Litzow, Mark R.

Outcomes of acute myeloid leukemia (AML) in elderly patients unfit for intensive chemotherapy is challenging. Hypomethylating agents (HMAs) can be effective in these patients but responses are usually short‐lived. The majority of patients will either have stable disease or progress through therapy. We hereby describe the outcome of these patients at our institution after they fail HMAs. The data on 56 AML patients at Mayo Clinic, Rochester were reviewed. Patients were considered for our study if they received HMA as frontline therapy for their AML. Out of 56 patients, 15 (27%) patients received azacitidine (AZA) and 41 (73%) received decitabine. Complete remission was found in 10 (18%), with overall response of 28% and median response duration of 10 months. Thirteen (81%) out of 16 responders relapsed. Therefore 53 patients were included in the primary or secondary failure analysis with a median overall survival (OS) of 2 months after the date of failure. Out of 53 patients, 12 (23%) received subsequent treatments. None of the 12 patients who got first salvage therapy achieved remission. Five out of the 12 patients received second salvage therapy, 2 (40%) of which achieved CR. Median OS for patients who received subsequent salvage therapies was better than those who did not receive any subsequent therapy after failing HMA (9.5 vs. 2 months, P = .0009). Outcome for patients who have primary or secondary failure is very poor. Our study provides important historical data for future novel therapies, which are sorely needed for these patients.

SummaryThe definition of the myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) subtype ‘MDS with isolated del(5q)’ was expanded to include cases with one additional non‐chromosome 7 based cytogenetic abnormality in the 2016 revised World Health Organization classification. This study applied the revised definition to a large primary MDS cohort, and evaluated the prognostic impact of the additional cytogenetic abnormality. Seventy‐two of 1067 patients (7%) met the ‘MDS with isolated del(5q)’ criteria, 11 (1%) of whom had an additional cytogenetic abnormality. There was no survival difference between patients in whom del(5q) occurred alone, compared to those with one additional cytogenetic abnormality (P = 0·52).

60 Background: A significant number of patients with advanced cancer die in the hospital. Examination of patterns of care and palliative care (PC) involvement may identify opportunities for process of care improvements for this vulnerable population. Methods: Patients were identified using the institutional mortality review system registry (Mayo Clinic hospitals from July, 2013-June, 2014). Within this group, patients with a diagnosis of terminal malignancy were identified by chart review and ICD-9 codes. Patient demographics, clinical characteristics, and use of PC resources were characterized in the last 60 days of life. Results: There were 159 of 924 decedents identified whose primary cause of death was advanced malignancy (Table). Ninety-two patients (57%) had PC consultation during the index admission preceding death, while 31 (19%) patients had seen PC as an outpatient or inpatient prior to index admission. Lack of inpatient PC consultation at index admission was associated with hematologic malignancy (p < 0.001), full code status at death (p 0.009), shorter median time between change of code status to DNR and death (13 vs 67 hrs, p < 0.001), death in the ICU (58% vs 31%, p < 0.001), and presence of code blue (22% vs 5%, p-value = 0.003). Patients who received a PC consultation were less likely to have chemotherapy within 14 days of death (15% vs 37%, p-value = 0.001), and had a median composite aggressive end of life score (6 factor composite score based on utilization in last 30 days of life, higher score indicating more aggressive care) of 3 vs 4 (p 0.002). Conclusions: Inpatient PC consultation for cancer patients who die in the hospital is associated with less aggressive cancer care at end of life. The single-institution patient population and small sample size are the limitations of our study. [Table: see text]

PURPOSE: To study the prognostic value of plasmablastic morphology after autologous stem-cell transplantation for relapsed or primary refractory myeloma. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Seventy-five patients were studied. Investigators blinded to the clinical details of the individual cases reviewed bone marrow aspirate slides to determine plasmablastic classification. Plasmablasts were defined using strict, well-described criteria. Plasmablastic morphology was considered to be present (plasmablastic myeloma) when 2% or more plasmablasts were present in the plasma-cell population. RESULTS: Patients underwent transplantation 5 to 88 months (median, 20 months) after the initial diagnosis of myeloma. Twenty-eight percent of patients had plasmablastic morphology. A significantly greater proportion of patients with plasmablastic morphology had abnormal cytogenetics compared with those with nonplasmablastic classification (73% v 31%, respectively; P = .003). The overall survival rate measured from the time of transplantation was significantly worse in patients with plasmablastic morphology compared with those without (median survival time, 5 months v 24 months, respectively; P < .001). Progression-free survival time was shortened also, with a median time of 4 months compared with 12 months, respectively (P < .001). In the multivariate analysis, plasmablastic classification was the most powerful prognostic factor after transplantation for both overall (P = .001) and progression-free survival rates (P < .001). We also identified three risk groups based on plasmablastic morphology: plasma-cell labeling index, lactate dehydrogenase, and cytogenetics. The median overall survival time was 38 months when none of these factors was abnormal, 17 months with one abnormal factor, and 8 months with two or more abnormal factors (P < .001). CONCLUSION: Plasmablastic morphology is a powerful independent predictor of poor survival rate after autologous stem-cell transplantation for relapsed or primary refractory myeloma.