/l); karyotype, n=161 normal, n=16 high-risk according to ELN recommendations; mutated NPM1 n=174 (59%). Data on response to first induction therapy were available in 277 pts; complete remission (CR) including CR with incomplete hematological recovery (CRi) 60%, PR 20%, refractory disease (RD) 15%, and death 5%. A second induction cycle was given in 54 pts. Overall response (CR/CRi) after induction therapy was 76% (76%, younger; 76%, older) and death 6% (4%, younger; 10% older). The dose of midostaurin during first induction therapy was reduced in 53% and 71% of patients in cohort-1 and cohort-2, respectively. Reasons for dose reduction were in 58% and 49% toxicity, and in 9% and 23% co-medication in cohort-1 and cohort-2, respectively. No difference in response to induction therapy was noted between cohorts (p=0.81). Median follow-up was 18 months. Overall 146 pts received an alloHCT, 128 in first CR (n=94 younger, n=34 older; n=92 from a matched unrelated and n=36 from a matched related donor). In pts receiving an alloHCT within the protocol in median two chemotherapy cycles were applied before transplant (range 1-4). The cumulative incidence of relapse (CIR) and death after transplant were 13% (SE 3.2%) and 16% (SE 3.5%) without differences (p=0.97, p=0.41, respectively) between younger and older patients. So far maintenance therapy was started in 86 pts, 61 pts after alloHCT and 25 pts after HDAC. Fifty-five adverse events 3°/4° were reported being attributed to midostaurin; cytopenias after alloHCT were the most frequent (29%). CIR in patients starting maintenance therapy was 20% one year after start of maintenance without difference between alloHCT and HiDAC (p=0.99). In addition, no difference in CIR was identified in patients after consolidation with alloHCT or HDAC according to dose reduction of midostaurin during first induction therapy (p=0.43, p=0.98, respectively). Median overall survival was 25 months (younger, 26 months; older 23 months; p=0.15). Conclusions: The addition of midostaurin to intensive induction therapy and as maintenance after alloHCT or HDAC is feasible and effective without an impact of age and dose adaptation on outcome. Disclosures Schlenk: Amgen: Research Funding; Pfizer: Honoraria, Research Funding. Fiedler:GSO: Other: Travel; Pfizer: Research Funding; Kolltan: Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Other: Travel, Patents & Royalties, Research Funding; Gilead: Other: Travel; Ariad/Incyte: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Teva: Other: Travel. Lübbert:Celgene: Other: Travel Funding; Janssen-Cilag: Other: Travel Funding, Research Funding; Ratiopharm: Other: Study drug valproic acid. Greil:Janssen-Cilag: Honoraria; Genentech: Honoraria, Research Funding; Mundipharma: Honoraria, Research Funding; Merck: Honoraria; AstraZeneca: Honoraria; Boehringer-Ingelheim: Honoraria; GSK: Research Funding; Ratiopharm: Research Funding; Cephalon: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria; Bristol-Myers-Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria; Pfizer: Honoraria, Research Funding; Roche: Honoraria, Research Funding; Sanofi Aventis: Honoraria; Eisai: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria, Research Funding. Greiner:BMS: Research Funding. Paschka:ASTEX Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Medupdate GmbH: Honoraria; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria; Pfizer Pharma GmbH: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria. Heuser:Bayer Pharma AG: Research Funding; Karyopharm Therapeutics Inc: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria; Pfizer: Research Funding; BerGenBio: Research Funding; Tetralogic: Research Funding.

Purpose At the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, SARS-CoV-2 was often compared to seasonal influenza. We aimed to compare the outcome of hospitalized patients with cancer infected by SARS-CoV-2 or seasonal influenza including intensive care unit admission, mechanical ventilation and in-hospital mortality. Methods We analyzed claims data of patients with a lab-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 or seasonal influenza infection admitted to one of 85 hospitals of a German-wide hospital network between January 2016 and August 2021. Results 29,284 patients with COVID-19 and 7442 patients with seasonal influenza were included. Of these, 360 patients with seasonal influenza and 1625 patients with COVID-19 had any kind of cancer. Cancer patients with COVID-19 were more likely to be admitted to the intensive care unit than cancer patients with seasonal influenza (29.4% vs 24.7%; OR 1.31, 95% CI 1.00–1.73 p < .05). No statistical significance was observed in the mechanical ventilation rate for cancer patients with COVID-19 compared to those with seasonal influenza (17.2% vs 13.6% OR 1.34, 95% CI 0.96–1.86 p = .09). 34.9% of cancer patients with COVID-19 and 17.9% with seasonal influenza died (OR 2.45, 95% CI 1.81–3.32 p < .01). Risk factors among cancer patients with COVID-19 or seasonal influenza for in-hospital mortality included the male gender, age, a higher Elixhauser comorbidity index and metastatic cancer. Conclusion Among cancer patients, SARS-CoV-2 was associated with a higher risk for in-hospital mortality than seasonal influenza. These findings underline the need of protective measurements to prevent an infection with either COVID-19 or seasonal influenza, especially in this high-risk population.

Myeloid sarcoma or chloroma, an extramedullary myeloid tumor, is observed in a minority of patients with acute non-lymphocytic leukaemia. Very few cases may present without bone marrow involvement (i.e., primary myeloid sarcoma). Among the various sites of disease manifestation reported, solitary bone lesions may occur. Diagnosis and, even more so, assessment of response to systemic therapy is strikingly more difficult than in systemic disease, i.e. acute leukaemia. We report the case of a patient diagnosed with primary myeloid sarcoma involving thoracic vertebral bones and associated with spinal cord compression. Here, positron emission tomography/computer tomography imaging allowed assessment of the initial extent of the disease as well as the response to a combined radiochemotherapeutic approach. A male, 60 years old patient presented with pain in the flanks extending to the left leg. MRI imaging revealed an intraspinal mass in close proximity to the eleventh thoracic vertebral bone. Surgical resection of the mass including biopsy of the vertebral bone allowed the histopathological diagnosis of a myeloid sarcoma. Upon presentation, the assessment of bone marrow and meningeal involvement yielded negative results. MRI imaging revealed changes suggestive of residual manifestations albeit remaining inconclusive with regard to an enhancement secondary to the surgical intervention. PET/CT imaging revealed a distinct signal located to the eleventh vertebral bone as a result of enhanced metabolic turnover (SUV 8.8) that was interpreted as active myelosarcoma tissue. Induction chemotherapy was initiated consisting of high-dose Ara C and Mitoxantrone (HAM). Following induction therapy, PET/CT assessment showed no change in metabolic activity. Extended field radiation therapy was performed, involving the two adjacent upper and lower vertebral bones, with a total dose of 30 Gy. This time, response assessment via PET/CT showed only a slight enhancement in metabolic turnover, suggestive of remission. As a consolidation, high dose Ara C therapy was initiated. Until now the patient is fine and shows no sign of residual myeloid sarcoma. PET/CT in this case was the only method which reliably allowed the assessment of tumor location, extent and activity in a previously operated vertebral bone and, as a tool for the assessment of response, was guiding therapeutic decisions. In our opinion, the exposure to substantial radiation exposure due to PET/CT imaging is outweighed by the obvious diagnostic benefit.