Mortality in recipients of allogeneic haematopoietic cell transplantation in the era of cytomegalovirus primary prophylaxis: a single-centre retrospective experience.

OBJECTIVES: Allogeneic haematopoietic cell transplant (allo-HCT) recipients who are cytomegalovirus (CMV)-seronegative have better post-transplant outcomes than CMV-seropositive recipients. Letermovir (LTV) is approved for CMV primary prophylaxis in adults who are CMV-seropositive after allo-HCT, and its use is associated with improved long-term post-transplant outcomes. We analysed whether LTV has affected the relationship between CMV serostatus and post-transplant outcomes. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective single-centre cohort study of allo-HCT recipients, stratified according to donor (D) and recipient (R). CMV serostatus and the use of LTV: D-/R-, R+/LTV-, and R+/LTV+. Outcomes measured were all-cause and non-relapse mortality, clinically significant CMV infection, graft-versus-host disease, and relapse up to week 48 after allo-HCT. The D-/R- group served as the reference for comparisons in univariate, competing risk regression, and cumulative incidence functions. RESULTS: The analysis included 1071 consecutive allo-HCT recipients: 131 D-/R-, 557 R+/LTV-, and 383 R+/LTV+. All-cause mortality by day 100 was 6.1% for the D-/R- group, compared with 14.0% (p 0.024) and 7.8% (p 0.7) for the R+/LTV- and R+/LTV + groups, respectively. Non-relapse mortality by day 100 was 11.0%, 6.8% and 3.8% for R+/LTV-, R+/LTV+, and D-/R- groups, respectively, without significant difference. When including relapse as a competing event, the hazard ratio for non-relapse mortality was 1.83 (95% CI: 1.12-2.99, p 0.017) for R+/LTV- compared with D-/R- and 1.05 (95% CI 0.62-1.77, p 0.85) for R+/LTV + compared with D-/R-. DISCUSSION: CMV primary prophylaxis with LTV abrogated the mortality gap based on CMV serostatus, a protective effect that persisted after discontinuation of primary prophylaxis.

High-Dose Chemotherapy and Autologous Stem Cell Transplantation for Relapsed or Refractory Primary Mediastinal Large B-Cell Lymphoma.

Primary mediastinal large B-cell lymphoma (PMBCL) is an uncommon, aggressive type of non-Hodgkin lymphoma. Rituximab-containing chemoimmunotherapy with or without radiation therapy (RT) is standard first-line treatment. Relapsed or refractory (R/R) disease has long been treated with salvage chemotherapy followed by high-dose chemotherapy (HDC), with autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) in appropriate patients. We retrospectively analyzed all patients with R/R PMBCL treated with HDC/ASCT at our center between January 2000 and August 2022. The 60 study patients received either rituximab-BEAM (n = 37) or rituximab-gemcitabine/busulfan/melphalan (R-GemBuMel) with or without vorinostat (n = 23), followed by ASCT. Forty-six patients received mediastinal RT, either as prior consolidation of frontline therapy or following ASCT. At median follow-up of 6 years (range, .3 to 21 years), the 5-year progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) rates of the whole group were 58% and 77%, respectively, for the entire cohort, 51% and 65% for the R-BEAM recipients, and 69% and 82% for R-vorinostat/GemBuMel recipients. Multivariable analyses showed that a negative positron emission tomography scan at ASCT (hazard ratio [HR], .28) and involvement of only 1 organ (HR, .33) were independently associated with improved PFS. In addition, receipt of R-vorinostat/GemBuMel (HR, .23) was an independent favorable predictor of OS. Our data indicate that HDC/ASCT is effective in R/R PMBCL, with improved outcomes in patients receiving R-vorinostat/GemBuMel.

Myeloablative fractionated busulfan for allogeneic stem cell transplant in older patients or patients with comorbidities.

