Multicenter Registry of Patients Receiving Systemic Mold-Active Triazoles for the Management of Invasive Fungal Infections.

INTRODUCTION: 'Real-world' data for mold-active triazoles (MATs) in the treatment of invasive fungal infections (IFIs) are lacking. This study evaluated usage of MATs in a disease registry for the management of IFIs. METHODS: Data were collected for this multicenter, observational, prospective study from 55 US centers, between March 2017 and April 2020. Eligible patients received isavuconazole, posaconazole, or voriconazole as MAT monotherapy (one MAT) or multiple/sequenced MAT therapy (more than one MAT) for prophylaxis or treatment. Patients were enrolled within 60 days of MAT initiation. The primary objective was to characterize patients receiving a MAT and their patterns of therapy. The full analysis set (FAS) included eligible patients for the relevant enrollment protocol, and the safety analysis set (SAF) included patients who received ≥ 1 MAT dose. RESULTS: Overall, 2009 patients were enrolled in the SAF. The FAS comprised 1993 patients (510 isavuconazole; 540 posaconazole; 491 voriconazole; 452 multiple/sequenced MAT therapies); 816 and 1177 received treatment and prophylaxis at study index/enrollment, respectively. Around half (57.8%) of patients were male, and median age was 59 years. Among patients with IFIs during the study, the most common pathogens were Aspergillus fumigatus in the isavuconazole (18.2% [10/55]) and voriconazole (25.5% [12/47]) groups and Candida glabrata in the posaconazole group (20.9% [9/43]); the lungs were the most common infection site (58.2% [166/285]). Most patients were maintained on MAT monotherapy (77.3% [1541/1993]), and 79.4% (1520/1915) completed their MAT therapies. A complete/partial clinical response was reported in 59.1% (591/1001) of patients with a clinical response assessment. Breakthrough IFIs were reported in 7.1% (73/1030) of prophylaxis patients. Adverse drug reactions (ADRs) were reported in 14.7% (296/2009) of patients (3.9% [20/514] isavuconazole; 11.3% [62/547] posaconazole; 14.2% [70/494] voriconazole). CONCLUSIONS: In this 'real-world' study, most patients remained on their initial therapy and completed their MAT therapy. Over half of patients receiving MATs for IFIs had a successful response, and most receiving prophylaxis did not develop breakthrough IFIs. ADRs were uncommon.

Clinical experience with a simple algorithm for plerixafor utilization in autologous stem cell mobilization.

Plerixafor augments PBSC collection, but the optimal approach for incorporating it into mobilization is uncertain. Forty-nine consecutive patients mobilized with G-CSF alone were analyzed, and a day 4 peripheral blood CD34(+) cell count of 0.015/ml was found to predict for a day 5 apheresis yield of 2 × 10(6) CD34(+) progenitors/kg, our institutional minimum necessary for a single autologous transplant. On the basis of this relationship, a clinical guideline was developed which recommended pre-emptive use of plerixafor if the day 4 peripheral blood CD34(+) cell count was between 0.005 and 0.015/ml. A total of 166 consecutive subjects with lymphoma or plasma cell dyscrasias underwent G-CSF mobilization after adoption of this care pathway, and the mobilization failure rate was only 7% in patients managed per guideline. The median PBSC yield was 6.3 × 10(6) CD34(+) progenitors/kg with G-CSF (day 4 peripheral blood CD34(+) cell > 0.015/ml) and 4.9 × 10(6) CD34(+) progenitors/kg with G-CSF+plerixafor (day 4 peripheral blood CD34(+) cell 0.005-0.015/ml). The median number of days of apheresis was 2 in both groups. This clinical guideline is an effective mobilization algorithm that minimizes mobilization failures, reduces poor apheresis yields, does not require risk factor identification and is simple to implement.

Three palonosetron regimens to prevent CINV in myeloma patients receiving multiple-day high-dose melphalan and hematopoietic stem cell transplantation.

