Back to Authors

Saliba, Antoine N

0000-0001-5134-7336

Mayo Clinic

Division of Hematology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA.

Citations 39

Outcomes of venetoclax‐based therapy in chronic phase and blast transformed chronic myelomonocytic leukemia

American Journal of Hematology | August 24, 2021 | Volume: 96 | Issue: 11 | Pages: No page available

10.1002/ajh.26334 | PMID 34428328

The Lebanese healthcare sector: The point of exsanguination

American Journal of Hematology | August 20, 2021 | Volume: 96 | Issue: 11 | Pages: No page available

10.1002/ajh.26331 | PMID 34416043

Psycho‐oncology in the Arab world: The time is now

Psycho-Oncology | August 14, 2021 | Volume: 31 | Issue: 1 | Pages: 148-151

10.1002/pon.5778 | PMID 34390087

Immune‐related hematologic adverse events in the context of immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy

American Journal of Hematology | June 17, 2021 | Volume: 96 | Issue: 10 | Pages: No page available

10.1002/ajh.26273 | PMID 34137072

Outcomes of COVID-19 in Patients With Cancer: A Closer Look at Pre-Emptive Routine Screening Strategies

JCO Oncology Practice | June 14, 2021 | Volume: 17 | Issue: 9 | Pages: e1382-e1393

10.1200/op.21.00177 | PMID 34125579

PURPOSE: The benefit of routine pre-emptive screening for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infections in patients with cancer before cancer-directed therapies is unclear. Herein, we characterize the outcomes of a cohort of patients with cancer who were diagnosed with COVID-19 by routine screening (RS) in comparison with those diagnosed on the basis of clinical suspicion or exposure history (nonroutine screening [NRS]). METHODS: A multisite prospective observational study was conducted at three major and five satellite campuses of the Mayo Clinic Cancer Center between March 18 and July 31, 2020. The primary outcome was COVID-19–related hospital admission. Secondary outcomes included intensive care unit admissions and all-cause mortality. RESULTS: Five thousand four hundred fifty-two patients underwent RS in the outpatient setting only, and 44 (0.81%) were diagnosed with COVID-19. RS detected 19 additional patients from the scheduled inpatient admissions for surgical or interventional procedures or inpatient chemotherapy. One hundred sixty-one patients were diagnosed with COVID-19 on the basis of NRS. COVID-19–related hospitalization rate (17.5% v 26.7%; P = .14), intensive care unit admission (1.6% v 5.6%; P = .19), and mortality (4.8% v 3.7%; P = .72) were not significantly different between the RS and NRS groups. In the multivariable analysis, age ≥ 60 years (odds ratio, 4.4; P = .023) and an absolute lymphocyte count ≤ 1.4 × 109/L (odds ratio, 9.2; P = .002) were independent predictors of COVID-19–related hospital admission. CONCLUSION: The COVID-19 positivity rate was low on the basis of RS. Comparing the hospital admission and mortality outcomes with the NRS cohort, there were no significant differences. The value of routine pre-emptive screening of asymptomatic patients with cancer for COVID-19 remains low.
Association of a Remote Patient Monitoring (RPM) Program With Reduced Hospitalizations in Cancer Patients With COVID-19

JCO Oncology Practice | June 4, 2021 | Volume: 17 | Issue: 9 | Pages: e1293-e1302

10.1200/op.21.00307 | PMID 34085535

PURPOSE: The goal of this study was to assess the impact of an interdisciplinary remote patient monitoring (RPM) program on clinical outcomes and acute care utilization in cancer patients with COVID-19. METHODS: This is a cross-sectional analysis following a prospective observational study performed at Mayo Clinic Cancer Center. Adult patients receiving cancer-directed therapy or in recent remission on active surveillance with polymerase chain reaction–confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection between March 18 and July 31, 2020, were included. RPM was composed of in-home technology to assess symptoms and physiologic data with centralized nursing and physician oversight. RESULTS: During the study timeframe, 224 patients with cancer were diagnosed with COVID-19. Of the 187 patients (83%) initially managed in the outpatient setting, those who did not receive RPM were significantly more likely to experience hospitalization than those receiving RPM. Following balancing of patient characteristics by inverse propensity score weighting, rates of hospitalization for RPM and non-RPM patients were 2.8% and 13%, respectively, implying that the use of RPM was associated with a 78% relative risk reduction in hospital admission rate (95% CI, 54 to 102; P = .002). Furthermore, when hospitalized, these patients experienced a shorter length of stay and fewer prolonged hospitalizations, intensive care unit admissions, and deaths, although these trends did not reach statistical significance. CONCLUSION: The use of RPM and a centralized virtual care team was associated with a reduction in hospital admission rate and lower overall acute care resource utilization among cancer patients with COVID-19.
Outcomes of cardiac resynchronization therapy in patients with chemotherapy‐induced cardiomyopathy

Pacing and Clinical Electrophysiology | February 16, 2021 | Volume: 44 | Issue: 4 | Pages: 625-632

10.1111/pace.14196 | PMID 33592678

AbstractBackgroundSeveral chemotherapy agents are associated with the development of non‐ischemic cardiomyopathy (NIC). When chemotherapy‐induced cardiomyopathy (CHIC) is associated with left bundle branch block (LBBB) and a left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) 35% or lower, cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is often utilized to improve cardiac function and relieve symptoms.ObjectiveTo determine the echocardiographic and clinical outcomes of CRT in patients with CHIC.MethodsThe study included 29 patients with CHIC (CHIC group) and 58 patients with other types of NIC (control group) who underwent CRT implantation between 2004 and 2017. The primary endpoints were changes in LVEF, left ventricular end‐systolic diameter (LVESD), and left ventricular end‐diastolic diameter (LVEDD) at 6–18 months after CRT. The secondary outcomes included changes in left ventricular global longitudinal strain (GLS), systolic strain rate (SRS), early diastolic strain rate (SRE), and overall survival.ResultsOut of 29 patients with CHIC, 62.1% received chemotherapy for lymphoma, 13.7% for breast cancer, and 24.1% for sarcoma. The agent implicated in 93.1% of the patients was an anthracycline. Half of the patients had LBBB. The mean baseline LVEF was 28% ± 8%. The mean baseline QRS duration was 146 ± 26 ms. Twenty‐eight patients had post‐CRT follow‐up data. CRT was associated with improvement in echocardiographic outcomes in the CHIC group and the control group. There was no difference in overall survival between the two groups (log‐rank p = .148).ConclusionCRT improves left ventricular function and reverses remodeling in patients with CHIC.
A land in agony: COVID‐19, economic collapse, political corruption, and a deadly blast

American Journal of Hematology | October 21, 2020 | Volume: 96 | Issue: 1 | Pages: No page available

10.1002/ajh.26029 | PMID 33085779

Aetiology and outcomes of secondary myelofibrosis occurring in the context of inherited platelet disorders: A single institutional study of four patients

British Journal of Haematology | June 22, 2020 | Volume: 190 | Issue: 5 | Pages: No page available

10.1111/bjh.16897 | PMID 32567678