Citations

Abstract Background: Given a potential risk of extravasation with vesicants and irritants, central venous catheters (CVCs), such as port-a-cath or peripherally inserted central catheters (PICC), are commonly used for the administration of anthracycline-based chemotherapy. However, CVC placement can result in treatment delay, deep vein thrombosis (DVT), catheter malfunction, and added burdens (eg, financial, travel, etc), partly due to the need for regular flushing. Peripheral intravenous (PIV) access is often utilized in the academic setting with select frontline chemotherapy regimens. However, there is limited data reporting on the safety of PIV in this setting. This large, multicenter RWA evaluated the use and associated complications of PIV and CVC for administering CHOP- or ABVD-based chemotherapy in patients (pts) with lymphoma. Methods: We conducted a retrospective RWA across 8 U.S. centers among pts aged ≥18 years with non-Hodgkin lymphoma and Hodgkin lymphoma who were consecutively treated with ABVD or CHOP-based anthracycline chemotherapy via PIV or CVC access between 2010-2024. Choice of catheter placement was at the discretion of the pt's treating physician. Detailed baseline and safety data were collected. The primary outcome was extravasation; secondary outcomes included infiltration, DVT, cellulitis, erythema, and pain. Standard definitions of extravasation and other complications were used (Jackson-Rose J. CJON 2017). Rates of complications were compared via Fischer exact testing. Results: A total of 1,414 pts were included in the analysis: 790 in each arm (ie, PIV vs CVC). Of these, 624 were unique to each group, while 166 pts received chemotherapy via both modalities (PIV and CVC during the treatment course). Overall, 78.9% of pts completed all treatment as planned via PIV. Median age was 63 years (IQR 45–75) in the PIV group and 61 years (IQR 40–73) in the CVC group. Male sex comprised 57% vs 51%, ECOG 0–1 performance status was 83% vs 76%, and advanced-stage disease (stage III/IV) was present in 51% vs 62%, respectively. Lymphoma subtypes were comparable: DLBCL/high-grade/B-cell NOS (54.5% vs 56.1%), Hodgkin lymphoma (27.2% vs 27.5%), T-cell lymphoma (12.4% vs 6.6%), and indolent/mantle cell lymphoma (5.6% vs 6.7%). Among those receiving chemotherapy via CVC, 78.5% were treated through a port-a-cath and 21.5% via PICC. CHOP-based and ABVD-based regimens were administered to 68% and 32% of PIV pts, and 69.6% and 30.4% of CVC pts, respectively. A total of 4,084 (PIV) vs 3,859 (CVC) treatment cycles were delivered, corresponding to 4,347 (PIV) vs 4,884 (CVC) anthracycline infusion days. There was 1 documented case of extravasation in the CVC group and 2 suspected cases in the PIV group (p=0.9); for PIV, this translates to a per pt risk of 0.3% (or 0.05% of infusion days). The two PIV cases involved elderly women with DLBCL receiving CHOP. Both developed localized symptoms post-infusion and were treated conservatively (DMSO/warm compresses or dexrazoxane/ice), with full symptom resolution within 1 week and 1 day, respectively. No tissue or vascular injury occurred. Additionally, there were no significant differences between the PIV and CVC groups in the rates of induration/swelling (1.8% vs 2.0%, p=0.85), phlebitis/cellulitis (2.4% vs 2.4%, p=0.9), venous thromboembolism (VTE; 1.4% vs 2.0%, p=0.32), or erythema (3.8% vs 5.1%, p=0.27). Pain or tenderness at the infusion site (8.5% vs 2.9%, p=0.001) and infiltration (1.4 vs 0.13%, p=0.006) were more frequent in the PIV group. Chronic vascular complications related to prior VTE was slightly lower in the PIV group (0.13% vs 0.9%, p=0.06), but not significant. Additional details from a propensity score-matched analysis will be presented at the meeting. Conclusions: This is the largest known analysis to date evaluating the safety of PIV access for anthracycline-based chemotherapy in >1,500 lymphoma pts over a recent 15-year period, representing >9,000 total treatments with CHOP or ABVD. PIV access was found to be safe and associated with a low rate of serious complications. Moreover, extravasation was rare and there was not a significant difference observed between PIV and CVC use. While PIV use was associated with higher rates of local pain/tenderness and infiltration, the events were uncommon and self-limited. Despite the widespread default to CVC placement in many centers, these findings support the selective use of PIV in appropriate pts as elucidated here.