BACKGROUND: Explore safety and efficacy of three palonosetron-containing regimens for emesis prevention over 7 days in multiple myeloma (MM) patients receiving melphalan (100 mg/m(2)) and hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Randomized, double-blind pilot study in MM patients (n=73) receiving 1, 2, or 3 days of 0.25 mg palonosetron (30-s i.v. bolus) 30 min before melphalan (days -2 and -1) and HSCT (day 0). Patients received dexamethasone (20 mg i.v., days -2 and -1) immediately before or after study drug/placebo. Daily diaries recorded emesis, rescue medication, nausea duration, and adverse events (AEs). RESULTS: Seven-day complete protection (no emesis) occurred in 41.7% [95% confidence interval (CI) 22.1% to 63.4%], 41.7% (95% CI 22.1% to 63.4%), and 44.0% (95% CI 24.2% to 65.1%) of patients receiving 1, 2, or 3 days of palonosetron, respectively (P=0.43). Complete response (emesis free without rescue medication) occurred in 8.3%, 20.8%, and 20.0% (P=0.14). Common AEs (≥10%) were mild-to-moderate diarrhea, constipation, headache, insomnia, and flatulence. No serious AEs occurred. CONCLUSIONS: Palonosetron with dexamethasone was safe and effective in preventing emesis in MM patients receiving melphalan and HSCT. This pilot study with a limited number of patients suggests that multiple doses of palonosetron could be more effective than a single dose in making patients emesis free without need for rescue medication. However, even multiple doses of palonosetron resulted in only 20% of patients being emesis free without rescue medication, suggesting that further improvement will require development of more effective combination antiemetic therapy.

Randomized open-label trial of dolasetron for the control of nausea and vomiting associated with high-dose chemotherapy with hematopoietic stem cell transplantation.

A prospective open-label trial was performed to compare the efficacy of dolasetron with that of ondansetron or granisetron (standard therapy) for prevention of nausea and vomiting associated with high-dose chemotherapy with or without total body irradiation followed by hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT). In a university teaching hospital setting, 62 patients were randomized to receive either dolasetron 100 mg daily or standard doses of ondansetron or granisetron. In addition to objective data such as number of episodes of emesis and quantity of rescue antiemetics required, 100 mm visual analogue scales were used to rate nausea, appetite, and changes in taste. A post-hoc subgroup analysis was performed between groups of patients that were matched for conditioning regimens. Sixty-five percent of the dolasetron-treated patients and 87% of patients in the standard therapy group achieved a major or complete response (P < .05) based on emetic episodes and nausea score. Patients in the standard therapy group used fewer rescue antiemetics and also rated more favorably on selected questions of the visual analogue scale. No differences in safety parameters or adverse effects were reported. At doses prescribed in this study, dolasetron was less effective than granisetron or ondansetron in preventing nausea and vomiting associated with high-dose chemotherapy/total body irradiation followed by HSCT.

Complications of chemotherapy for prostate cancer.

To date, all available therapies for prostate cancer are plagued by adverse effects. Chemotherapy is no exception. The mechanisms of activity of chemotherapy agents are not cancer-specific. Normal tissues, particularly those that require rapid cell proliferation, are vulnerable to the effects of growth inhibition by these cytotoxic agents. Furthermore, both predictable as well as idiosyncratic toxicities unrelated to the antineoplastic activity of these agents can occur. In some cases, the cause of adverse events may be linked to the vehicle required to suspend water-insoluble chemotherapy drugs. Patient-specific factors can also significantly contribute to the risk of chemotherapy side-effects. However, with optimal clinical care the toxicity of antineoplastic agents can be substantially reduced. Long before chemotherapy is contemplated, it is imperative to limit treatments that reduce patients' capacity to tolerate subsequent chemotherapy. Moreover, offering treatment before patients' performance status declines can significantly improve tolerance of treatment. Once chemotherapy is initiated, the incidence and severity of adverse effects can be reduced through individualized selection of chemotherapy regimens and appropriate use of adjunct medications. Finally, aggressive management of toxicities after they occur lessens their duration and severity. The common toxicities of current chemotherapy regimens for prostate cancer, as well as strategies to limit and manage these toxicities are reviewed.

Delayed sodium thiosulfate as an otoprotectant against carboplatin-induced hearing loss in patients with malignant brain tumors.

