Varenicline Combined With Oral Nicotine Replacement Therapy and Smartphone-Based Medication Reminders for Smoking Cessation: Feasibility Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND: Varenicline and oral nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) have each been shown to increase the likelihood of smoking cessation, but their combination has not been studied. In addition, smoking cessation medication adherence is often poor, thus, challenging the ability to evaluate medication efficacy. OBJECTIVE: This study examined the effects of combined varenicline and oral NRT and smartphone medication reminders on pharmacotherapy adherence and smoking abstinence among adults enrolled in smoking cessation treatment. METHODS: A 2×2 factorial design was used. Participants (N=34) were randomized to (1) varenicline + oral NRT (VAR+NRT) or varenicline alone (VAR) and (2) smartphone medication reminder messages (REM) or no reminder messages (NREM) over 13 weeks. Participants assigned to VAR+REM received varenicline reminder prompts, and those assigned to VAR+NRT+REM also received reminders to use oral NRT. The other 2 groups (VAR+NREM and VAR+NRT+NREM) did not receive medication reminders. Participants were not blinded to intervention groups. All participants received tobacco cessation counseling. Smartphone assessments of smoking as well as varenicline and NRT use (if applicable) were prompted daily through the first 12 weeks after a scheduled quit date. Descriptive statistics were generated to characterize the relations between medication and reminder group assignments with daily smoking, daily varenicline adherence, and daily quantity of oral NRT used. Participants completed follow-up assessments for 26 weeks after the quit date. RESULTS: Participants were predominantly White (71%), and half were female (50%). On average, participants were 54.2 (SD 9.4) years of age, they smoked an average of 19.0 (SD 9.0) cigarettes per day and had smoked for 34.6 (SD 12.7) years. Descriptively, participants assigned to VAR+NRT reported more days of smoking abstinence compared to VAR (29.3 vs 26.3 days). Participants assigned to REM reported more days of smoking abstinence than those assigned to NREM (40.5 vs 21.8 days). Participants assigned to REM were adherent to varenicline on more days compared to those assigned to NREM (58.6 vs 40.5 days), and participants assigned to VAR were adherent to varenicline on more days than those assigned to VAR + NRT (50.7 vs 43.3 days). In the subsample of participants assigned to VAR+NRT, participants assigned to REM reported more days where ≥5 pieces of NRT were used than NREM (14.0 vs 7.4 days). Average overall medication adherence (assessed via the Medication Adherence Questionnaire) showed the same pattern as the daily smartphone-based adherence assessments. CONCLUSIONS: Preliminary findings indicated that smoking cessation interventions may benefit from incorporating medication reminders and combining varenicline with oral NRT, though combining medications may be associated with poorer adherence. Further study is warranted. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03722966; https://classic.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03722966

Persistent Postoperative Hiccups

Hiccups are a common and poorly understood pathologic phenomenon. While hiccups often occur suddenly and episodically, they may persist for weeks and sometimes months. There is a paucity of data regarding the precise etiology and optimal treatment for persistent hiccups. Frequently considered a benign and frustrating condition, hiccups are sometimes a presenting symptom for pulmonary embolism and cardiac disease. We present a patient with gastroesophageal reflux disease who developed 11 days of recurrent hiccups following an orthopedic procedure

Current and prospective antibody-based therapies in multiple myeloma

Multiple Myeloma (MM) is a hematologic malignancy involving clonal plasma cell proliferation. Unfortunately, MM remains an incurable disease. Over the past five years, the incorporation of novel monoclonal antibodies has synergized with standard of care to improve patient outcomes in both newly diagnosed MM as well as relapsed and refractory MM. This manuscript reviews current and prospective antibody-based treatments including naked monoclonal antibodies, immunoconjugates, and Bi-specific T-cell engagers (BiTE)

A retrospective analysis of venous thromboembolism trends in chemotherapy‐induced anemia: Red blood cell transfusion versus erythrocyte stimulating agent administration

Abstract Background Patients receiving a variety of chemotherapy regimens often develop chemotherapy‐induced anemia (CIA), which contributes to poor outcomes including increased mortality. Prompt and effective treatment of CIA is essential to prevent fewer chemotherapy dose delays and reductions. Optimal therapy of CIA is controversial and involves the solitary and combined use of intravenous iron, red blood cell (RBC) transfusions, and erythropoietin stimulating agents (ESAs). Despite the baseline coagulopathies present in patients with malignancy, administration of both RBC transfusions and ESAs is associated with venous thromboembolism (VTE). It remains unknown whether the risk of VTE in patients with CIA is greater among patients who receive RBC transfusions or ESAs. Methods A retrospective study analyzed 10,269 University of Pennsylvania Health System patients with malignancies of various type, stage, and histopathology who developed CIA between 2008 and 2017. Using multivariate Cox regression, we determined adjusted hazard ratios (and corresponding 95% confidence intervals) of VTE development after adjusting for RBC and ESA intervention (all during the 90 days following CIA diagnosis). Results Among the 10,269 patients with CIA, 2,642 (25.7%) developed a VTE within the 90‐day period. VTE risk following RBC transfusion (HR = 1.37, 95% CI 1.24‐1.50, P < .001) was more than twice as common as VTE risk following ESA administration (HR = 0.53, 95% CI 0.40‐0.69, P < .001). Conclusion While both RBC transfusion and ESA are independently associated with VTE, our data suggest a greater risk of VTE development with RBC transfusion as compared with ESA

