Cancer is not a risk factor for severe COVID-19 in children, except in patients with recent allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation or comorbidities.

The EPICO (Spanish general registry of COVID-19 in children)-SEHOP (Spanish Society of Pediatric Hematology and Oncology) platform gathers data from children with SARS-CoV-2 in Spain, allowing comparison between children with cancer or allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (alloHSCT) and those without. The infection is milder in the cancer/alloHSCT group than in children without comorbidities (7.1% vs. 14.7%), except in children with recent alloHSCT (less than 300 days), of which 35.7% experienced severe COVID-19. These data have been shared with the SEHOP members to support treatment and isolation policies akin to those for children without cancer, except for those with recent alloHSCT or additional comorbidities. This highlights the collaborative registries potential in managing pandemic emergencies.

Prognostic Value of Measurable Residual Disease in Patients with AML Undergoing HSCT: A Multicenter Study.

Allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) represents the best therapeutic option for many patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML). However, relapse remains the main cause of mortality after transplantation. The detection of measurable residual disease (MRD) by multiparameter flow cytometry (MFC) in AML, before and after HSCT, has been described as a powerful predictor of outcome. Nevertheless, multicenter and standardized studies are lacking. A retrospective analysis was performed, including 295 AML patients undergoing HSCT in 4 centers that worked according to recommendations from the Euroflow consortium. Among patients in complete remission (CR), MRD levels prior to transplantation significantly influenced outcomes, with overall (OS) and leukemia free survival (LFS) at 2 years of 76.7% and 67.6% for MRD-negative patients, 68.5% and 49.7% for MRD-low patients (MRD < 0.1), and 50.5% and 36.6% for MRD-high patients (MRD ≥ 0.1) (p < 0.001), respectively. MRD level did influence the outcome, irrespective of the conditioning regimen. In our patient cohort, positive MRD on day +100 after transplantation was associated with an extremely poor prognosis, with a cumulative incidence of relapse of 93.3%. In conclusion, our multicenter study confirms the prognostic value of MRD performed in accordance with standardized recommendations.

Allocation to Matched Related or Unrelated Donor Results in Similar Clinical Outcomes without Increased Risk of Failure to Proceed to Transplant among Patients with Acute Myeloid Leukemia: A Retrospective Analysis from the Time of Transplant Approval.

Clinical outcomes after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (allo-SCT) from unrelated donors (URDs) approach those of matched related donor (MRD) transplants in patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML). Yet, available data fail to account for differences in pretransplantation outcomes between these donor selection strategies. In this regard, URD allo-HSCT is associated with longer waiting times to transplantation, potentially resulting in higher probabilities of failure to reach transplant. We retrospectively analyzed 108 AML patients accepted for first allo-HSCT from the time of approval to proceed to transplant. Fifty-eight (54%) patients were initially allocated to MRD, while URD search was initiated in 50 (46%) patients. Time to transplant was longer in patients allocated to a URD when compared with patients assigned to an MRD (median 142 days versus 100 days; p < .001). Forty-three of 58 (74%) patients in the MRD group and 35 of 50 (70%) patients in the URD group underwent transplantation (odds ratio [OR], 1.22; p = .63). Advanced disease status at the time of allo-HSCT approval was the only predictor of failure to reach transplantation in the multivariate analysis (OR, 4.78; p = .001). Disease progression was the most common cause of failure to reach allo-HSCT (66.7%) in both the MRD and URD groups. With a median follow-up from transplantation of 14.5 (interquartile range, 5 to 29) months, the 2-year estimate of overall survival (OS) from allo-HSCT was 46% in the MRD group and 57% in the URD group (p = .54). There were no differences in OS according to donor type allocation in the multivariate analysis (hazard ratio, 1.01; p = .83). When including patients from the time of transplant approval, 2-year OS was 39% in the MRD group versus 42% in the URD group. Our study suggests that allocation of AML patients to URDs may result in comparable clinical outcomes to MRD assignment without a significant increase in the risk of failure to reach transplant.

Prospective randomized trial of 5 days azacitidine versus supportive care in patients with lower-risk myelodysplastic syndromes without 5q deletion and transfusion-dependent anemia.