Abstract Background Due to the high mortality of immune thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura (iTTP), rapid clinical evaluation and early intervention are crucial. The PLASMIC score remains a valuable and widely used tool for predicting severe ADAMTS13 deficiency. However, recent studies have shown variable performance across different populations. In addition, its variables may often be missing during initial presentation. Refining the accuracy of early iTTP evaluation could improve timely recognition and treatment, while reducing unnecessary interventions in those eventually ruled out for iTTP. Machine learning advancements offer several advantages for enhancing clinical prediction models: the ability to assess continuous variables, capture complex interactions between them, and handle missing data. We previously utilized XGBoost (extreme gradient boosting) to develop a novel machine learning tool, TTP-14, which improved upon the PLASMIC score's predictive performance in repeat 10-fold cross-validation achieving an AUC of 0.91 (Blood. 2024;144[Suppl 1]:2617). TTP-14 generates a predicted probability for iTTP, expressed as a continuous percentage estimate of iTTP diagnostic likelihood, and is also able to do so with missing variables. However, it has not previously been externally validated. Objectives To externally validate the ability of TTP-14 to predict iTTP diagnosis and improve upon the PLASMIC score. Methods We performed an external validation of TTP-14 using an independent cohort of patients with suspected iTTP at the Mayo Clinic. These patients were not part of the original multi-center development cohort of 106 iTTP patients from the University of Utah, Case Western Reserve University, Rochester Regional Health, and University of Illinois. For the validation cohort, we identified patients who underwent ADAMTS13 activity testing between 2010 and 2025 for evaluation of thrombotic microangiopathy at the Mayo Clinic. iTTP was defined as ADAMTS13 activity <10%, and controls as ADAMTS13 activity >20%. TTP-14 variables were collected at initial presentation: platelet count, lactate dehydrogenase, creatinine, international normalized ratio, reticulocyte percentage, active cancer, indirect bilirubin, mean corpuscular volume, total bilirubin, haptoglobin, neurologic deficit, hemoglobin, age, and history of transplant. Receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) was reported with 95% confidence intervals (CI). While the model provides a continuous estimate and is not categorical, we evaluated clinically meaningful probability thresholds to illustrate performance in decision-relevant zones. Sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) were reported at these select thresholds and analyzed for patients with and without missing variables. Result We included 50 iTTP patients and 56 controls in the external validation cohort. 13 patients had missing PLASMIC variables. TTP-14 achieved an AUC of 0.96 (95% CI: 0.93–0.99), outperforming the PLASMIC score's AUC of 0.90 (95% CI: 0.83–0.96) in the same dataset, and improving upon TTP-14's previously reported cross-validated AUC of 0.91 (95% CI: 0.90–0.92) in the development cohort. Among patients with complete data (n = 93), applying select thresholds for clinical relevance demonstrated: Low risk cut-off (<5% predicted iTTP risk): Sensitivity = 98% Specificity = 71% PPV = 76% NPV = 97% Accuracy = 84% High risk cut-off (≥50% predicted iTTP risk): Sensitivity = 71% Specificity = 98% PPV = 97% NPV = 78% Accuracy = 85% In the full cohort (n = 106) that included those with missing PLASMIC variables, TTP-14 maintained excellent predictive performance with AUC = 0.95 (95% CI: 0.92–0.99). Performance metrics analyzed using the above thresholds also yielded similar results. Conclusion External validation of TTP-14 demonstrated high predictive accuracy for iTTP diagnosis (AUC = 0.96). TTP-14 outperformed the PLASMIC score in the validation cohort (AUC = 0.96 vs 0.90, respectively). TTP-14 offers more flexibility than the PLASMIC score by generating predictions even with incomplete data, and maintained excellent performance in the cohort that included those with missing variables (AUC = 0.95) Its refined accuracy and ability to predict iTTP despite missing data provide a key advantage, offering an alternative tool to improve rapid iTTP diagnosis. TTP-14 may help enhance early recognition and treatment of iTTP while reducing unnecessary interventions in non-TTP patients.

