Citations

The primary objective of treatment in essential thrombocythemia (ET) is to prevent thromboembolic complications. In this regard, advanced age and thrombosis history have long distinguished “low” from “high” risk patients. More recently, JAK2V617F and cardiovascular (CV) risk factors were identified as additional modifiers, leading to the development of a 3‐tiered International Prognostic Score of Thrombosis for ET (IPSET‐thrombosis): “low,” “intermediate,” and “high”. The international data set used to develop IPSET‐thrombosis was recently re‐analyzed in order to quantify the additional pro‐thrombotic effect of JAK2V617F and CV risk factors in specific risk subcategories. The revised IPSET‐thrombosis identified four risk categories based on three adverse variables (thrombosis history, age >60 years and JAK2V617F): very low (no adverse features), low (presence of JAK2V617F), intermediate (age >60 years) and high (presence of thrombosis history or presence of both advanced age and JAK2V617F). In this study of 585 patients with ET (median age 68 years; 61% female), we validated the revised IPSET‐thrombosis by confirming significant differences in thrombosis risk between “very low” and “low” (HR 2.4, 95% CI 1.1 − 5.3) and between “intermediate” and “high” (HR 2.3, 95% CI 1.1 − 5.2) risk patients. Furthermore, in multivariable analysis, only JAK2V617F (HR=1.8, CI= 1.07 − 2.94) and history of thrombosis (HR=2.1, CI= 1.20 − 3.58) were independently predictive of future thrombotic events. The revised IPSET‐thrombosis needs confirmation in prospective studies, especially in terms of risk‐adapted therapy that includes the need for aspirin therapy in very low risk, twice‐daily aspirin therapy for low risk and cytoreductive therapy for low or intermediate risk patients. Am. J. Hematol. 91:390–394, 2016. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Chronic lymphocytic leukemia/small lymphocytic lymphoma (CLL) patients requiring initial therapy are often older and frailer and unsuitable candidates for standard chemoimmunotherapy regimens. Shorter duration combination monoclonal antibody (mAb) therapy using alemtuzumab and rituximab has been shown to be effective and tolerable treatment for CLL. Standard dose anti‐CD20 mAb therapy causes loss of CD20 expression by surviving CLL cells, which can be minimized by decreasing the mAb dose. We report a randomized phase II clinical trial enrolling older (≥ 65 years) patients (median age 76 years, n = 31) with treatment naïve progressive CLL. Patients received 8‐12 weeks of standard subcutaneous alemtuzumab with either intravenous standard (375 mg/m2 weekly)(n = 16) or low dose (20 mg/m2 3x week)(n = 15) rituximab. This study was closed before full accrual because the manufacturer withdrew alemtuzumab for treatment of CLL. The overall response rate was 90% with an 45% complete response rate, median progression‐free survival of 17.9 months and no significant differences in outcome between the low and standard dose rituximab arms. The major toxicities were cytopenia and infection with one treatment fatality caused by progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy but no other opportunistic infections. Combination mAb therapy was effective and tolerable treatment for older and frailer patients with progressive CLL, achieving a high rate of complete remissions. These data support the role of mAb in therapy for less fit CLL patients and the further study of low dose higher frequency anti‐CD20 mAb therapy as a potentially more effective use of anti‐CD20 mAb in the treatment of CLL. Am. J. Hematol. 91:308–312, 2016. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

ObjectiveTo develop a new evidence‐based, pharmacologic treatment guideline for rheumatoid arthritis (RA).MethodsWe conducted systematic reviews to synthesize the evidence for the benefits and harms of various treatment options. We used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology to rate the quality of evidence. We employed a group consensus process to grade the strength of recommendations (either strong or conditional). A strong recommendation indicates that clinicians are certain that the benefits of an intervention far outweigh the harms (or vice versa). A conditional recommendation denotes uncertainty over the balance of benefits and harms and/or more significant variability in patient values and preferences.ResultsThe guideline covers the use of traditional disease‐modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs), biologic agents, tofacitinib, and glucocorticoids in early (<6 months) and established (≥6 months) RA. In addition, it provides recommendations on using a treat‐to‐target approach, tapering and discontinuing medications, and the use of biologic agents and DMARDs in patients with hepatitis, congestive heart failure, malignancy, and serious infections. The guideline addresses the use of vaccines in patients starting/receiving DMARDs or biologic agents, screening for tuberculosis in patients starting/receiving biologic agents or tofacitinib, and laboratory monitoring for traditional DMARDs. The guideline includes 74 recommendations: 23% are strong and 77% are conditional.ConclusionThis RA guideline should serve as a tool for clinicians and patients (our two target audiences) for pharmacologic treatment decisions in commonly encountered clinical situations. These recommendations are not prescriptive, and the treatment decisions should be made by physicians and patients through a shared decision‐making process taking into account patients’ values, preferences, and comorbidities. These recommendations should not be used to limit or deny access to therapies.

