Search

The incorporation of L-asparaginase and pegylated asparaginase into pediatric-inspired regimens has conferred a survival advantage in treatment of adults with acute lymphoblastic leukemia. Use of asparaginase products requires careful prevention, monitoring, and management of adverse effects including hypersensitivity, hepatotoxicity, pancreatitis, coagulopathy, and thrombosis. Currently, there is limited published literature to offer guidance on management of these toxicities. At the University of Maryland Marlene and Stewart Greenebaum Comprehensive Cancer Center, a standard of practice guideline was created to prevent and manage asparaginase-related adverse events. By sharing our long-term experience with asparaginase products and clinical management of asparaginase-induced toxicities, this article aims to improve patient safety and optimize treatment outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Incidence of both acute myeloid leukemia (AML) and cardiovascular disease (CVD) increases with age. We evaluated whether pre-existing CVD impacts clinical outcomes in AML. We retrospectively evaluated 291 consecutive adult AML patients treated at our institution, 2014–2020. Pretreatment comorbidities were identified by chart review. Outcomes included complete remission (CR) and CR with incomplete count recovery (CRi) rates, disease-free survival (DFS), overall survival (OS) and incidence of cardiovascular adverse events. CVD was present in 34% of patients at AML diagnosis. CVD patients had worse performance status (p=0.03) and more commonly had secondary AML (p=0.03) and received hypomethylating (HMA) agent-based therapy (72% vs 38%, p< 0.001). CVD (0.45 vs 0.71, p<0.001) and diabetes mellitus (HR= 0.24, 95% CI: 0.08 – 0.8, p= 0.01) were associated with lower probability of achieving CR/CRi. Accounting for age, performance status (PS), complex karyotype, secondary disease and treatment, CVD patients had shorter OS (HR=1.5, 95% CI: 1.1–2.2, p=0.002), with 1- and 3-year OS 44% vs 67% and 25% vs 40%, respectively, but there was no difference in cumulative incidence of relapse between patients with vs without CVD. Thus, CVD is an independent risk factor for lower response rate and shorter survival in AML patients. • AML treatment response was inferior and OS was shorter in patients with a pre-existing CV risk factors after controlling for type of treatment. • Awareness of the adverse impact of CVD can help guide treatment choices, monitoring and management • Irrespective of whether patients had CVD or not, those who received intensive therapy had improved survival. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]