Traditional conditioning regimens for patients undergoing allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (allo-HCT) provide suboptimal outcomes, especially for older patients and those with comorbidities. We hypothesized that a fractionated myeloablative busulfan dose delivered over an extended period would reduce nonrelapse mortality (NRM) while retaining antileukemic effects. Here, we performed a phase 2 trial for adults with hematological malignancies receiving matched related or unrelated allo-HCT. Participants received busulfan 80 mg/m2 as outpatients on days -20 and -13 before transplant. Fludarabine 40 mg/m2 was administered on days -6 to -3, followed by busulfan dosed to achieve a target area under the curve of 20 000 mol/min for the whole course. The primary end point was day-100 NRM. Seventy-eight patients were included, with a median age of 61 years (range, 39-70 years), who received transplantation for acute leukemia (24%), myelodysplastic syndrome (27%), or myeloproliferative disease/chronic myeloid leukemia (44%). HCT-specific comorbidity index (HCT-CI) was ≥3 in 34 (44%). With a median follow-up of 36.4 months (range, 2.9-51.5), the 100-day, 1-year, and 3-year NRM rates were 3.8%, 8%, and 9.3%, respectively, without a significant difference in age or HCT-CI score. The 1-year and 3-year relapse incidence was 10% and 18%, respectively. The 3-year overall survival was 80%, without a significant difference in age or HCT-CI score and was similar for patients aged >60 years and those aged <60 years as well as for those with HCT-CI ≥3 and HCT-CI <3. Overall, a myeloablative fractionated busulfan regimen has low NRM without an increase in relapse rate, resulting in promising survival, even in older patients or in patients with comorbidities. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT02861417.

Improved outcomes of high-risk relapsed Hodgkin lymphoma patients after high-dose chemotherapy: a 15-year analysis.

High-dose chemotherapy and autologous stem-cell transplant (HDC/ASCT) is standard treatment for chemosensitive relapsed classical Hodgkin lymphoma, although outcomes of high-risk relapse (HRR) patients remain suboptimal. We retrospectively analyzed all HRR classical Hodgkin lymphoma patients treated with HDC/ASCT at our institution between 01/01/2005 and 12/31/2019. HRR criteria included primary refractory disease/relapse within 1 year, extranodal extension, B symptoms, requiring more than one salvage line, or positron emission tomography (PET)-positive disease at ASCT. All patients met the same ASCT eligibility criteria. We treated 501 patients with BEAM (n=146), busulphan/melphalan (BuMel) (n=38), gemcitabine( Gem)/BuMel (n=189) and vorinostat/Gem/BuMel (n=128). The Gem/BuMel and vorinostat/Gem/BuMel cohorts had more HRR criteria and more patients with PET-positive disease at ASCT. Treatment with brentuximab vedotin (BV) or anti-PD1 prior to ASCT, PET-negative disease at ASCT, and maintenance BV increased over time. BEAM and BuMel predominated in earlier years (2005-2007), GemBuMel and BEAM in middle years (2008-2015), and vorinostat/GemBuMel and BEAM in later years (2016-2019). The median follow-up is 50 months (range, 6-186). Outcomes improved over time, with 2-year progressionfree survival (PFS)/overall survival (OS) rates of 58%/82% (2005-2007), 59%/83% (2008-2011), 71%/94% (2012-2015) and 86%/99% (2016- 2019) (P<0.0001). Five-year PFS/OS rates were 72%/87% after vorinostat/ GemBuMel, 55%/75% after GemBuMel, 45%/61% after BEAM, and 39%/57% after BuMel (PFS: P=0.0003; OS: P<0.0001). These differences persisted within the PET-negative and PET-positive subgroups. Prior BV and vorinostat/GemBuMel were independent predictors of more favorable outcome, whereas primary refractory disease, ≥2 salvage lines, bulky relapse, B symptoms and PET-positivity at ASCT correlated independently with unfavorable outcomes. In conclusion, post-HDC/ASCT outcomes of patients with HRR classic Hodgkin lymphoma have improved over the last 15 years. Pre-ASCT BV treatment and optimized synergistic HDC (vorinostat/GemBuMel) were associated with this improvement.

Feasibility and Implementation of a Multimodal Supportive Care Program to Improve Outcomes in Older Patients Undergoing Allogeneic Stem Cell Transplantation.

Increasingly, patients age ≥65 years are undergoing allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (allo-SCT). Although age alone is a well-documented predictor of overall survival (OS) and nonrelapse mortality (NRM), growing evidence suggests that poor functional status and frailty associated with aging may have roles as well. Our goal in the present study was to identify and improve these and other aging-related maladies by developing a multimodal supportive care program for older allo-SCT recipients. We designed and implemented a multimodal supportive care program, Enhanced Recovery in Stem Cell Transplant (ER-SCT), for patients age ≥65 years undergoing allo-SCT. The ER-SCT program consists of evaluation and critical interventions by key health care providers from multiple disciplines starting before hospital admission for transplantation and extending through 100 days post-allo-SCT. We determined the feasibility of implementing this program in a large stem cell transplantation center. After 1 year of ongoing process improvements, multiple evaluations, and enrollment, we found that a dedicated weekly clinic was necessary to coordinate care and evaluate patients early. We successfully enrolled 57 of 64 eligible patients (89%) in the first year. Our data show that a multimodal supportive care program to enhance recovery for older patients undergoing allo-SCT is feasible. © 2021 American Society for Transplantation and Cellular Therapy. Published by Elsevier Inc.