A Phase II Pilot Study of Avelumab in Combination with Hypofractionated Radiotherapy in Patients with Relapsed Refractory Multiple Myeloma

Background: Multiple myeloma (MM) is the 2nd most common hematologic malignancy and remains incurable despite significant treatment advances over the last decade. Patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM), who have exhausted available therapies, have limited treatment options and a median survival as brief as 6 months (Richardson PG et al., Oncology 2010). Immune checkpoint inhibitors (CPI) have dramatically changed treatment paradigms in multiple cancers, with growing evidence that radiation therapy (XRT) may synergize with these agents via the abscopal effect. MM cells express high levels of PD-L1. Preclinical models have demonstrated rejection of murine myeloma when PD-L1 blockade was combined with XRT (Kearl TJ et al., Journal of Immunology 2013), as well as longer survival in myeloma-bearing mice compared to controls (Jing W et al., Journal for ImmunoTherapy of Cancer 2015). Early phase single arm clinical trials with combinations of immunomodulatory drugs (IMiDs) and CPI showed response rates between 33 and 76% (Pianko MJ et al., Stem Cell Investigation 2017)(San Miguel J et al., Blood 2015)(Badros A et al., Blood 2017). However, subsequent phase 3 studies revealed a potential safety signal of this combination (FDA 2017). Nonetheless, a subset of patients appear to attain durable responses (Badros A et al., Blood Advances 2019). CPI combined with other therapies such as XRT, that help to prime the immune system, hold great promise in the treatment of patients with RRMM. Herein, we describe our phase II study of avelumab, an anti-PD-L1 IgG1 antibody with potential antibody-dependent cellular cytotoxic properties, in combination with XRT in patients with RRMM. Methods: Trial Design: The primary endpoint of this trial is to assess the systemic response rate with the combination of avelumab and XRT in the treatment of extramedullary plasmacytomas or active lytic lesions in patients with RRMM using the 2016 IMWG response criteria. Secondary endpoints include determination of complete response rate, progression-free survival, and overall survival. Patients will undergo bone marrow biopsies and imaging (PET/CT and DW-MRI) at baseline, during disease response evaluations, and at the end of treatment. Treatment: Treatment consists of a 4-week lead-in with avelumab at a flat dose of 800mg IV every 2 weeks followed by concurrent XRT of 5Gy for 5 consecutive days directed toward the plasmacytoma/lytic lesion (Figure 1). Monotherapy avelumab, 800mg IV every 2 weeks, will continue indefinitely until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Analysis: This is a single arm trial with a Simon minimax two-stage phase II trial design that will enroll up to 27 patients. The first stage will enroll 13 evaluable patients, and if 0 of the 13 have a clinical response, then no further patients will be accrued due to futility. If 1 or more of the first 13 patients have a response, then accrual will continue until a total of 27 evaluable patients have been treated in the second stage. This will provide a two-sided alpha of 5% and a Power of 80% to rule out an ORR of 5% in favor of a response rate of 20%. Response fractions and time to event endpoints will be reported along with 90 and 95% two-sided confidence intervals with nominal p values. Eligibility: Patients must have previously treated relapsed MM or RRMM refractory to, ineligible for, or intolerant of, available myeloma therapies and have ≥ 1 extramedullary plasmacytoma and/or lytic lesion. Lesions must be amenable to, and clinically indicated for, treatment with localized XRT. Eligible patients must have documented evidence of progressive disease on, or after, their most recent regimen as defined by the IMWG criteria. They must have achieved at least a minimal response to one or more prior regimens. Exclusionary criteria include patients with: clinically unstable lesions where a delay in XRT may be detrimental; active autoimmune diseases or history of serious autoimmune-related disorders; uncontrolled intercurrent illnesses; concurrent use of immunosuppressant medications; and recent or current anti-cancer treatment prior to the first dose of avelumab. Current Enrollment: This study is actively enrolling patients to the first stage. At the time of this submission, 4 patients have been enrolled and have received at least one dose of trial therapy. Clinical trial registry number: NCT03910439. Figure Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare. OffLabel Disclosure: avelumab not approved in myelom