Carboplatin is effective in the treatment of malignant brain tumors. However, when administered in conjunction with osmotic opening of the blood-brain barrier (BBB), carboplatin is ototoxic. The purpose of this study was to determine whether delayed administration of sodium thiosulfate (STS), given after BBB closure, provided protection against carboplatin ototoxicity. Patients underwent monthly treatment with intra-arterial carboplatin (200 mg/m2/day x 2) in conjunction with osmotic opening of the BBB, for up to 1 year. Audiological assessment was conducted at baseline and within 24 h before each monthly treatment. STS was administered i.v. as one (20 g/m2) or two (20 g/m2 and 16 g/m2) 15-min doses, depending on baseline hearing status. The initial group received the first STS dose 2 h (or 2 and 6 h) after carboplatin (STS2) and a subsequent group received STS 4 h (or 4 and 8 h) after carboplatin (STS4). Audiological data were compared with a historical comparison group (HCG) treated with carboplatin without STS. Spearman correlation coefficients comparing STS 2 (n = 24), STS4 (n = 17), and HCG (n = 19) indicated significantly lower rates of ototoxicity with increased delay in STS (P = 0.0006). On the basis of the analysis of hearing levels, there were significant differences among the two STS groups and HCG at 8000 Hz (P = 0.0010) and at 4000 Hz (P = 0.0075). The log-rank test for time to ototoxicity indicated a significant difference between STS4 and HCG (P = 0.0018). Delayed STS was effective in protecting against carboplatin-induced hearing loss. STS delayed to 4 h after carboplatin significantly decreased time to development of ototoxicity and rate of ototoxicity when compared with HCG.

Safety and efficacy of a multicenter study using intraarterial chemotherapy in conjunction with osmotic opening of the blood-brain barrier for the treatment of patients with malignant brain tumors.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to determine the safety and efficacy of intraarterial chemotherapy with osmotic opening of the blood-brain barrier (BBB) for the treatment of malignant brain tumors when administered across multiple centers. METHODS: Patients with primary central nervous system lymphoma (PCNSL), primitive neuroectodermal tumor (PNET), germ cell tumor, cancer metastasis to the brain, or low or high grade glioma were eligible. Prior to entry, magnetic resonance imaging or computed tomography brain scan, medical history, neurologic status, and Karnofsky performance status were reviewed at the coordinating center. Standardized anesthesia and intraarterial catheterization guidelines were followed by a multidisciplinary team at each center. Between March 1994 and November 1997, 5 universities treated 221 adult patients with intraarterial chemotherapy with or without osmotic opening of the BBB (2464 procedures). RESULTS: Of evaluable patients with PCNSL, 40 of 53 (75%) achieved complete response (CR). All evaluable patients with PNET (n = 17), metastatic disease (n = 12), or germ cell tumor (n = 4) achieved stable disease (SD) or better. Of 57 evaluable patients with glioblastoma multiforme, 45 (79%) achieved SD or better. Asymptomatic subintimal tear occurred in 11 of 221 patients (5%), pulmonary embolism in 6 of 221 (2.7%), and renal toxicity in 4 of 221 (1.8%). One patient with extensive glioma expired within 48 hours after treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Using standard guidelines and protocols, intraarterial chemotherapy with or without osmotic opening of the BBB is feasible across multiple centers with a low incidence of catheter-related complications. In patients with chemotherapy-sensitive tumors, such as PCNSL, PNET, germ cell tumor, and cancer metastasis to the central nervous system, enhanced delivery results in a high degree of tumor response, with an efficacy profile that is reproducible across multiple centers.

First evidence of otoprotection against carboplatin-induced hearing loss with a two-compartment system in patients with central nervous system malignancy using sodium thiosulfate.

Sodium thiosulfate (STS) provides protection against carboplatin-induced ototoxicity in an animal model. The purpose of this study was to determine the STS dose required for otoprotection, in patients with malignant brain tumors treated with carboplatin in conjunction with osmotic blood-brain barrier disruption. Twenty-nine patients received STS intravenously 2 hr after carboplatin. Doses were escalated from 4 g/m2 to 8, 12, 16 and 20 g/m2 on consecutive months. Audiologic assessment was performed at baseline and monthly. The audiograms were compared with those of 19 similarly treated historical control patients who did not receive STS. The incidence of ototoxicity in the historical control group of patients was 79% (15/19). This group had an average loss of 20.8 +/- 5.9 dB (n = 19) at 8 kHz after one treatment with carboplatin, whereas the STS treatment group lost only 3.7 +/- 2 dB (n = 15) after one treatment. This difference was statistically significant as assessed by Student's t test (P < .05). Furthermore, patients in the STS treatment group with excellent base-line hearing showed little change in hearing thresholds at 8 kHz after the second treatment (8.0 +/- 8.3 dB) (n = 5) compared with the historical control patients with excellent base-line hearing, (40.5 +/- 8.6 dB) (n = 11). Our data support that doses of 16 or 20 g/m2 of STS decrease carboplatin-induced hearing loss without central nervous system entry. Clinical demonstration of an otoprotective effect with a two-compartment system to prevent drug-induced hearing loss, while preserving central nervous system cytotoxicity, has not been reported previously.