Patient-reported treatment burden of chronic immune thrombocytopenia therapies

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Chronic immune thrombocytopenia (ITP) is a debilitating autoimmune disorder that causes a reduction in blood platelets and increased risk of bleeding. ITP is currently managed with various pharmacologic therapies and splenectomy.</p> <p>This study was conducted to assess patient perceived and reported treatment side effects, as well as the perceived burden or bother, and need to reduce or stop treatment, associated with these side effects among adult patients with chronic ITP.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>A Web-enabled survey was administered to members of a US-based ITP patient support group. Patients reported demographic and clinical characteristics, ITP treatments' side effects for treatments received since diagnosed, level of bother (or distress), and need to reduce or stop treatment, associated with side effects. Current and past exposure was assessed for five specific treatment types: corticosteroids (CS), intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg), anti-D immunoglobulin (anti-D), rituximab (RT), and splenectomy (SPL), as well as for other patient-referenced therapies (captured as "other").</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The survey was completed by 589 patients; 78% female, 89% white, mean age 48 years (SD = 14.71), and 68% reported a typical low platelet count of < 50,000/μL. Current or past treatment with CS was reported by 92% (n = 542) of patients, 56% (n = 322) for IVIg, 36% (n = 209) for anti-D, 36% (n = 213) for RT, and 39% (n = 227) for SPL. A substantial proportion of CS-treated patients reported side effects (98%, <it>P </it>< 0.05), were highly bothered by their side effects (53.1%, <it>P </it>< 0.05), and reported the need to stop or reduce treatment due to side effects (37.8%, <it>P </it>< 0.05). Among patients reporting side effects of treatment, significant associations were noted for the number of side effects, aggregate bother of reported side effects, and the need to stop or reduce treatment (all <it>P </it>< 0.05).</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Current ITP treatments, particularly corticosteroids, are associated with multiple bothersome side effects that may lead to patients stopping or reducing therapy. Open, informed and complete communication between clinician and patient regarding both the benefits and the side effects of ITP treatment may better prepare patients for their prescribed regimens.</p

The EHA Research Roadmap:Platelet Disorders

In 2016, the European Hematology Association (EHA) published the EHA Roadmap for European Hematology Research1 aiming to highlight achievements in the diagnostics and treatment of blood disorders, and to better inform European policy makers and other stakeholders about the urgent clinical and scientific needs and priorities in the field of hematology. Each section was coordinated by 1 to 2 section editors who were leading international experts in the field. In the 5 years that have followed, advances in the field of hematology have been plentiful. As such, EHA is pleased to present an updated Research Roadmap, now including 11 sections, each of which will be published separately. The updated EHA Research Roadmap identifies the most urgent priorities in hematology research and clinical science, therefore supporting a more informed, focused, and ideally a more funded future for European hematology research. The 11 EHA Research Roadmap sections include Normal Hematopoiesis; Malignant Lymphoid Diseases; Malignant Myeloid Diseases; Anemias and Related Diseases; Platelet Disorders; Blood Coagulation and Hemostatic Disorders; Transfusion Medicine; Infections in Hematology; Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation; CAR-T and Other Cellbased Immune Therapies; and Gene Therapy

Phase II Study of Cetuximab in Combination with Docetaxel in Patients with Recurrent and/or Metastatic Squamous Cell Carcinoma of the Head and Neck after Platinum-Containing Therapy: A Multicenter Study of the Arbeitsgemeinschaft Internistische Onkologie

Background: Cetuximab and docetaxel have single-agent activity in squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (SCCHN). The efficacy of their combination was evaluated in platinum-pretreated patients with recurrent and/or metastatic SCCHN. Patients and Methods: A total of 84 patients were treated with docetaxel 35 mg/m2 weekly for a maximum of 6 cycles and concomitant cetuximab 250 mg/m2 weekly until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint was the objective response rate and secondary endpoints included the response rate in relation to platinum sensitivity, progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and toxicity. Results: Nine (11%) patients achieved a partial response and 34 (40%) stable disease, resulting in a disease control rate of 51%. Response to treatment was 49% in previously platinum-sensitive and 50% in previously platinum-resistant disease. The median PFS was 3.1 months and the median OS 6.7 months. The most common grade 3 or 4 adverse events were mucositis (8%), pneumonia (8%), fatigue (8%) and skin reactions (14%). Sepsis occurred in 3 patients. Conclusion: Cetuximab plus docetaxel is an active treatment regimen with moderate toxicity in SCCHN patients. However, no superiority in comparison with monotherapy could be shown. Responsiveness and survival were independent of previous platinum sensitivity

A novel case of human visceral leishmaniasis from the urban area of the city of Rio de Janeiro: autochthonous or imported from Spain ?

