Remote home monitoring (virtual wards) for confirmed or suspected COVID-19 patients:a rapid systematic review

Background: the aim of this review was to analyze the implementation and impact of remote home monitoring models (virtual wards) for confirmed or suspected COVID-19 patients, identifying their main components, processes of implementation, target patient populations, impact on outcomes, costs and lessons learnt. Methods: we carried out a rapid systematic review on models led by primary and secondary care across seven countries (US, Australia, Canada, The Netherlands, Ireland, China, UK). The main outcomes included in the review were: impact of remote home monitoring on virtual length of stay, escalation, emergency department attendance/reattendance, admission/readmission and mortality. The search was updated on February 2021. We used the PRISMA statement and the review was registered on PROSPERO (CRD: 42020202888). Findings: the review included 27 articles. The aim of the models was to maintain patients safe in the appropriate setting. Most models were led by secondary care and confirmation of COVID-19 was not required (in most cases). Monitoring was carried via online platforms, paper-based systems with telephone calls or (less frequently) through wearable sensors. Models based on phone calls were considered more inclusive. Patient/career training was identified as a determining factor of success. We could not reach substantive conclusions regarding patient safety and the identification of early deterioration due to lack of standardized reporting and missing data. Economic analysis was not reported for most of the models and did not go beyond reporting resources used and the amount spent per patient monitored. Interpretation: future research should focus on staff and patient experiences of care and inequalities in patients' access to care. Attention needs to be paid to the cost-effectiveness of the models and their sustainability, evaluation of their impact on patient outcomes by using comparators, and the use of risk-stratification tools

Peripheral Blood Hematopoietic Stem Cells for Transplantation of Hematological Diseases from Related, Haploidentical Donors after Reduced-Intensity Conditioning

AbstractIn a multicenter collaboration, we carried out T cell–replete, peripheral blood stem cell (PBSC) transplantations from related, HLA-haploidentical donors with reduced-intensity conditioning (RIC) and post-transplantation cyclophosphamide (Cy) as graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) prophylaxis in 55 patients with high-risk hematologic disorders. Patients received 2 doses of Cy 50 mg/kg i.v. on days 3 and 4 after infusion of PBSC (mean, 6.4 × 106/kg CD34+ cells; mean, 2.0 × 108/kg CD3+ cells). The median times to neutrophil (500/μL) and platelet (>20,000/μL) recovery were 17 and 21 days respectively. All but 2 of the patients achieved full engraftment. The 1-year cumulative incidences of grade II and grade III acute GVHD were 53% and 8%, respectively. There were no cases of grade IV GVHD. The 2-year cumulative incidence of chronic GHVD was 18%. With a median follow-up of 509 days, overall survival and event-free survival at 2 years were 48% and 51%, respectively. The 2-year cumulative incidences of nonrelapse mortality and relapse were 23% and 28%, respectively. Our results suggest that PBSC can be substituted safely and effectively for bone marrow as the graft source for haploidentical transplantation after RIC

Pomalidomide – An Appraisal of Its Clinical Development and Role in the Treatment of Relapsed/Refractory Multiple Myeloma

Pomalidomide is a distinct immunomodulatory agent with significant activity in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). The optimal treatment schedule in patients with RRMM who have received multiple lines of treatment, including bortezomib and lenalidomide, is 4 mg/day on days 1–21 of a 28-day cycle in combination with weekly low-dose dexamethasone. Improved responses and outcomes relative to traditional therapies continue to be confirmed in recently completed and ongoing trials. Pomalidomide exhibits direct tumoricidal, immunomodulatory, anti-angiogenic and anti-inflammatory activities, which facilitate combination therapy with agents with complementary mechanisms of action, resulting in greater anti-myeloma effects than single-agent therapy or previous combination therapies. For example, in combination with proteasome inhibitors and traditional chemotherapeutic agents in doublet or triplet regimens, pomalidomide provides high rates of durable response, and represents an important new treatment option for patients with RRMM requiring effective new therapies. Additionally, pomalidomide maintains its efficacy and tolerability profile in difficult-to-treat patients, including the elderly, patients with poor cytogenetics and those with renal impairment. This review summarises the clinical development of pomalidomide and discusses this effective agent for the treatment of patients with RRMM in the context of current myeloma treatment options, as well as potential future directions to further improve patient outcomes

RNA-seq of newly diagnosed patients in the PADIMAC study leads to a bortezomib/lenalidomide decision signature.

