Sequence of Splenectomy and Rituximab for the Treatment of Steroid-Refractory Immune Thrombocytopenia: Does It Matter?

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impact of the sequence of treatment with rituximab and/or splenectomy on time to relapse for patients with steroid-refractory immune thrombocytopenia (ITP). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients 18 years or older with steroid-refractory immune thrombocytopenia who underwent treatment with splenectomy or rituximab from January 1, 2002, through December 31, 2015, at Mayo Clinic. Evaluation included freedom from relapse (FFR) and response rates after treatment with rituximab or splenectomy as single or sequential interventions. RESULTS: A total of 218 eligible patients with ITP who were treated according to standard of care were included in this analysis. Patients failing steroids treated with splenectomy had a higher 5-year FFR than did those treated with rituximab (67.4% vs 19.2%; P<.001, propensity-score matched). Patients who failed splenectomy and were then treated with rituximab had a 2-year FFR similar to that of patients who failed rituximab and were then treated with splenectomy (73.4% vs 59.9%; P=.52). Patients treated with rituximab after splenectomy had a longer 2-year FFR than did patients treated with rituximab as a second-line treatment (73.4% vs 29.0%; P<.001). CONCLUSION: For patients with ITP that relapse after treatment with steroids, splenectomy provides longer FFR than rituximab as a second-line therapy. Among patients who fail second-line treatment with splenectomy or rituximab, those who end up receiving sequential splenectomy-rituximab or rituximab-splenectomy therapy seem to derive similar benefit in the long term. Patients who received rituximab after splenectomy seem to derive superior benefit than do those who are treated with rituximab with an intact spleen.

Correlation of sociodemographic and clinical parameters with depression and distress in patients with hematologic malignancies.

A quarter of cancer patients struggle with distress or depression during their illness. Multiple organizations including the National Comprehensive Cancer Network recommend universal screening for distress and depression. Herein, we describe a universal screening program in patients with hematologic malignancies and factors associated with distress and depression. Between December 2013 and February 2015, patients with hematologic malignancies took the Patient Health Questionnaire 9 (PHQ-9) and Distress Thermometer (DT) prior to receiving their first outpatient parenteral chemotherapy. Patient demographic information as well as information regarding visit burden and baseline use of psychiatric medications were recorded. A PHQ-9 score of ≥ 9 and a DT score ≥ 4 suggested a high risk of major depression and distress. Intergroup comparisons of categorical and continuous variables were performed via chi-square and Wilcoxon rank-sum tests. Multivariate models were constructed using the stepwise selection technique using all potential variables. Two hundred forty-six patients with a median age at diagnosis 65 years (range 18-94 years) were included. In the multivariate analysis, a PHQ-9 score ≥ 9 was associated with living alone (P = 0.007), positive PHQ-2 (P = 0.003), and high Charlson comorbidity index (CCI; P = 0.02), while a DT score ≥ 4 was associated with being married (P = 0.03) and female (P = 0.03). There was no other association with high scores on either questionnaire. Patients with hematologic malignancies often have prolonged treatment and surveillance. We identified subpopulations within this group who may be at high risk of developing distress and depression and who should be aggressively screened even when universal screening programs are not available.