Universidade Federal do Estado do Rio de Janeiro. Centro de Ciências Biológicas e da Saúde. Hospital Universitário Gaffrée e Guinle, 10ª Enfermaria. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brasil.Universidade Federal do Estado do Rio de Janeiro. Centro de Ciências Biológicas e da Saúde. Hospital Universitário Gaffrée e Guinle, 10ª Enfermaria. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brasil.Universidade Federal do Estado do Rio de Janeiro. Centro de Ciências Biológicas e da Saúde. Hospital Universitário Gaffrée e Guinle, 10ª Enfermaria. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brasil.Universidade Federal do Estado do Rio de Janeiro. Centro de Ciências Biológicas e da Saúde. Hospital Universitário Gaffrée e Guinle, 10ª Enfermaria. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brasil.Universidade Federal do Estado do Rio de Janeiro. Centro de Ciências Biológicas e da Saúde. Hospital Universitário Gaffrée e Guinle, 10ª Enfermaria. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brasil.Universidade Federal do Estado do Rio de Janeiro. Centro de Ciências Biológicas e da Saúde. Hospital Universitário Gaffrée e Guinle, 10ª Enfermaria. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brasil.Universidade Federal do Estado do Rio de Janeiro. Centro de Ciências Biológicas e da Saúde. Hospital Universitário Gaffrée e Guinle, 10ª Enfermaria. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brasil.Universidade Federal do Estado do Rio de Janeiro. Centro de Ciências Biológicas e da Saúde. Hospital Universitário Gaffrée e Guinle, 10ª Enfermaria. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brasil.Universidade Federal do Estado do Rio de Janeiro. Centro de Ciências Biológicas e da Saúde. Hospital Universitário Gaffrée e Guinle, 10ª Enfermaria. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brasil.Universidade Federal do Estado do Rio de Janeiro. Centro de Ciências Biológicas e da Saúde. Hospital Universitário Gaffrée e Guinle. Serviço de Anatomia Patológica. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brasil.Fundação Oswaldo Cruz. Instituto Nacional de Infectologia Evandro Chagas. Laboratório de Pesquisa Clínica e Vigilância em Leishmanioses. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brasil.Fundação Oswaldo Cruz. Instituto Nacional de Infectologia Evandro Chagas. Laboratório de Pesquisa Clínica e Vigilância em Leishmanioses. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brasil.Fundação Oswaldo Cruz. Instituto Nacional de Infectologia Evandro Chagas. Laboratório de Pesquisa Clínica e Vigilância em Leishmanioses. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brasil.Fundação Oswaldo Cruz. Instituto Nacional de Infectologia Evandro Chagas. Laboratório de Pesquisa Clínica e Vigilância em Leishmanioses. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brasil.Fundação Oswaldo Cruz. Instituto Nacional de Infectologia Evandro Chagas. Laboratório de Pesquisa Clínica e Vigilância em Leishmanioses. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brasil.Fundação Oswaldo Cruz. Instituto Nacional de Infectologia Evandro Chagas. Laboratório de Pesquisa Clínica e Vigilância em Leishmanioses. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brasil

The European Hematology Association Roadmap for European Hematology Research. A Consensus Document

Abstract The European Hematology Association (EHA) Roadmap for European Hematology Research highlights major achievements in diagnosis and treatment of blood disorders and identifies the greatest unmet clinical and scientific needs in those areas to enable better funded, more focused European hematology research. Initiated by the EHA, around 300 experts contributed to the consensus document, which will help European policy makers, research funders, research organizations, researchers, and patient groups make better informed decisions on hematology research. It also aims to raise public awareness of the burden of blood disorders on European society, which purely in economic terms is estimated at Euro 23 billion per year, a level of cost that is not matched in current European hematology research funding. In recent decades, hematology research has improved our fundamental understanding of the biology of blood disorders, and has improved diagnostics and treatments, sometimes in revolutionary ways. This progress highlights the potential of focused basic research programs such as this EHA Roadmap. The EHA Roadmap identifies nine sections in hematology: normal hematopoiesis, malignant lymphoid and myeloid diseases, anemias and related diseases, platelet disorders, blood coagulation and hemostatic disorders, transfusion medicine, infections in hematology, and hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. These sections span 60 smaller groups of diseases or disorders. The EHA Roadmap identifies priorities and needs across the field of hematology, including those to develop targeted therapies based on genomic profiling and chemical biology, to eradicate minimal residual malignant disease, and to develop cellular immunotherapies, combination treatments, gene therapies, hematopoietic stem cell treatments, and treatments that are better tolerated by elderly patients. Received December 15, 2015. Accepted January 27, 2016. Copyright © 2016, Ferrata Storti Foundatio

The European Hematology Association Roadmap for European Hematology Research: a consensus document

The European Hematology Association (EHA) Roadmap for European Hematology Research highlights major achievements in diagnosis and treatment of blood disorders and identifies the greatest unmet clinical and scientific needs in those areas to enable better funded, more focused European hematology research. Initiated by the EHA, around 300 experts contributed to the consensus document, which will help European policy makers, research funders, research organizations, researchers, and patient groups make better informed decisions on hematology research. It also aims to raise public awareness of the burden of blood disorders on European society, which purely in economic terms is estimated at €23 billion per year, a level of cost that is not matched in current European hematology research funding. In recent decades, hematology research has improved our fundamental understanding of the biology of blood disorders, and has improved diagnostics and treatments, sometimes in revolutionary ways. This progress highlights the potential of focused basic research programs such as this EHA Roadmap. The EHA Roadmap identifies nine ‘sections’ in hematology: normal hematopoiesis, malignant lymphoid and myeloid diseases, anemias and related diseases, platelet disorders, blood coagulation and hemostatic disorders, transfusion medicine, infections in hematology, and hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. These sections span 60 smaller groups of diseases or disorders. The EHA Roadmap identifies priorities and needs across the field of hematology, including those to develop targeted therapies based on genomic profiling and chemical biology, to eradicate minimal residual malignant disease, and to develop cellular immunotherapies, combination treatments, gene therapies, hematopoietic stem cell treatments, and treatments that are better tolerated by elderly patients

Retroperitoneal hematoma after bone marrow biopsy: the first cut should not be the deepest

Bone marrow biopsies are standard hematology procedures. We report the case of a patient with acute myeloid leukemia who developed retroperitoneal hematoma after the procedure. The bleeding was stopped with endovascular embolization and coiling. This case raises several issues about the standards for bone marrow biopsies and discusses the approach to patients with bleeding risk factors. We also provide a literature review