Hepatotoxicity during legacy cancer chemotherapy in patients infected with hepatitis C virus: A retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: The rates and causes of significant hepatotoxicity with cancer chemotherapy (CCT) in patients infected with hepatitis C virus (HCV) are incompletely characterized. METHODS: We compared rates of grade 3 or 4 hepatotoxicity, defined as elevated transaminases, during CCT in patients who are mono-infected with HCV compared with rates in controls matched on demographics, diagnosis, and rituximab use. We excluded patients with hepatobiliary cancers, hepatitis B virus or human immunodeficiency virus infection. Hepatotoxicity was attributed to a medical cause, cancer progression, or CCT, including HCV flare. RESULTS: Patients with HCV (n = 196) had a higher rate of cirrhosis than the 1,130 matched controls (21.9% versus 4%; P <0.001). Their higher rate of overall hepatotoxicity (8.7% versus 4.5% of controls, P = 0.01) was due to higher rate of CCT-related hepatotoxicity (4.1% versus 1.2%, P = 0.01). On multivariable analysis, the largest risk factor for overall hepatotoxicity was cirrhosis, and the only risk factor for CCT-related hepatotoxicity was HCV infection. Among those with HCV, the only significant risk factor for hepatotoxicity was rituximab use. Hepatotoxicity caused by CCT delayed or altered treatment in only 3 HCV patients and 1 control (1.5% versus 0.1%, P = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Most patients with HCV can safely be treated with cancer chemotherapy. Cirrhosis and HCV infection contributed to increased hepatotoxicity in subjects on CCT. Among HCV patients, rituximab use was the major risk factor for increased hepatotoxicity. Hepatotoxicity due to CCT itself rarely altered or delayed CCT. Nonetheless, HCV-positive patients should be monitored carefully during CCT.

A prognostic information system for real-time personalized care: Lessons for embedded researchers.

Embedded researchers could play a central role in developing tools to personalize care using electronic medical records (EMRs). However, few studies have described the steps involved in developing such tools, or evaluated the key factors in success and failure. This case study describes how we used an EMR-derived data warehouse to develop a prototype informatics tool to help oncologists counsel patients with pancreatic cancer about their prognosis. The tool generated real-time prognostic information based on tumor type and stage, age, comorbidity status and lab tests. Our multidisciplinary team included embedded researchers, application developers, user experience experts, and an oncologist leader.This prototype succeeded in establishing proof of principle, but did not reach adoption into actual practice. In pilot testing, oncologists succeeded in generating prognostic information in real time. A few found it helpful in patient encounters, but all identified critical areas for further development before implementation. Generalizable lessons included the need to (1) include a wide range of potential use cases and stakeholders when selecting use cases for such tools; (2) develop talking points for clinicians to explain results from predictive tools to patients; (3) develop ways to reduce lag time between events and data availability; and (4) keep the options presented in the user interface very simple. This case demonstrates that embedded researchers can lead collaborations using EMR-derived data to create systems for real-time personalized patient counseling, and highlights challenges that such teams can anticipate.

Low-dose versus High-dose Carfilzomib with Dexamethasone (S1304) in Patients with Relapsed-Refractory Multiple Myeloma.

PURPOSE: Treatment of multiple myeloma has evolved tremendously and optimal utilization of available therapies will ensure maximal patient benefits. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We report the Southwest Oncology Group randomized phase II trial (S1304) comparing twice weekly low-dose (27 mg/m2; arm 1) to high-dose carfilzomib (56 mg/m2; arm 2), both with dexamethasone, administered for 12 cycles (11 months) for relapsed and/or refractory multiple myeloma with up to six prior lines of therapy (NCT01903811). The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS), and patients on arm 1 could cross-over to arm 2 after progression on treatment. RESULTS: Among 143 enrolled patients, of whom 121 were eligible and analyzable, the overall response rate was 42.8%, with no significant difference between the arms (P = 0.113). Also, neither the median PFS [5 months and 8 months, respectively; HR, 1.061; 80% Wald confidence interval (CI), 0.821-1.370; P = 0.384] nor the median overall survival were significantly different (26 and 22 months, respectively; HR, 1.149, 80% Wald CI, 0.841-.571; P = 0.284). Sixteen patients crossed over to arm 2 with a median PFS benefit of 3 months. Certain adverse events (AE) were more frequent in arm 2, including fatigue, thrombocytopenia, and peripheral neuropathy, but there was no significant difference in cardiopulmonary AEs. CONCLUSIONS: This randomized trial did not support a benefit of fixed duration, twice weekly 56 mg/m2 dosing of carfilzomib over the 27 mg/m2 dose for the treatment of relapsed and/or refractory multiple myeloma. However, treatment to progression in earlier patient populations with high-dose carfilzomib using different schedules should still be considered as part of the standard of care.

Developing a Prognostic Information System for Personalized Care in Real Time.