American Society for Transplantation and Cellular Therapy Series: #4 - Cytomegalovirus treatment and management of resistant or refractory infections after hematopoietic cell transplantation.

The Practice Guidelines Committee of the American Society of Transplantation and Cellular Therapy (ASTCT) partnered with its Transpl. Infect. Dis. Special Interest Group (TID-SIG) to update its 2009 compendium-style infectious disease guidelines for hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT). A new approach was employed with the goal of better serving clinical providers by publishing each standalone topic in the infectious diseases series as a concise format of frequently asked questions (FAQ), tables, and figures. Adult and pediatric infectious diseases and HCT content experts developed and answered FAQs. Topics were finalized with harmonized recommendations that were made by assigning an A through E strength of recommendation paired with a level of supporting evidence graded I through III. The fourth topic in the series focuses on the management and treatment of cytomegalovirus (CMV) resistant and refractory infections. The diagnosis, definitions of resistant and refractory CMV, risk factors, virological genotypes and treatment algorithms are reviewed.

Chimeric Antigen Receptor T Cell Therapy: A Comprehensive Review of Clinical Efficacy, Toxicity, and Best Practices for Outpatient Administration.

Chimeric antigen receptor T cell (CAR T) therapy has been integrated into treatment algorithms for acute leukemia, lymphoma, and, most recently, multiple myeloma. The number of clinical trials in both hematologic and solid tumor malignancies for new products and potential indications continues to grow. The clinical toxicities of CAR T therapy include cytokine release syndrome and immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome, which often warrant inpatient admission for close monitoring and treatment. Consequently, many centers have built processes around the administration of these cells in the inpatient setting. As new products gain Food and Drug Administration approval with more manageable toxicity profiles, and as institutions gain experience with the management of these toxicities, outpatient administration and monitoring should be expected. In addition, payor reimbursements for inpatient treatment have put the sustainability of inpatient CAR T therapy in jeopardy, especially for centers with a payor mix that includes a high proportion of Medicare patients. This has the serious potential to limit access to care. As the use of CAR T therapy continues to expand, changes in payment models, care settings, or both are needed to ensure the sustainability of safe, efficient, and cost-effective treatment. This review outlines the efficacy and toxicity of currently approved products, as well as best practices to optimize the management of CAR T cell therapy in the outpatient setting.

Refractory and Resistant Cytomegalovirus After Hematopoietic Cell Transplant in the Letermovir Primary Prophylaxis Era.

BACKGROUND: Cytomegalovirus (CMV) reactivation is one of the most common infectious complications after allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplant (HCT) and may result in significant morbidity and mortality. Primary prophylaxis with letermovir demonstrated a reduction in clinically significant CMV infections (CS-CMVi) in clinical trials of CMV-seropositive HCT recipients. This study aims at exploring the effect of primary letermovir prophylaxis in this population on the incidence and outcomes of refractory or resistant CMV infections. METHODS: This is a single-center, retrospective cohort study of 537 consecutive CMV-seropositive allogeneic HCT recipients cared for between March 2016 and October 2018. Baseline demographics, HCT characteristics, CMV infections, treatment, and mortality data were collected from the electronic medical record. CMV outcomes were defined according to the recently standardized definitions for clinical trials. Characteristics and outcomes were assessed according to receipt of primary letermovir prophylaxis. RESULTS: Of 537 patients identified, 123 received letermovir for primary prophylaxis during the first 100 days after HCT; 414 did not. In a multivariate analysis, primary prophylaxis with letermovir was associated with reductions in CS-CMVi (hazard ratio [HR] 0.26; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.16-0.41), CMV end-organ disease (HR 0.23; 95% CI, 0.10-0.52), refractory or resistant CMV infection (HR 0.15; 95% CI, 0.04-0.52), and nonrelapse mortality at week 48 (HR 0.55; 95% CI, 0.32-0.93). There was neither resistant CMV nor CMV-related mortality in the primary letermovir prophylaxis group. CONCLUSIONS: Primary letermovir prophylaxis effectively prevents refractory or resistant CMV infections and decreases nonrelapse mortality at week 48, as well as CS-CMVi and CMV disease after allogeneic HCT.

Vedolizumab for Steroid Refractory Lower Gastrointestinal Tract Graft-Versus-Host Disease.

