Early and late follow-up of patients with Hodgkin’s lymphoma. Recommendations of the Polish Lymphoma Research Group

Optymalny sposób monitorowania chorych na chłoniaka Hodgkina (HL) po zakończeniu leczenia przeciwnowotworowego nie jest do końca ustalony i opiera się w głównej mierze na praktyce klinicznej. Przez pierwsze lata obserwacji największy nacisk kładzie się na wykrycie ewentualnej wznowy, następnie większe znaczenie ma monitorowanie późnych powikłań terapii. W artykule przedstawiono dostępne zalecenia oraz rekomendacje monitorowania chorych po leczeniu chłoniaka Hodgkina przygotowane przez Polską Grupę Badawczą Chłoniaków.Post-treatment follow-up of patients with Hodgkin’s lymphoma has not yet been fully optimised and is still basedmainly on clinical practice and experience. During the first years of follow-up, the principal aims are to detectrelapse and monitor any post-treatment complications or side effects. Such as they are, current guidelines onfollow-up are herein considered and discussed, together with those now recommended by the Polish LymphomaResearch Group

Analysis of ibrutinib efficacy in a subgroup of chronic lymphocytic leukemia patients with 17p deletion: observational study of the Polish Adult Leukemia Group (PALG)

BackgroundThe 17p deletion is regarded as the strongest poor prognostic factor in chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). Results of recently performed clinical trials have suggested that ibrutinib significantly improves the outcome in this patient group.AimThe study aimed at analyzing the efficacy and adverse events profile of ibrutinib monotherapy in CLL patients with 17p deletion treated in routine clinical practice outside clinical trials.Materials and MethodsClinical response and adverse events profile of ibrutinib monotherapy were assessed in thirty-five CLL patients with 17p deletion treated within the ibrutinib named patients program in Poland.ResultsOverall response rate was 80% (28/35 patients) with median observation time of 24.2 months (range 0,1 – 30,9). Complete remission was observed in 5 patients (14.3%), partial remission in 11 (31.4%), partial remission with lymphocytosis in 13 (37.1%), whereas stable disease and progression was noted in 4 (11.4%) and 1 (2.9%) respectively. Response was not assessed in 1 patient. Median progression-free survival was 29.5 months, whereas median overall survival was not reached. Eleven patients died (7 because of infection, 1 of CLL progression, 1 of sudden cardiac death, 1 of disseminated breast cancer and 1 of unknown causes). In 13 patients (37.1%) at least one 3 or 4 grade adverse event occurred. In 11 patients (31.4%) the treatment was temporary withheld or the dose reduced due to adverse events.ConclusionIbrutinib is characterized by high clinical efficacy and acceptable toxicity in CLL patients with 17p deletion in daily clinical practice

Multiple Myeloma Treatment in Real-world Clinical Practice : Results of a Prospective, Multinational, Noninterventional Study

