Concomitant Venetoclax and Imatinib for Comanaging Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia and Chronic Myeloid Leukemia: A Case Report.

Patients with synchronous malignancies can be problematic to diagnose and manage because workup and therapeutic targeting for each individual malignancy must be coordinated carefully. This report presents a patient with concurrent chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) and chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) managed with concomitant venetoclax and imatinib. Because imatinib is a moderate cytochrome P450 3A4 inhibitor, close monitoring is required when using with a substrate of 3A4 such as venetoclax. Although the target dose of venetoclax is 400 mg, it was capped at 100 mg due to the interaction. Despite the interaction and possible enhancement of toxicities, the patient has tolerated therapy well, and both diseases have responded to this novel approach. In addition, because aberrant BCL-2 activity has been implicated in CML, the use of venetoclax may contribute to success in the management of this patient's CML. This case report represents the safe concomitant use of venetoclax and imatinib in a patient with synchronous CML and CLL.

Cardio-Oncology Drug Interactions: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association.

In the cardio-oncology population, drug interactions are of particular importance given the complex pharmacological profile, narrow therapeutic index, and inherent risk of therapies used to manage cardiovascular disease and cancer. Drug interactions may be beneficial or detrimental to the desired therapeutic effect. Clinicians in both cardiology and oncology should be cognizant of these potential drug-drug interactions that may reduce the efficacy or safety of either cardiovascular or cancer therapies. These risks can be mitigated through increased recognition of potential drug-drug interaction, use of alternative medications when possible, and careful monitoring. This scientific statement provides clinicians with an overview of pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic drug-drug interactions in patients with cancer exposed to common cardiovascular and cancer medications.

Ofatumumab plus HyperCVAD/HD-MA induction leads to high rates of minimal residual disease negativity in patients with newly diagnosed mantle cell lymphoma: Results of a phase 2 study.

BACKGROUND: Ofatumumab is a humanized type 1 anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody. Preclinical studies show improved complement-mediated cytotoxicity (CMC) compared to rituximab in mantle cell lymphoma (MCL). This study evaluates the safety and efficacy of combining ofatumumab with HyperCVAD/MA (O-HyperCVAD) in newly diagnosed MCL. METHODS: In this single-arm phase 2 study, 37 patients were treated with the combination of O-HyperCVAD for 4 or 6 cycles, followed by high dose chemotherapy and autologous stem cell transplant. Primary objectives were overall response rate (ORR) and complete response (CR) rate at the end of therapy. Secondary objectives included minimal residual disease (MRD) negativity, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Median age was 60 years; ORR was 86% and 73% achieved a CR by modified Cheson criteria. The MRD negativity rate was 78% after 2 cycles of therapy, increasing to 96% at the end of induction; median PFS and OS were 45.5 months and 56 months, respectively. Achieving a post-induction CR by both imaging and flow cytometry was associated with improved PFS and OS. Early MRD negativity (post-2 cycles) was also associated with an improved PFS but not OS. There were 3 deaths while on therapy, and grades 3 and 4 adverse events (AEs) were observed in 22% and 68% of the patients. CONCLUSION: The addition of ofatumumab to HyperCVAD/HD-MA led to high rates of MRD negativity by flow cytometry in patients with newly diagnosed MCL. Achieving a CR post-induction by both imaging and flow cytometry is associated with improved overall survival.

Evaluating the Effect of Six Proton Pump Inhibitors on the Antiplatelet Effects of Clopidogrel.

BACKGROUND AND GOAL: Cytochrome P450 (CYP) enzymes are responsible for the conversion of clopidogrel into its active metabolite and the metabolism of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs), which may also inhibit CYP enzymes. A current Food and Drug Administration advisory suggests avoiding esomeprazole and omeprazole while taking clopidogrel because of concerns that PPIs may compromise clopidogrel's antiplatelet effects. The objective of the present study was to examine the robustness of this interaction using a well-controlled study design in a population of participants free of confounders. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty-eight healthy male participants, with a mean age 24.2 ± 3.2, were randomized to an incomplete crossover design schedule. Participants underwent platelet aggregation testing after clopidogrel alone, while on clopidogrel in combination with 1 of 3 PPIs (40 mg of pantoprazole, 20 mg of omeprazole, 20 mg of rabeprazole, 40 mg of esomeprazole, 30 mg of lansoprazole, or 30 mg of dexlansoprazole), and during 1 week of clopidogrel-only washout periods. FINDINGS: The median platelet aggregation to adenosine diphosphate during a drug-free baseline was 10Ω (2.5 interquartile range) of impedance and decreased to 0Ω on clopidogrel alone. Aggregation did not significantly change with concomitant use of PPIs and clopidogrel. CONCLUSION: These data do not demonstrate a significant interaction between common individual PPIs and clopidogrel in healthy volunteers who respond to clopidogrel alone. This adds data to a growing body of evidence indicating that the addition of a PPI may have a weak effect on clopidogrel's antiplatelet properties, and may only be relevant in specific clinical circumstances.