Steroid-refractory (SR) lower gastrointestinal (LGI) acute graft-versus-host disease (aGVHD) has poor prognosis, and novel drugs are needed. We describe outcomes of patients with SR-LGI aGVHD treated with vedolizumab. The primary objective was to determine overall response rate (ORR) at days 14, 28, and 56. Secondary outcomes included overall survival (OS), non-relapse mortality and toxicities. Twenty patients, median age 46 years (range, 23-71), were included. All but 2 patients (90%) had grade 3 to 4 aGVHD (45% stage 4, 40% stage 3 LGI). Median time to vedolizumab was 21 days (range, 5-1031) and 13 days (range, 0-533) after diagnosis of LGI aGVHD and SR-LGI aGVHD, respectively. It was given as ≥3rd line (median 3; range 2-6) in 75% after failure of steroids, and additional treatments including ruxolitinib (n = 12) and others. Median follow-up was 17 months (range, 10-34). The days 14, 28 and 56 ORRs were 45% (9/20; complete response [CR] 25%), 35% (7/20; CR 20%), and 25% (5/20; CR 20%), respectively. Among ruxolitinib failures, it was 50% (6/12; CR 25%), 50% (6/12; CR 25%) and 25% (3/12; CR 16.7%), respectively. Fifteen patients died (14 GVHD, 1 leukemia relapse). The actuarial 6-month OS was 35% (95% confidence interval 16-55). No progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy or infusion reaction occurred. Forty-four infection events (22 viral, 18 bacterial, and 4 fungal) were noted in 16 patients. Vedolizumab was well tolerated and demonstrated potential efficacy even after ruxolitinib failure for SR-LGI aGVHD. Yet the responses were suboptimal, and its use requires further investigation.

Letermovir and its role in the prevention of cytomegalovirus infection in seropositive patients receiving an allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplant.

Cytomegalovirus (CMV) reactivation is one of the most common infections affecting allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplant recipients. Although available anti-CMV therapies have been evaluated for the prevention of CMV reactivation, their toxicity profile makes them unfavorable for use as primary prophylaxis; thus, they are routinely reserved for the treatment of CMV viremia or CMV end-organ disease. Pre-emptive CMV monitoring strategies have been widely accepted, and although they have been helpful in early detection, they have not affected the overall morbidity and mortality associated with CMV. Letermovir is a novel agent that was approved for primary prophylaxis in CMV-seropositive adult allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplant recipients. This review focuses on letermovir's novel mechanism; clinical trials supporting its United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval and subsequent follow-up analyses; clinical considerations, with an emphasis on pharmacology; and lessons learned from solid organ transplant recipients, as well as potential future directions.

American Society for Transplantation and Cellular Therapy Pharmacy Special Interest Group Position Statement on Pharmacy Practice Management and Clinical Management for COVID-19 in Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation and Cellular Therapy Patients in the United States.

The coronavirus-19 (COVID-19) pandemic poses a significant risk to patients undergoing hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HCT) or cellular therapy. The American Society for Transplantation and Cellular Therapy Pharmacy Special Interest Group Steering Committee aims to provide pharmacy practice management recommendations for how to transition clinical HCT or cellular therapy pharmacy services using telemedicine capabilities in the inpatient and outpatient settings to maintain an equivalent level of clinical practice while minimizing viral spread in a high-risk, immunocompromised population. In addition, the Steering Committee offers clinical management recommendations for COVID-19 in HCT and cellular therapy recipients based on the rapidly developing literature. As the therapeutic and supportive care interventions for COVID-19 expand, collaboration with clinical pharmacy providers is critical to ensure safe administration in HCT recipients. Attention to drug-drug interactions (DDIs) and toxicity, particularly QTc prolongation, warrants close cardiac monitoring and potential cessation of concomitant QTc-prolonging agents. Expanded indications for hydroxychloroquine and tocilizumab have already caused stress on the usual supply chain. Detailed prescribing algorithms, decision pathways, and specific patient population stock may be necessary. The COVID-19 pandemic has challenged all members of the healthcare team, and we must continue to remain vigilant in providing pharmacy clinical services to one of the most high-risk patient populations while also remaining committed to providing compassionate and safe care for patients undergoing HCT and cellular therapies.

Oral Versus Aerosolized Ribavirin for the Treatment of Respiratory Syncytial Virus Infections in Hematopoietic Cell Transplant Recipients.