CONTEXT: Electronic medical records hold promise to transform clinical practice. However, technological and other barriers may preclude using them to guide care in real time. We used the Virtual Data Warehouse (VDW) to develop a tool that enables physicians to generate real-time, personalized prognostic information about survival after cancer. CASE DESCRIPTION: Patients with cancer often ask their oncologists, "Have you ever seen a patient like me?" To help oncologists answer this question, we developed a prototype Prognostic Information System (PRISM), a web-based tool that gathers data about the index patient from Kaiser Permanente's clinical information systems, selects a historical cohort of similar patients, and displays the survival curve of the similar patients relative to key points in their treatment course. FINDINGS AND MAJOR THEMES: The prototype was developed by a multidisciplinary team with expertise in oncology, research, and technology. We have completed two rounds of user testing and refinement. Successful development rested on: (1) executive support and a clinical champion; (2) collaboration among experts from multiple disciplines; (3) starting with simple cases rather than ambitious ones; (4) extensive research experience with the Virtual Data Warehouse, related databases, and an existing query tool; and (5) following agile software development principles, especially iterative user testing. CONCLUSION: Clinical data stored in health care systems' electronic medical records can be used to personalize clinical care in real time. Development of prognostic information systems can be accelerated by collaborations among researchers, technology specialists, and clinicians and by use of existing technology like the Virtual Data Warehouse.

Atypical femur fractures among breast cancer and multiple myeloma patients receiving intravenous bisphosphonate therapy.

PURPOSE: Atypical femur fractures represent a potential complication of chronic oral bisphosphonate therapy in women with osteoporosis, but the risk of atypical femur fractures among cancer patients receiving intravenous bisphosphonates at higher cumulative doses remains unclear. We examined femur fractures occurring in cancer patients treated with intravenous bisphosphonates (IVBP) to determine whether a subset may be atypical fractures. METHODS: Between 2005 and 2010, we identified patients with known IVBP therapy for multiple myeloma or metastatic breast cancer, who subsequently sustained a femur fracture based on hospitalization, oncology, pharmacy and chemotherapy visit records. Radiographs were examined by an orthopedic surgeon to determine anatomic fracture site and pattern. An atypical fracture was defined as a transverse or short oblique fracture occurring below the lesser trochanter with evidence of focal hypertrophy of the lateral cortex and absence of biopsy-proven malignancy or radiation therapy at the fracture site. RESULTS: A total of 62 patients with breast cancer (N=39) or multiple myeloma (N=23) with femur fracture and prior IVBP treatment for bone malignancy were identified. There were 30 proximal hip, 18 subtrochanteric and 14 femoral shaft fractures. Intraoperative bone samples were sent in 29 of 58 fracture cases undergoing operative repair, with 76% positive for malignancy. Six cases (4 breast cancer, 2 multiple myeloma) of atypical femur fracture were identified, two with negative intraoperative pathology and four with no bone biopsy samples sent. Five of the six patients with atypical fracture had bilateral femur findings, including two with transverse fracture in the contralateral femur and three with focal hypertrophy of the contralateral cortex. Two atypical fracture cases also experienced osteonecrosis of the jaw compared to 3 in the remaining cohort (33% vs. 5%, p=0.07). Patients with atypical fracture received more IVBP (median 55 vs. 15 doses) and zoledronic acid (32 vs. 12 doses) and had longer treatment duration (median 5.9 vs. 1.6 years) compared to patients without atypical fracture (all p≤0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Among 62 patients who received IVBP for skeletal malignancy and experienced a femur fracture, we identified six cases of atypical fracture. While fractures in this population are often assumed to be pathologic, prospective studies investigating fracture pattern, microscopic bone pathology and pharmacologic exposures should be conducted to further examine the association of IVBP and atypical femur fractures.

Stage I-IIA non-bulky Hodgkin's lymphoma. Is further distinction based on prognostic factors useful? The Stanford experience.

PURPOSE: In the United States, early-stage Hodgkin's lymphoma (HL) is defined as asymptomatic stage I/II non-bulky disease. European groups stratify patients to more intense treatment by considering additional unfavorable factors, such as age, number of nodal sites, sedimentation rate, extranodal disease, and elements of the international prognostic score for advanced HL. We sought to determine the prognostic significance of these factors in patients with early-stage disease treated at Stanford University Medical Center. METHODS AND MATERIALS: This study was a retrospective analysis of 101 patients treated with abbreviated Stanford V chemotherapy (8 weeks) and 30-Gy (n=84 patients) or 20-Gy (n=17 patients) radiotherapy to involved sites. Outcomes were assessed after applying European risk factors. RESULTS: At a median follow-up of 8.5 years, freedom from progression (FFP) and overall survival (OS) rates were 94% and 97%, respectively. From 33% to 60% of our patients were unfavorable per European criteria (i.e., German Hodgkin Study Group [GHSG], n=55%; European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer, n=33%; and Groupe d'Etudes des Lymphomes de l'Adulte, n=61%). Differences in FFP rates between favorable and unfavorable patients were significant only for GHSG criteria (p=0.02) with there were no differences in OS rates for any criteria. Five of 6 patients who relapsed were successfully salvaged. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of our patients deemed unfavorable had an excellent outcome despite undergoing a significantly abbreviated regimen. Application of factors used by the GHSG defined a less favorable subset for FFP but with no impact on OS. As therapy for early-stage disease moves to further reductions in therapy, these factors take on added importance in the interpretation of current trial results and design of future studies.