Cardiac Safety of Pegylated Liposomal Doxorubicin After Conventional Doxorubicin Exposure in Patients With Sarcoma and Breast Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Lifetime cumulative doses of conventional doxorubicin (>450 mg/m2) are associated with dose-dependent cardiotoxicity. In sarcoma and breast cancer, conventional doxorubicin is often utilized in the adjuvant setting, whereas pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (PLD) is typically reserved for recurrent and metastatic disease. PLD is believed to be associated with reduced cardiotoxicity compared to conventional doxorubicin. Limited data exists evaluating the cardiotoxicity associated with PLD treatment after conventional doxorubicin, especially when doxorubicin lifetime doses approach the established cumulative total lifetime dose of 450-550 mg/m2. This study aims to further qualify the cardiac safety of PLD use in patients who have had prior exposure to conventional doxorubicin. METHODS: This was a single-center, observational, retrospective cohort study conducted in patients ≥18 years with sarcoma or breast cancer who were exposed to conventional doxorubicin from an earlier line of treatment before PLD between January 2010 to May 2022. Patients were evaluated for the presence of cardiac toxicity at any point in their treatment course. Cardiac toxicity was defined as ≥ 10% decrease in left ventricle ejection fraction (LVEF) or a new diagnosis of heart failure within six months after PLD cessation. The time interval between the last conventional doxorubicin exposure and PLD initiation and the time interval between PLD initiation and LVEF monitoring were also analyzed. RESULTS: 494 patients were screened, and 50 met inclusion criteria: eight with sarcoma and 42 with breast cancer. The median lifetime cumulative conventional doxorubicin dose in patients with sarcoma was 450 mg/m2 with a maximum dose of 825 mg/m2 and 240 mg/m2 with a maximum dose of 300 mg/m2 in breast cancer patients. The median lifetime cumulative PLD dose was 105 mg/m2 (range: 35-150 mg/m2) in the sarcoma group and 105 mg/m2 (range: 35-510 mg/m2) in the breast cancer group. A decrease of ≥ 10% in LVEF was not observed in the sarcoma group. Patients with breast cancer had available LVEF data on PLD, and three of these patients experienced ≥ 10% in LVEF drop, with one of these patients diagnosed with heart failure. The average cumulative dose of PLD administered in patients with > 10% decrease in LVEF was 177 mg/m2 and had an average of 3.5 cycles. Five sarcoma patients initiated PLD treatment within two years after conventional doxorubicin exposure, while most breast patients initiated PLD treatment at least 10 years following conventional doxorubicin exposure. The average time from PLD initiation to first and second available LVEF monitoring was one and five months in the sarcoma group and three and eight months in the breast cancer group, respectively. CONCLUSION: PLD administration in patients with prior exposure to conventional doxorubicin appears to be safe, with limited cardiotoxicity in patients with sarcoma and breast cancer. Future research is needed to determine if and how often routine cardiac monitoring is needed for patients on PLD without existing cardiac risk.

Evaluation of direct oral anticoagulants versus low molecular weight heparins for venous thromboembolism treatment in patients with gastrointestinal malignancies.

BACKGROUND: Direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) use in cancer-associated venous thromboembolism (CA-VTE) has increased due to updates in recent guidelines and literature. However, select guidelines caution against DOAC use in patients with gastrointestinal (GI) malignancies due to reported increased bleeding events. The objective of this study was to compare the safety and effectiveness of DOACs versus low-molecular-weight heparins (LMWHs) for CA-VTE treatment in patients with GI malignancies. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This multicenter, retrospective cohort study included patients with primary GI malignancies who received therapeutic anticoagulation with a DOAC or LMWH for CA-VTE between January 1, 2018, and December 31, 2019. The primary outcome was the incidence rate of bleeding events (major, clinically relevant non-major, or minor bleeding events) within a 12-month period following the initiation of therapeutic anticoagulation. The secondary endpoint was the incidence rate of recurrent VTE events within a 12-month period following the start of therapeutic anticoagulation. RESULTS: After screening, 141 patients met inclusion criteria. The incidence rate of all bleeding events significantly differed between DOAC (4.98 events/100 person-months) and LWMH (10.2 events/100 person-months) recipients. The corresponding incidence rate ratio (IRR) with the DOAC group serving as the reference was 2.05 (p = 0.01), with the majority of bleeds in both groups presenting as minor bleeds. No difference was found between the incidence rate of recurrent VTE within a 12-month period of starting therapeutic anticoagulation between groups (IRR 3.08, p = 0.06). CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that DOACs do not pose an additional bleeding risk compared to LMWH in patients with certain GI malignancies. Careful selection of DOAC therapy with respect to bleeding risk is still warranted.