BACKGROUND: The use of oral ribavirin (RBV) for respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) infections is not well studied. With the drastic increase in the cost of aerosolized RBV, we aimed to compare outcomes of hematopoietic cell transplant (HCT) recipients treated with oral or aerosolized RBV for RSV infections. METHODS: We reviewed the records of 124 HCT recipients with RSV infections treated with oral or aerosolized RBV from September 2014 through April 2017. An immunodeficiency scoring index (ISI) was used to classify patients as low, moderate, or high risk for progression to lower respiratory infection (LRI) or death. RESULTS: Seventy patients (56%) received aerosolized RBV and 54 (44%) oral RBV. Both groups had a 27% rate of progression to LRI (P = 1.00). Mortality rates did not significantly differ between groups (30-day: aerosolized 10%, oral 9%, P = 1.00; 90-day: aerosolized 23%, oral 11%, P = .10). Classification and regression tree analysis identified ISI ≥7 as an independent predictor of 30-day mortality. For patients with ISI ≥7, 30-day mortality was significantly increased overall, yet remained similar between the aerosolized and oral therapy groups (33% for both). After propensity score adjustment, Cox proportional hazards models showed similar mortality rates between oral and aerosolized therapy groups (30-day: hazard ratio [HR], 1.12 [95% confidence interval {CI}, .345-3.65, P = .845). CONCLUSIONS: HCT recipients with RSV infections had similar outcomes when treated with aerosolized or oral RBV. Oral ribavirin may be an effective alternative to aerosolized RBV, with potential significant cost savings.

Carbapenem versus Cefepime or Piperacillin-Tazobactam for Empiric Treatment of Bacteremia Due to Extended-Spectrum-ß-Lactamase-Producing Escherichia coli in Patients with Hematologic Malignancy.

Infections with extended-spectrum-ß-lactamase (ESBL)-producing Escherichia coli are common in patients with hematologic malignancy. The utility of cefepime and piperacillin-tazobactam as empiric therapy for ESBL-producing E. coli bacteremia in patients with hematologic malignancy is largely unknown. We conducted a single-center, retrospective cohort review of 103 adult inpatients with leukemia and/or hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HCT) recipients with monomicrobial ESBL-producing E. coli bacteremia. No association between increased 14-day mortality and empiric treatment with cefepime (8%) or piperacillin-tazobactam (0%) relative to that with carbapenems (19%) was observed (P = 0.19 and P = 0.04, respectively). This observation was consistent in multivariate Cox proportional hazards models adjusted for confounding and an inverse probability of treatment-weighted (IPTW) Cox proportional hazards model. Both fever and persistent bacteremia were more common in patients treated empirically with cefepime or piperacillin-tazobactam. Empiric treatment with cefepime or piperacillin-tazobactam did not result in increased mortality relative to that with treatment with carbapenems in patients with hematologic malignancy and ESBL-producing E. coli bacteremia, although most patients were changed to carbapenems early in treatment. However, due to prolonged fever and persistent bacteremia, their role may be limited in this patient population.

The oncologic burden of hepatitis C virus infection: A clinical perspective.

Answer questions and earn CME/CNE Chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection affects millions of people worldwide and is associated with cancer. Direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) have changed HCV treatment paradigms, but little is known about the management of HCV infection in patients with cancer. The substantial burden of HCV infection and the inconclusive evidence regarding its detection and management in patients with cancer prompted the authors to review the literature and formulate recommendations. Patients for whom HCV screening is recommended included all patients with hematologic malignancies, hematopoietic cell transplantation candidates, and patients with liver cancer. There is a lack of consensus-based recommendations for the identification of HCV-infected patients with other types of cancer, but physicians may at least consider screening patients who belong to groups at heightened risk of HCV infection, including those born during 1945 through 1965 and those at high risk for infection. Patients with evidence of HCV infection should be assessed by an expert to evaluate liver disease severity, comorbidities associated with HCV infection, and treatment opportunities. DAA therapy should be tailored on the basis of patient prognosis, type of cancer, cancer treatment plan, and hepatic and virologic parameters. HCV-infected patients with cancer who have cirrhosis (or even advanced fibrosis) and those at risk for liver disease progression, especially patients with HCV-associated comorbidities, should have ongoing follow-up, regardless of whether there is a sustained virologic response, to ensure timely detection and treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma. HCV infection and its treatment should not be considered contraindications to cancer treatment and should not delay the initiation of an urgent cancer therapy. CA Cancer J Clin 2017. © 2017 American Cancer Society. CA Cancer J Clin 2017;67:411-431. © 2017 American Cancer Society.