Abstract Consumption of a Western diet and high body mass index (BMI) are risk factors for progression from premalignant phenotypes to multiple myeloma, a hematologic cancer. In the NUTRIVENTION trial (NCT04920084), we administered a high-fiber, plant-based diet (HFPBD; meals for 12 weeks, coaching for 24 weeks) to 23 participants with myeloma precursor states and elevated BMI. The intervention was feasible and improved quality of life and modifiable risk factors: metabolic (BMI, insulin resistance), microbiome (diversity, composition), and immune (inflammation, monocyte subsets). Disease progression trajectory improved (n = 2) or was stable. Findings were translated to Vk*MYC mice modeling the myeloma precursor state, in which a high-fiber diet (HFD) delayed disease progression through improved metabolism and microbiome composition, leading to increased short-chain fatty acid production that reinvigorated antitumor immunity and inhibited tumor growth. These effects from fiber consumption were independent of calorie restriction and weight loss. A HFD is a low-risk intervention that may delay progression to myeloma. Significance: A HFPBD in participants with precursor plasma cell disorders and an elevated BMI improved metabolic, microbiome, and immune biomarkers of disease. In a subset, it may delay progression to myeloma. In mouse models, a HFD delayed progression to myeloma independent of calorie restriction. See related commentary by Fairfield and Reagan, p. 623

Introduction Registrational trials are clinical trials which are used to justify regulatory approval of a new medication by the FDA. However, clinical trials may not be designed around patient-centred outcomes, like overall survival (OS) or quality of life. This disconnect raises concerns about whether current trial designs are truly aligned with the long-term needs and priorities of patients. A comprehensive analysis of trial designs and endpoints is necessary to ensure that future oncological therapies deliver meaningful clinical improvements. Our objective was to describe types of clinical trial design and primary endpoints used for registrational trials, and their trends over time. Research design and methods In this cohort study, the HemOnc database was used to identify registrational trials supporting cancer drug approval from 2004 through 2023. Clinical trial design (escalation, de-escalation, in-class switch, out-of-class switch) and primary endpoint (OS; time-to-event including progression-free survival; response-based endpoint) were characterized. Results Escalation trial designs were more common than in-class switches or out-of-class switches. De-escalation and mixed designs were exceedingly rare. The most common primary endpoint was a composite time-to-event endpoint. Conclusion Most clinical trials leading to FDA approval for cancer-directed therapies employ escalation designs with composite time-to-event endpoints. Designs reflecting paradigm shifts in therapy (in-class switches and out-of-class switches) are sparsely used. This approach raises the concern that trials may increase therapeutic toxicity without delivering meaningful improvements in OS or quality of life.

PURPOSE Although most patients with follicular lymphoma (FL) can expect an indolent course, progressive lymphoma remains the primary cause of death during the first decade after diagnosis. Progression of disease within 24 months (POD24) of starting first-line (1L) immunochemotherapy defines a high-risk population with poor survival, but better risk stratification at diagnosis is needed. METHODS The FLIPI24 model was developed and internally validated to predict 24-month event rates using individual data from 4,485 patients treated with 1L immunochemotherapy from 10 observational cohorts of FL. Overall and cause-specific survival was further evaluated in FLIPI24 risk groups. External validation in the 1L immunochemotherapy setting was performed using the prospective observational Lymphoma Epidemiology of Outcomes (LEO) cohort (N = 565) and three randomized phase III trials (N = 3,192); extension to all patients with FL (any 1L therapy) was performed in the LEO cohort (N = 1,445) and its Molecular Epidemiology Resource subcohort (N = 1,074). RESULTS The FLIPI24 model uses age and four blood-based variables (hemoglobin, lactate dehydrogenase, beta-2 microglobulin, and WBC count). FLIPI24 showed consistent performance across validation and extension data sets, which was superior to existing prognostic tools. Across the four external immunochemotherapy validation data sets, patients with high-risk FLIPI24 (23%-32% of patients) had significantly higher 24-month event rates (22%-35%) and inferior 5-year overall survival (77%-83%) compared with patients with low-risk FLIPI24 (29%-31% of patients, 24-month event rates: 10%-12%; 5-year OS: 96%-97%). Results were consistent when evaluating lymphoma-related death and when extended to all patients with FL. CONCLUSION The FLIPI24 model robustly stratifies, at diagnosis, patients with FL at increased risk of lymphoma-related death versus patients with very low lymphoma-related mortality during the first decade after diagnosis. FLIPI24 can be used to enrich future clinical trial designs in newly diagnosed FL.

