De novo CD5+ diffuse large B-cell lymphoma: Adverse outcomes with and without stem cell transplantation in a large, multicenter, rituximab treated cohort: CD5 positivity affects DLBCL outcome

De novo CD5+ diffuse large B-cell lymphomas (DLBCL) are a distinct subgroup of DLBCL with poor prognosis. However the role of rituximab-containing therapy and salvage stem cell transplantation in this patients’ population remain to be defined. We retrospectively reviewed clinical features and outcomes of 102 patients with de novo CD5+ DLBCL treated with rituximab-containing therapy at 9 different institutions. By Hans’ criteria, 64 patients had activated B-cell (ABC) subtype, 24 germinal center B-cell (GCB) subtype, and 14 were not evaluated. No patients had a myc translocation. Eighty-three patients were treated with rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, prednisone (R-CHOP), 7 with rituximab, etoposide, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, prednisone (R-EPOCH) and 6 with R-CHOP with methotrexate, 3 g/m2. The overall response rate to frontline therapy was 85%. The 3-year progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) for all patients were 40% and 65%, respectively. The 3-year PFS for ABC- and GCB-subtypes was 34% and 45%, respectively. The 3-year OS for ABC- and GCB-subtypes was 62% and 67%, respectively. The median time to second treatment failure was 3 months and 1 month for ABC- and GCB-subtypes, respectively. Twenty of 28 (71%) transplanted patients with autologous, allogeneic, or both, relapsed. This study confirms the poor prognosis of de novo CD5+ DLBCL in a large multi-center cohort despite initial rituximab-containing chemotherapy and suggests that stem cell transplantation fails to salvage the majority of these patients. Approaches to prevent recurrence and/or novel therapies for relapsed disease are needed for this subgroup of DLBCL patients

Transplant Physicians’ Attitudes on Candidacy for Allogeneic Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation (HCT) in Older Patients: The Need for a Standardized Geriatric Assessment (GA) Tool

Background Despite improvements in conditioning regimens and supportive care having expanded the curative potential of HCT, underutilization of HCT in older adults persists (Bhatt VR et al, BMT 2017). Therefore, we conducted a survey of transplant physicians (TP) to determine their perceptions of the impact of older age (≥60 years) on HCT candidacy and utilization of tools to gauge candidacy. Methods We conducted a 23-item, online cross-sectional survey of adult physicians recruited from the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research between May and July 2019. Results 175/770 (22.7%) TP completed the survey; majority of respondents were 41-60 years old, male, and practicing in a teaching hospital. Over 75% were at centers performing ≥50 HCT per year. When considering regimen intensity, most (96%, n=168) had an upper age limit (UAL) for using a myeloablative regimen (MAC), with only 29 physicians (17%) stating they would consider MAC for patients ≥70 years. In contrast, when considering a reduced intensity/non-myeloablative conditioning (RIC/NMA), 8%, (n=13), 54% (n=93), and 20% (n=35) stated that age 70, 75, and 80 years respectively would be the UAL to use this approach, with 18% (n=31) reporting no UAL. TP agreed that Karnofsky Performance Score (KPS) could exclude older pts for HCT, with 39.1% (n=66), 42.6% (n=72), and 11.4% (n=20) requiring KPS of ≥70, 80, and 90, respectively. The majority (n=92, 52.5%) indicated an HCT-comorbidity index threshold for exclusion, mostly ranging from ≥3 to ≥ 5. Almost all (89.7%) endorsed the need for a better health assessment of pre-HCT vulnerabilities to guide candidacy for pts ≥60 with varied assessments being utilized beyond KPS (Figure 1). However, the majority of centers rarely (33.1%) or never (45.7%) utilize a dedicated geriatrician/geriatric-oncologist to assess alloHCT candidates ≥60 yrs. The largest barriers to performing GA included uncertainty about which tools to use, lack of knowledge and training, and lack of appropriate clinical support staff (Figure 2). Approximately half (n=78, 45%) endorsed GA now routinely influences candidacy. Conclusions The vast majority of TP will consider RIC/NMA alloHCT for patients ≥70 years. However, there is heterogeneity in assessing candidacy. Incorporation of GA into a standardized and easily applied health assessment tool for risk stratification is an unmet need. The recently opened BMT CTN 1704 may aid in addressing this gap