High-dose methotrexate-based regimens with or without vincristine for the treatment of primary central nervous system lymphoma.

BACKGROUND: Primary central nervous system lymphoma (PCNSL) is a rare malignancy with few treatment options. One regimen used for induction is rituximab, high-dose methotrexate (HD-MTX), procarbazine, and vincristine (R-MPV). A common institutional practice is removing vincristine (VCR) from this regimen due to its poor CNS penetration and associated toxicities. The aim of this study was to evaluate how the omission of VCR from HD-MTX-based induction impacted clinical outcomes. METHODS: In a retrospective review, patients with PCNSL who received HD-MTX-based induction therapy between January 1, 2010 and May 31, 2018 were evaluated. Patients were stratified according to treatment into 2 groups, VCR-containing therapy versus no VCR. The primary endpoint was complete response (CR) rate following the completion of induction chemotherapy. Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and adverse event rate. RESULTS: Twenty-nine patients were included: 16 patients in the VCR group and 13 in the non-VCR group. A CR was achieved in 7 (44%) and 5 (38%) (odds ratio [OR] = 1.24; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.28-5.53) patients, respectively. Median OS was 85.3 (95% CI: 20.2-85.3) versus 67.1 months (95% CI: 10.5-NR) and median PFS was 60.7 (95% CI: 9.4-NR) versus 23.7 months (95% CI: 4.7-NR) in the VCR group versus non-VCR group, respectively. The incidence of any grade peripheral neuropathy was higher in the VCR group. CONCLUSIONS: CR rate, OS, and PFS were similar between groups regardless of VCR inclusion. Adverse events were higher in the VCR group. Larger studies are required to further evaluate the efficacy of VCR in PCNSL induction regimens.

Effect of Acid-Suppressive Strategies on Pazopanib Efficacy in Patients With Soft-Tissue Sarcoma.

Pazopanib (PAZ), a tyrosine kinase inhibitor used in the treatment of soft tissue sarcoma (STS), should not be administered with acid-suppressive medications (ASMs) due to decreased drug solubility. Common practice for patients requiring ASM with PAZ is to separate administration by 12 hours; however, there is little real-world evidence describing clinical outcomes using this strategy. The aim of this study was to determine whether concomitant ASM impacted efficacy and adverse event rates in patients with STS receiving PAZ. Medical records were retrospectively reviewed for patients with STS who received PAZ from June 2011 to July 2017. Patients were stratified into two groups, PAZ with or without ASM (PAZ + ASM or PAZ only). The primary objective was to determine whether progression-free survival (PFS) differed between groups. Secondary objectives were to determine overall survival (OS) and occurrence of grade 3/4 toxicities. Ninety-one patients were included in the study, 42 patients in the PAZ + ASM group and 49 in the PAZ only group. Median PFS was significantly shorter in the PAZ + ASM group than the PAZ only group (5.3 vs. 6.7 months). The PAZ + ASM group also had a 74% higher relative risk of progression or death than the PAZ only group, but there was no difference in OS. Regarding adverse events, the PAZ + ASM group trended toward lower levels of grade 3/4 hypertension (19% vs. 37%). These results suggest that ASM should be avoided in patients with STS receiving PAZ. Larger studies are needed to further elucidate the impact of ASM use with PAZ in clinical practice.

Can small shifts in circadian phase affect performance?

Small shifts in circadian timing occur frequently as a result of daylight saving time or later weekend sleep. These subtle shifts in circadian phase have been shown to influence subjective sleepiness, but it remains unclear if they can significantly affect performance. In a retrospective analysis we examined performance on the Psychomotor Vigilance Test before bedtime and after wake time in 11 healthy adults on fixed sleep schedules based on their habitual sleep times. The dim light melatonin onset, a marker of circadian timing, was measured on two occasions. An average 1.1 h shift away from a proposed optimal circadian phase angle (6 h between melatonin onset and midpoint of sleep) significantly slowed mean, median and fastest 10% reaction times before bedtime and after wake time (p < 0.05). These results add to previous reports that suggest that humans may be sensitive to commonly occurring small shifts in circadian timing.