Improving outcomes in multiple myeloma will involve not only development of new therapies but also better use of existing treatments. We performed RNA sequencing on samples from newly diagnosed patients enrolled in the phase 2 PADIMAC (Bortezomib, Adriamycin, and Dexamethasone Therapy for Previously Untreated Patients with Multiple Myeloma: Impact of Minimal Residual Disease in Patients with Deferred ASCT) study. Using synthetic annealing and the large margin nearest neighbor algorithm, we developed and trained a 7-gene signature to predict treatment outcome. We tested the signature in independent cohorts treated with bortezomib- and lenalidomide-based therapies. The signature was capable of distinguishing which patients would respond better to which regimen. In the CoMMpass data set, patients who were treated correctly according to the signature had a better progression-free survival (median, 20.1 months vs not reached; hazard ratio [HR], 0.40; confidence interval [CI], 0.23-0.72; P = .0012) and overall survival (median, 30.7 months vs not reached; HR, 0.41; CI, 0.21-0.80; P = .0049) than those who were not. Indeed, the outcome for these correctly treated patients was noninferior to that for those treated with combined bortezomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone, arguably the standard of care in the United States but not widely available elsewhere. The small size of the signature will facilitate clinical translation, thus enabling more targeted drug regimens to be delivered in myeloma.Wellcome Trust, Bloodwise, Cancer Research UK

Evaluation of GCS-100 as a therapy for myeloma

EThOS - Electronic Theses Online ServiceGBUnited Kingdo

Pomalidomide plus low-dose dexamethasone in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma and renal impairment: Results from a phase ii trial

Purpose Renal impairment (RI) limits treatment options in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). Here, we prospectively studied pomalidomide plus low-dose dexamethasone (LoDEX) in patients with RRMM and moderate or severe RI, including those receiving hemodialysis. Patients and Methods MM-013, a noncomparative, European phase II trial, enrolled three patient cohorts: moderate RI (cohort A; estimated glomerular filtration rate, 30 to, 45 mL/min/1.73 m2); severe RI (cohort B; estimated glomerular filtration rate,, 30 mL/min/1.73 m2); and severe RI that requires hemodialysis (cohort C). Patients received pomalidomide 4 mg/d on days 1 to 21 and LoDEX 20 or 40 mg once per week in 28-day cycles. The primary end point was overall response rate. Results Of 81 enrolled patients (33, 34, and 14 patients in cohorts A, B, and C, respectively), 13 were still receiving treatment at data cutoff (January 28, 2017). Overall response rates were 39.4%, 32.4%, and 14.3%, with a median duration of response of 14.7 months, 4.6 months, and not estimable, respectively. Of importance, 100%, 79.4%, and 78.6% of patients, respectively, achieved disease control. With a median follow-up of 8.6 months, median overall survival was 16.4 months, 11.8 months, and 5.2 months, respectively. Complete renal responses were observed only in cohort A (18.2%), and no patients in cohort C became hemodialysis independent. Grade 3 and 4 hematologic treatment-emergent adverse events and pomalidomide discontinuations as a result of treatment-emergent adverse events occurred more frequently in cohort C. Pomalidomide pharmacokinetics were comparable among the three renal cohorts. Conclusion Pomalidomide 4 mg/d plus LoDEX is efficacious in patients with RRMM with moderate or severe RI, including those who had more advanced disease and required hemodialysis. The safety profile was acceptable among the three groups, and no new safety signals were observed