Post-Autologous (ASCT) Stem Cell Transplant Therapy in Multiple Myeloma

Autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) is the standard of care in transplant-eligible multiple myeloma patients and is associated with significant improvement in progression-free survival (PFS), complete remission rates (CR), and overall survival (OS). However, majority of patients eventually relapse, with a median PFS of around 36 months. Relapses are harder to treat and prognosis declines with each relapse. Achieving and maintaining best response to initial therapy is the ultimate goal of first-line treatment and sustained CR is a powerful surrogate for extended survival especially in high-risk multiple myeloma. ASCT is often followed by consolidation/maintenance phase to deepen and/or maintain the response achieved by induction and ASCT. Novel agents like thalidomide, lenalidomide, and bortezomib have been used as single agents or in combination. Thalidomide use has been associated with a meaningful improvement in PFS and EFS, however, with substantial side effects. Data with lenalidomide maintenance after-ASCT is favorable, but the optimal duration of lenalidomide maintenance is still unclear. Bortezomib use has been associated with superior outcomes, predominantly in high-risk myeloma patients. Combination regimens utilizing a proteasome inhibitor (i.e., bortezomib) with an immunomodulatory drug (thalidomide or lenalidomide) have provided the best outcomes. This review article serves as a review of the best available evidence in post-ASCT approaches in multiple myeloma

Referring the Common to its Meaning at Ibn Ashour in his Explanation: A Comparative Study

The aim of the study is to clarify the position of Ibn Ashour in referring the common on its meanings one time, presenting his applications for such rule, comparing it with the approaches adopted by other explainers. To achieve the aim of the study, a deductive (editing and enlightenment)  design, an analytical and comparative design to analyze the evidences of Ibn Ashour, its applications and comparing them with other explanation books were used. At the conclusion of this study, the researchers came up with several results, including that referring the common to its meanings at Ibn Ashour is one part of an integrated explanation semantic system he adopts using Quran utterances and structures on all their possible meanings. This may be in the form of referring the common to its meanings- that is the census saying among scholars- has its evident effects in the explanation field as explainer may understand and absorb the various semantic meanings of Quran utterances and structures, which in turn contributes in clarifying that these have extended meanings and semantic structures. This implies that Ibn Ashour rule- referring the common to its meanings- is an active rule and used in the sayings  of explainers

Post-transplant lymphoproliferative disease (PTLD): risk factors, diagnosis, and current treatment strategies

Post-transplant lymphoproliferative diseases (PTLD) are heterogeneous lymphoid disorders ranging from indolent polyclonal proliferations to aggressive lymphomas that complicate solid organ or hematopoietic transplantation. Risk factors for PTLD include viral infections, degree of immunosuppression, recipient age and race, allograft type, and host genetic variations. Clinically, extra-nodal disease is common including 10-15 % presenting with central nervous system (CNS) disease. Most PTLD cases are B cell (5-10 % T/NK cell or Hodgkin lymphoma), while over one-third are EBV-negative. World Health Organization (WHO) diagnostic categories are: early lesions, polymorphic, and monomorphic PTLD; although in practice, a clear separation is not always possible. Therapeutically, reduction in immunosuppression remains a mainstay, and recent data has documented the importance of rituximab +/- combination chemotherapy. Therapy for primary CNS PTLD should be managed according to immunocompetent CNS paradigms. Finally, novel treatment strategies for PTLD have emerged, including adoptive immunotherapy and rational targeted therapeutics (e.g., anti-CD30 based therapy and downstream signaling pathways of latent membrane protein-2A)