PURPOSE STELLAR (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02796261 ) was a phase III, randomized, open-label trial of eflornithine + lomustine versus lomustine monotherapy in patients with recurrent grade 3 astrocytoma. METHODS At trial initiation, eligibility criteria included: age ≥18 years, anaplastic astrocytoma (2016 WHO CNS Tumor classification [WHO CNS4]), first recurrence ≥6 months after radiation and temozolomide (TMZ), Karnofsky performance status ≥70, and no imaging findings consistent with grade 4 glioblastoma. Random assignment (1:1) was stratified by isocitrate dehydrogenase ( IDH ) mutation, age, resection extent, and geography. Patients received eflornithine (2.8 g/m 2 orally, every 8 hours [2 weeks on, 1 week off]) + lomustine (90 mg/m 2 orally, once every 6 weeks), or lomustine monotherapy (110 mg/m 2 once every 6 weeks). The primary end point was overall survival (OS). RESULTS Among 343 patients randomly assigned across 74 sites in eight countries, there was no difference in survival between eflornithine + lomustine and lomustine monotherapy (median OS 23.4 v 20.3 months, hazard ratio [HR], 0.94). Following changes in classification and grading in the 2021 WHO CNS5, a subset analysis of patients with IDH- mutant, grade 3 astrocytoma (n = 196), defined in 2024, before unblinding, showed clinically meaningful improvements in median OS with eflornithine + lomustine versus lomustine monotherapy (34.9 v 23.5 months, HR, 0.64) and median progression-free survival (PFS, 15.8 v 7.2 months, HR, 0.57). No differences were observed among patients with CNS grade 4 disease. Grade ≥3 treatment-emergent adverse events of relevance were related to reversible myelosuppression (eflornithine + lomustine 42% v lomustine monotherapy 29% of patients) and hearing impairment (24% v 0%). No new safety signals were identified. CONCLUSION Clinically meaningful improvements were observed; eflornithine + lomustine doubled PFS and improved OS in patients with recurrent IDH -mutant, grade 3 astrocytoma, but not grade 4 tumors, after prior radiotherapy and TMZ, consistent with its cytostatic mechanism of action.

Aims The aim of this study was to achieve consensus for important topics related to periprosthetic infection (PJI) in orthopaedic oncology, and to identify areas for future research. Methods In January 2024, the Birmingham Orthopaedic Oncology Meeting (BOOM) held in Birmingham, UK, gathered 309 delegates from 53 countries to debate 20 consensus statements on PJI in orthopaedic oncology using a modified Delphi process. Results Of 20 questions and statements on PJI in orthopaedic oncology, none achieved unanimous consensus, 18 achieved strong consensus, one achieved moderate consensus, and one achieved weak consensus. The statements that reached consensus with notable agreement were on the prophylaxis of infection, management of leaking wounds, and surgical strategies for the treatment of PJI. Short-duration antibiotic prophylaxis was deemed as effective as longer courses for lower-risk reconstructions, and aggressive management was recommended for wounds draining beyond five to seven days to prevent deep infection. Furthermore, single-stage, two-stage, and 1.5-stage revision were recognized as valid strategies, with two-stage revision remaining the most reliable. The statements that did not achieve consensus were on the role of debridement, antibiotics, and implant retention and prolonged antibiotic use post-revision. Conclusion The BOOM meeting achieved consensus for important topics on periprosthetic infection in orthopaedic oncology, but highlighted the low quality of the underlying evidence. This study has provided recommendations for the treatment of leaky wounds, duration of postoperative antibiotic prophylaxis, and choice of revision strategy. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2025;107-B(12):1352–1359.