Funding Information: The authors would like to thank all patients and their families and all the EMMOS investigators for their valuable contributions to the study. The authors would like to acknowledge Robert Olie for his significant contribution to the EMMOS study. Writing support during the development of our report was provided by Laura Mulcahy and Catherine Crookes of FireKite, an Ashfield company, a part of UDG Healthcare plc, which was funded by Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc, and Janssen Global Services, LLC. The EMMOS study was supported by research funding from Janssen Pharmaceutical NV and Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Funding Information: The authors would like to thank all patients and their families and all the EMMOS investigators for their valuable contributions to the study. The authors would like to acknowledge Robert Olie for his significant contribution to the EMMOS study. Writing support during the development of our report was provided by Laura Mulcahy and Catherine Crookes of FireKite, an Ashfield company, a part of UDG Healthcare plc, which was funded by Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc, and Janssen Global Services, LLC. The EMMOS study was supported by research funding from Janssen Pharmaceutical NV and Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Funding Information: M.M. has received personal fees from Janssen, Celgene, Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Sanofi, Novartis, and Takeda and grants from Janssen and Sanofi during the conduct of the study. E.T. has received grants from Janssen and personal fees from Janssen and Takeda during the conduct of the study, and grants from Amgen, Celgene/Genesis, personal fees from Amgen, Celgene/Genesis, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Novartis, and Glaxo-Smith Kline outside the submitted work. M.V.M. has received personal fees from Janssen, Celgene, Amgen, and Takeda outside the submitted work. M.C. reports honoraria from Janssen, outside the submitted work. M. B. reports grants from Janssen Cilag during the conduct of the study. M.D. has received honoraria for participation on advisory boards for Janssen, Celgene, Takeda, Amgen, and Novartis. H.S. has received honoraria from Janssen-Cilag, Celgene, Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Novartis, and Takeda outside the submitted work. V.P. reports personal fees from Janssen during the conduct of the study and grants, personal fees, and nonfinancial support from Amgen, grants and personal fees from Sanofi, and personal fees from Takeda outside the submitted work. W.W. has received personal fees and grants from Amgen, Celgene, Novartis, Roche, Takeda, Gilead, and Janssen and nonfinancial support from Roche outside the submitted work. J.S. reports grants and nonfinancial support from Janssen Pharmaceutical during the conduct of the study. V.L. reports funding from Janssen Global Services LLC during the conduct of the study and study support from Janssen-Cilag and Pharmion outside the submitted work. A.P. reports employment and shareholding of Janssen (Johnson & Johnson) during the conduct of the study. C.C. reports employment at Janssen-Cilag during the conduct of the study. C.F. reports employment at Janssen Research and Development during the conduct of the study. F.T.B. reports employment at Janssen-Cilag during the conduct of the study. The remaining authors have stated that they have no conflicts of interest. Publisher Copyright: © 2018 The AuthorsMultiple myeloma (MM) remains an incurable disease, with little information available on its management in real-world clinical practice. The results of the present prospective, noninterventional observational study revealed great diversity in the treatment regimens used to treat MM. Our results also provide data to inform health economic, pharmacoepidemiologic, and outcomes research, providing a framework for the design of protocols to improve the outcomes of patients with MM. Background: The present prospective, multinational, noninterventional study aimed to document and describe real-world treatment regimens and disease progression in multiple myeloma (MM) patients. Patients and Methods: Adult patients initiating any new MM therapy from October 2010 to October 2012 were eligible. A multistage patient/site recruitment model was applied to minimize the selection bias; enrollment was stratified by country, region, and practice type. The patient medical and disease features, treatment history, and remission status were recorded at baseline, and prospective data on treatment, efficacy, and safety were collected electronically every 3 months. Results: A total of 2358 patients were enrolled. Of these patients, 775 and 1583 did and did not undergo stem cell transplantation (SCT) at any time during treatment, respectively. Of the patients in the SCT and non-SCT groups, 49%, 21%, 14%, and 15% and 57%, 20%, 12% and 10% were enrolled at treatment line 1, 2, 3, and ≥ 4, respectively. In the SCT and non-SCT groups, 45% and 54% of the patients had received bortezomib-based therapy without thalidomide/lenalidomide, 12% and 18% had received thalidomide/lenalidomide-based therapy without bortezomib, and 30% and 4% had received bortezomib plus thalidomide/lenalidomide-based therapy as frontline treatment, respectively. The corresponding proportions of SCT and non-SCT patients in lines 2, 3, and ≥ 4 were 45% and 37%, 30% and 37%, and 12% and 3%, 33% and 27%, 35% and 32%, and 8% and 2%, and 27% and 27%, 27% and 23%, and 6% and 4%, respectively. In the SCT and non-SCT patients, the overall response rate was 86% to 97% and 64% to 85% in line 1, 74% to 78% and 59% to 68% in line 2, 55% to 83% and 48% to 60% in line 3, and 49% to 65% and 36% and 45% in line 4, respectively, for regimens that included bortezomib and/or thalidomide/lenalidomide. Conclusion: The results of our prospective study have revealed great diversity in the treatment regimens used to manage MM in real-life practice. This diversity was linked to factors such as novel agent accessibility and evolving treatment recommendations. Our results provide insight into associated clinical benefits.publishersversionPeer reviewe

Early and late follow-up of patients with Hodgkin’s lymphoma. Recommendations of the Polish Lymphoma Research Group

Post-treatment follow-up of patients with Hodgkin’s lymphoma has not yet been fully optimised and is still based mainly on clinical practice and experience. During the first years of follow-up, the principal aims are to detect relapse and monitor any post-treatment complications or side effects. Such as they are, current guidelines on follow-up are herein considered and discussed, together with those now recommended by the Polish Lymphoma Research Group