ABSTRACT
Cytokine storm syndrome (CSS), which is frequently fatal, has garnered increased attention with the ongoing coronavirus pandemic. A variety of hyperinflammatory conditions associated with multiorgan system failure can be lumped under the CSS umbrella, including familial hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis (HLH) and secondary HLH associated with infections, hematologic malignancies, and autoimmune and autoinflammatory disorders, in which case CSS is termed macrophage activation syndrome (MAS). Various classification and diagnostic CSS criteria exist and include clinical, laboratory, pathologic, and genetic features. Familial HLH results from cytolytic homozygous genetic defects in the perforin pathway employed by cytotoxic CD8 T lymphocytes and natural killer (NK) cells. Similarly, NK cell dysfunction is often present in secondary HLH and MAS, and heterozygous mutations in familial HLH genes are frequently present. Targeting overly active lymphocytes and macrophages with etoposide and glucocorticoids is the standard for treating HLH; however, more targeted and safer anticytokine (e.g., anti-interleukin-1, -6) approaches are gaining traction as effective alternatives. Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Medicine, Volume 74 is January 2023. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates for revised estimates.
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Histiocytic disorders pose significant diagnostic and management challenges for the clinicians due to diverse clinical manifestations and often non-specific histopathologic findings. Herein, we report the tumor board experience from the first-of-its-kind Histiocytosis Working Group (HWG). MATERIALS AND METHODS: The HWG was established in June 2017 and consists of experts from 10 subspecialties that discuss cases in a multidisciplinary format. We present the outcome of tumor board case discussions during the first 2 years since its inception (June 2017-June 2019). RESULTS: Forty cases with a suspected histiocytic disorder were reviewed at HWG during this time period. Average number of subspecialties involved in HWG case discussion was 5 (range, 2-9). Histiocytosis Working Group tumor board recommendations led to significant changes in the care of 24 (60%) patients. These included change in diagnosis (n = 11, 27%) and change in treatment (n = 13, 33%). CONCLUSION: Our report highlights the feasibility of a multidisciplinary tumor board and its impact on outcomes of patients with histiocytic disorders.
Subject(s)
Histiocytosis , Neoplasms , Histiocytosis/diagnosis , Histiocytosis/pathology , Histiocytosis/therapy , HumansABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has led to delays in patients seeking care for life-threatening conditions; however, its impact on treatment patterns for patients with metastatic cancer is unknown. We assessed the COVID-19 pandemic's impact on time to treatment initiation (TTI) and treatment selection for patients newly diagnosed with metastatic solid cancer. METHODS: We used an electronic health record-derived longitudinal database curated via technology-enabled abstraction to identify 14 136 US patients newly diagnosed with de novo or recurrent metastatic solid cancer between January 1 and July 31 in 2019 or 2020. Patients received care at approximately 280 predominantly community-based oncology practices. Controlled interrupted time series analyses assessed the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic period (April-July 2020) on TTI, defined as the number of days from metastatic diagnosis to receipt of first-line systemic therapy, and use of myelosuppressive therapy. RESULTS: The adjusted probability of treatment within 30 days of diagnosis was similar across periods (January-March 2019 = 41.7%, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 32.2% to 51.1%; April-July 2019 = 42.6%, 95% CI = 32.4% to 52.7%; January-March 2020 = 44.5%, 95% CI = 30.4% to 58.6%; April-July 2020 = 46.8%, 95% CI= 34.6% to 59.0%; adjusted percentage-point difference-in-differences = 1.4%, 95% CI = -2.7% to 5.5%). Among 5962 patients who received first-line systemic therapy, there was no association between the pandemic period and use of myelosuppressive therapy (adjusted percentage-point difference-in-differences = 1.6%, 95% CI = -2.6% to 5.8%). There was no meaningful effect modification by cancer type, race, or age. CONCLUSIONS: Despite known pandemic-related delays in surveillance and diagnosis, the COVID-19 pandemic did not affect TTI or treatment selection for patients with metastatic solid cancers.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Neoplasms, Second Primary , COVID-19/epidemiology , Humans , Neoplasm Recurrence, Local/epidemiology , Neoplasms, Second Primary/epidemiology , Pandemics , Time-to-Treatment , United States/epidemiologyABSTRACT
Histiocytic disorders are an exceptionally rare group of diseases with diverse manifestations and a paucity of approved treatments, thereby leading to various challenges in their diagnosis and management. With the discovery of novel molecular targets and the incorporation of targeted agents in the management of various adult histiocytic disorders, their management has become increasingly complex. In an attempt to improve the understanding of the clinical features and management of common adult histiocytic disorders (Langerhans cell histiocytosis, Erdheim-Chester disease, Rosai-Dorfman disease, and hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis), we created this document based on existing literature and expert opinion.