Clinical features associated with COVID-19 outcome in multiple myeloma: first results from the International Myeloma Society data set

The primary cause of morbidity and mortality in patients with multiple myeloma(MM) is an infection. Therefore there is great concern about the susceptibility to the outcome of COVID-19 infected patients with MM. This retrospective study describes the baseline characteristics and outcome data of COVID-19 infection in 650 patients with plasma cell disorders, collected by the International Myeloma Society to understand the initial challenges faced by myeloma patients during COVID-19 pandemic. Analysis were performed for hospitalized MM patients. Among hospitalized patinets, the median age was 69 years, and nearly all patients(96%) had MM. Approximately 36% were recently diagnosed(2019-2020), and 54% of patients were receiving first-line therapy. Thirty-three percent of patients have died, with significant geographic variability, ranging from 27% to 57% of hospitalized patients. Univariate analysis identified age, ISS3, high-risk disease, renal disease, suboptimal myeloma control(active or progressive disease), and one or more comorbidities as risk factors for higher rates of death. Neither history of transplant, including within a year of COVID-19 diagnosis, nor other anti-MM treatments were associated with outcomes. Multivariate analysis found that only age, high-risk MM, renal disease, and suboptimal MM control remained independent predictors of adverse outcome with COVID-19 infection. The management of MM in the era of COVID-19 requires careful consideration of patient and disease-related factors to decrease the risk of acquiring COVID-19 infection, while not compromising disease control through appropriate MM treatment. This study provides initial data to develop recommendations for the management of MM patients with COVID-19 infection

Continuous low-dose cyclophosphamide and methotrexate combined with celecoxib for patients with advanced cancer

BACKGROUND: Combined therapy of metronomic cyclophosphamide, methotrexate and high-dose celecoxib targeting angiogenesis was used in a phase II trial. METHODS: Patients with advanced cancer received oral cyclophosphamide 50 mg o.d., celecoxib 400 mg b.d. and methotrexate 2.5 mg b.d. for two consecutive days each week. Response was determined every 8 weeks; toxicity was evaluated according to CTC version 2.0. Plasma markers of inflammation, coagulation and angiogenesis were measured. RESULTS: Sixty-seven of 69 patients were evaluable for response. Twenty-three patients had stable disease (SD) after 8 weeks, but there were no objective responses to therapy. Median time to progression was 57 days. There was a low incidence of toxicities. Among plasma markers, levels of tissue factor were higher in the SD group of patients at baseline, and levels of both angiopoietin-1 and matrix metalloproteinase-9 increased in the progressive disease group only. There were no changes in other plasma markers. CONCLUSION: This metronomic approach has negligible activity in advanced cancer albeit with minimal toxicity. Analysis of plasma markers indicates minimal effects on endothelium in this trial. These data for this particular regimen do not support basic tenets of metronomic chemotherapy, such as the ability to overcome resistant tumours by targeting the endothelium

Cardiac toxicity of trastuzumab in metastatic breast cancer patients previously treated with high-dose chemotherapy: a retrospective study

HER-2 overexpression is associated to a poor prognosis in high-risk and metastatic breast cancer (MBC) patients treated with high-dose chemotherapy (HDC). HER-2 status is also a predictive factor and when trastuzumab is administered in combination with or sequentially to chemotherapy, a significant disease-free and/or overall survival improvement has been observed in HER-2+ early and MBC. Unfortunately, in both settings, trastuzumab is associated with an increased risk of cardiac dysfunction (CD). We have reviewed the clinical charts of HER-2-overexpressing MBC patients treated with trastuzumab after HDC. Age, baseline left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), radiation therapy on cardiac area, exposure to anthracycline, single or multiple transplant, high-dose agents, trastuzumab treatment duration were recorded as potential risk factors. In total, 53 patients have been included in the analysis. Median LVEF at baseline was 60.5%; at the end of trastuzumab (data available for 28 patients only), it was 55% (P=0.01). Five out of the 28 (17.9%) patients experienced CD. Two out of 53 (3.8%) patients developed a congestive heart failure. Age ⩾50 years and multiple transplant procedure were potential risk factors for CD. The overall incidence of CD observed in this population of HER-2+ MBC patients treated with trastuzumab after HDC is not superior to that reported with concomitant trastuzumab and anthracyclines. However, patients with age ⩾50 years or receiving multiple course of HDC should be considered at risk for CD

How to calculate the dose of chemotherapy

Body surface area-dosing does not account for the complex processes of cytotoxic drug elimination. This leads to an unpredictable variation in effect. Overdosing is easily recognised but it is possible that unrecognised underdosing is more common and may occur in 30% or more of patients receiving standard regimen. Those patients who are inadvertently underdosed are at risk of a significantly reduced anticancer effect. Using published data, it can be calculated that there is an almost 20% relative reduction in survival for women receiving adjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer as a result of unrecognised underdosing. Similarly, the cure rate of cisplatin-based chemotherapy for advanced testicular cancer may be reduced by as much as 10%. The inaccuracy of body surface area-dosing is more than an inconvenience and it is important that methods for more accurate dose calculation are determined, based on the known drug elimination processes for cytotoxic chemotherapy. Twelve rules for dose calculation of chemotherapy are given that can be used as a guideline until better dose-calculation methods become available. Consideration should be given to using fixed dose guidelines independent of body surface area and based on drug elimination capability, both as a starting dose and for dose adjustment, which may have accuracy, safety and financial advantages