In this prospective trial, the efficacy of azacitidine in lower-risk myelodysplastic syndromes (LR-SMD) lacking del(5q) was compared to best supportive care (BSC) at 1:1. The primary endpoint was the achievement of erythroid hematologic improvement (HI-E) after nine cycles. Thirty-six patients received at least ≥1 cycle. HI-E was confirmed 44.4% randomized to Aza and in 5.5% of patients receiving BSC (p < .01). After entry in Aza extension period, transfusion independence was achieved in all Aza responders with a median duration of 50 weeks (range: 17-231). No significant differences were observed in secondary endpoints. Importantly, variant allele frequency (VAF) of some mutated genes (RET, SF3B1, ASXL1) decreased after 9 months of treatment in Aza-responder patients. In conclusion, LR-MDS patients lacking del5q and resistant to ESAs, who receive 5 days Aza, achieve TI in a substantial proportion of cases and results in modifications in mutational landscape.

Role of 18F-FDG-PET/CT in the management of marginal zone B cell lymphoma.

The use of PET in patients with marginal zone B cell lymphoma (MZL) is controversial because of variability of fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) avidity. We analyzed 40 PET/CT in 25 consecutive patients to compare its performance with CT at staging and as a first-line response assessment. Sensitivity of PET/CT and CT was 96 and 76%. Mean standard uptake value was 6.1, 6.9 and 3.4 (p = 0.3) in nodal, extranodal and splenic subtypes, respectively. Of 17 patients (extranodal: n = 9; nodal: n = 6; splenic subtype: n = 2) with both imaging tests available at diagnosis, 8 (47%) had more involved areas with PET/CT than with CT, 75% of which were extranodal lesions. PET/CT resulted in upstaging of five patients although treatment of only two of them was changed. Responses of 15 patients with post-treatment PET/CT were the following: 9 negative and 6 positive of which 3 were isolated residual lesions. Progression was documented in two of these three patients. Response was also assessed by CT in 11 patients. Discrepancies were found in three: Two were in complete remission by CT while PET/CT detected localized residual disease; another patient was in partial remission by CT, whereas PET/CT showed only one positive lesion. Two of these three patients relapsed. Patients with negative post-treatment PET/CT did not relapse. With a median follow-up of 50 months (10-152 months), 3-year overall survival was 100 and 80% for patients with negative and positive post-treatment PET/CT (p = 0.2). Three-year disease-free survival was 86%; the negative predictive value (NPV) was 100%, and the positive predictive value (PPV) was 83.3%. Although a larger number of patients will be required to further confirm these data, we can conclude that PET/CT is a useful imaging tool for both staging and response assessment in patients with nodal and extranodal MZL as a result of its high sensitivity, NPV and PPV.

Role of 18F-FDG-PET/CT in the management of Burkitt lymphoma.

UNLABELLED: Burkitt lymphoma (BL) is highly FDG-avid even though its usefulness in the management of these patients is still controversial. AIM: We analyzed the role of positron emission tomography/computerized tomography (PET/CT) in staging newly diagnosed patients with BL and evaluating disease after first-line chemotherapy. METHODS: Fifty-two PET/CTs were performed in 32 patients (20 at diagnosis, 27 after treatment, five to monitor residual disease). Involved areas were retrospectively compared with those observed in contrast-enhanced CT. RESULTS: Discrepancies were found in 64.7% of patients for whom results of both tests at diagnosis were available (n = 17), most of them involving extranodal sites. Regarding response assessment, discrepancies were observed in 38% of patients with both tests (5/13): residual masses detected by CT with negative PET/CT. Of 27 patients with post-treatment PET/CT, 22 were in complete remission whereas one true-positive and four false-positive lesions (two nodal and two extranodal) were detected. With a median follow-up of 27 months, 22 patients with negative PET/CT did not relapse. Thus, negative predictive value (NPV) was 100%. With respect to positive predictive value (PPV), one of five patients with positive assays after treatment died due to progression while the remaining four had false-positive lesions. Nevertheless, for these four patients, mean SUVmax at nodal sites was 4.1 vs. 14.9 at diagnosis, while mean SUVmax at extranodal sites was 3.8 vs. 12.1. Thus, with a cutoff value for SUVmax < 66% of that observed at diagnosis, PPV was also 100%. CONCLUSION: More accurate staging can be achieved using PET/CT. NPV reaches 100%, and using a ΔSUV < 66%, a high PPV is also observed.