Objective To develop a new evidence‐based, pharmacologic treatment guideline for rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Methods We conducted systematic reviews to synthesize the evidence for the benefits and harms of various treatment options. We used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology to rate the quality of evidence. We employed a group consensus process to grade the strength of recommendations (either strong or conditional). A strong recommendation indicates that clinicians are certain that the benefits of an intervention far outweigh the harms (or vice versa). A conditional recommendation denotes uncertainty over the balance of benefits and harms and/or more significant variability in patient values and preferences. Results The guideline covers the use of traditional disease‐modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs), biologic agents, tofacitinib, and glucocorticoids in early (<6 months) and established (≥6 months) RA. In addition, it provides recommendations on using a treat‐to‐target approach, tapering and discontinuing medications, and the use of biologic agents and DMARDs in patients with hepatitis, congestive heart failure, malignancy, and serious infections. The guideline addresses the use of vaccines in patients starting/receiving DMARDs or biologic agents, screening for tuberculosis in patients starting/receiving biologic agents or tofacitinib, and laboratory monitoring for traditional DMARDs. The guideline includes 74 recommendations: 23% are strong and 77% are conditional. Conclusion This RA guideline should serve as a tool for clinicians and patients (our two target audiences) for pharmacologic treatment decisions in commonly encountered clinical situations. These recommendations are not prescriptive, and the treatment decisions should be made by physicians and patients through a shared decision‐making process taking into account patients’ values, preferences, and comorbidities. These recommendations should not be used to limit or deny access to therapies.

Abstract Background: PI3K/Akt activation is downstream of the B cell receptor (BCR) signaling cascade and is critical to mediate the interactions between CLL B-cell and bone marrow stroma which support leukemic survival. MK-2206 is a potent oral allosteric Akt inhibitor and we have demonstrated in vitro synergism with bendamustine (B) to induce CLL apoptosis. MK-2206 selectively abolishes BCR-stimulated cytokines CCL3, CCL4, CCL2, and IL-2Ra and significantly inhibits the BCR signaling pathway (Ding, BJH, 2013). We sought to assess the safety, maximal tolerated dose (MTD) and efficacy of MK-2206 in combination with B-rituximab (BR) in relapsed and refractory CLL/SLL patients in a phase I/II trial (NCCTG N1087 Alliance). Methods: Previously treated symptomatic CLL/SLL patients with up to 3 prior lines of therapy and ECOG performance status of 0-2 were eligible. Patients with 17p deletion or prior treatment with B were excluded. A standard phase I design was used to determine the MTD of MK-2206 in combination with BR (B 70mg/m2 for 2 days per cycle; R cycle 1: 375 mg/m2, cycle 2-6: 500 mg/m2). Phase II employed the MTD to evaluate safety and efficacy of the combination. Response was evaluated 2 months after the last cycle of therapy per IWCLL 2008 criteria. Results: 13 patients with a median age of 68 years (range 44-75) and 1.2 prior lines of therapy were treated. CLL FISH showed: del(11q) in 4 (31%), trisomy 12 in 2 (15%), del(13q) in 3 (23%), del(6q) (8%), del(17cen) (8%) and normal results in 2 (15%). IGHV was unmutated in 10 (91%) and mutated in 1 patient (9%) and was missing in 2 cases. ZAP-70 was positive in 8 (73%) and negative in 3 patients (27%). CD38 was positive in 8 (62%) and negative in 5 patients (38%). 70% of patients had received prior chemoimmunotherapy. At 90 mg of MK-2206, 1/6 patients experienced a DLT of grade 3 febrile neutropenia and hemolysis. 2/6 patients on the 135 mg dose experienced a DLT. One patient had grade 3 febrile neutropenia and one patient had a grade 3 acneiform rash. MTD was determined to be MK-2206 90 mg. The most common grade 3/4 adverse events were neutropenia (46%) including febrile neutropenia (23%), diarrhea (15%) and thrombocytopenia (15%). The most common all-grade toxicities were neutropenia (69%), thrombocytopenia (62%), anemia (54%), nausea (54%), diarrhea (39%), rash (38%), and hyperglycemia (31%). 10 patients were treated at 90 mg and 3 patients were treated at the 135 mg dose. The ORR was 92% (n=12). Responses were: 3 CR (23%), 2 CR with incomplete marrow recovery (CRi) (15%), 1 clinical CR (CCR) (8%) without marrow confirmation, 1 nodular partial remission (nPR) (8%), 5 PR (38%), and 1 progressive disease (8%). Median follow-up was 20 months (6-31 months). Median PFS in the CR/CRi group was not reached (NR) with 100% of patients progression free versus 12 months (95% CI 2 months-NR) if CR/CRi was not achieved (p=0.027). Median overall survival was NR in either the CR/CRi or non-CR/CRi groups but 2 deaths occurred in the latter group (p=0.44). One patient developed Richter transformation and died at 15 months and a second patient who had achieved PR died from autoimmune hemolytic anemia and fungal infection at 27 months. Two out of five patients who achieved CR or CRi had bone marrow MRD negative status at the final response evaluation. Conclusions: The Akt inhibitor MK-2206 administered at 90 mg once weekly in combination with BR is tolerated in patients with relapsed or refractory CLL and compares favorably to BR alone (59% ORR and 9% CR, Fischer, JCO, 2011). An ORR of 92% was observed with a 38% of patients achieving CR or CRi. The trial was terminated prematurely due to withdrawal of sponsor support, however further testing of Akt inhibition is needed given the promising results. Citation Format: Jeremy T. Larsen, Tait D. Shanafelt, Jose F. Leis, Betsy R. LaPlant, Timothy G. Call, Clive S. Zent, Curtis A. Hanson, Charles Erlichman, Thomas M. Habermann, Craig B. Reeder, Deborah A. Bowen, Michael Conte, Justin C. Boysen, Charla R. Secreto, Connie E. Lesnick, Renee C. Tschumper, Diane F. Jelinek, Neil E. Kay, Wei Ding. The Akt inhibitor MK-2206 in combination with rituximab and bendamustine demonstrates efficacy in relapsed/refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia: Updated results from the NCCTG N1087 Alliance study. [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the AACR Special Conference: Targeting the PI3K-mTOR Network in Cancer; Sep 14-17, 2014; Philadelphia, PA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Mol Cancer Ther 2015;14(7 Suppl):Abstract nr B02.