Search

Contains fulltext : 231712.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access) BACKGROUND: Oncokompas is a web-based self-management application that supports cancer survivors to monitor their health-related quality of life (HRQOL) and symptoms, and to obtain personalised feedback and tailored options for supportive care. In a large randomised controlled trial among survivors of head and neck cancer, colorectal cancer, and breast cancer and (non-)Hodgkin lymphoma, Oncokompas proved to improve HRQOL, and to reduce several tumour-specific symptoms. Effect sizes were however small, and no effect was observed on the primary outcome patient activation. Therefore, this study aims to explore which subgroups of cancer survivors may especially benefit from Oncokompas. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Cancer survivors (n = 625) were randomly assigned to the intervention group (access to Oncokompas, n = 320) or control group (6 months waiting list, n = 305). Outcome measures were HRQOL, tumour-specific symptoms, and patient activation. Potential moderators included socio-demographic (sex, age, marital status, education, employment), clinical (tumour type, stage, time since diagnosis, treatment modality, comorbidities), and personal factors (self-efficacy, personal control, health literacy, Internet use), and patient activation, mental adjustment to cancer, HRQOL, symptoms, and need for supportive care, measured at baseline. Linear mixed models were performed to investigate potential moderators. RESULTS: The intervention effect on HRQOL was the largest among cancer survivors with low to moderate self-efficacy, and among those with high personal control and those with high health literacy scores. Cancer survivors with higher baseline symptom scores benefitted more on head and neck (pain in the mouth, social eating, swallowing, coughing, trismus), and colorectal cancer (weight) specific symptoms. DISCUSSION: Oncokompas seems most effective in reducing symptoms in head and neck cancer and colorectal cancer survivors who report a higher burden of tumour-specific symptoms. Oncokompas seems most effective in improving HRQOL in cancer survivors with lower self-efficacy, and in cancer survivors with higher personal control, and higher health literacy.

Background: CASSIOPEIA part 1 showed superior depth of response and significantly improved progression-free survival with daratumumab, bortezomib, thalidomide, and dexamethasone (D-VTd) versus bortezomib, thalidomide, and dexamethasone (VTd) as induction and consolidation in patients with autologous stem-cell transplant (ASCT)-eligible newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. In part 2, we compared daratumumab maintenance versus observation only. Methods: CASSIOPEIA is a two-part, open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial of patients aged 18–65 years with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0–2, done in 111 European academic and community practice centres. In part 1, patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to induction and consolidation with D-VTd or VTd. Patients still on study who had a partial response or better were randomly assigned (1:1) by an interactive web-response system to daratumumab 16 mg/kg intravenously every 8 weeks (a reduced frequency compared with standard daratumumab long-term dosing) or observation only for up to 2 years. Stratification factors were induction treatment and depth of response in part 1. The part 2 primary endpoint was progression-free survival from second randomisation. This preplanned interim analysis of progression-free survival was done after 281 events and shall be considered the primary analysis of progression-free survival. Sponsor personnel and designees who were involved in the analysis were masked to treatment group until the independent data monitoring committee recommended that the preplanned interim analysis be considered the main analysis of progression-free survival in part 2. Otherwise, treatment assignments were unmasked. The interaction between induction and consolidation and maintenance was tested at a two-sided significance level of 0·05 by a stratified Cox regression model that included the interaction term between maintenance treatment and induction and consolidation treatment. Efficacy analyses were done in the maintenance-specific intention-to-treat population, which comprised all patients who underwent second randomisation. Safety was analysed in all patients in the daratumumab group who received at least one dose and all patients randomly assigned to observation only. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02541383. Long-term follow-up is ongoing and the trial is closed to new participants. Findings: Between May 30, 2016, and June 18, 2018, 886 patients (458 [84%] of 543 in the D-VTd group and 428 [79%] of 542 in the VTd group) were randomly assigned to daratumumab maintenance (n=442) or observation only (n=444). At a median follow-up of 35·4 months (IQR 30·2–39·9) from second randomisation, median progression-free survival was not reached (95% CI not evaluable [NE]–NE) with daratumumab versus 46·7 months (40·0–NE) with observation only (hazard ratio 0·53, 95% CI 0·42–0·68, p

Real-life data on the treatment of myelofibrosis patients with baseline thrombocytopenia with ruxolitinib are limited. We present the outcomes of thrombocytopenic Dutch patients treated within a compassionate-use program. Additionally, we performed a literature review. We conclude that treatment of patients with platelet counts of 50 to 100 3 10(9)/L with ruxolitinib is safe. Background: Ruxolitinib is an approved treatment for myelofibrosis patients, but data regarding patients with baseline thrombocytopenia are limited. The EXPAND study recently suggested tolerability of ruxolitinib, with a maximum starting dose of 10 mg 2 times a day (BID). However, the small sample size and vigorous follow-up in this trial hamper direct translation of these results to routine practice. Patients and Methods: We report retrospective data on Dutch ruxolitinib-treated myelofibrosis patients, focusing on those with baseline thrombocytopenia. Additionally, we reviewed current literature regarding ruxolitinib treatment in this subgroup. Results: In our cohort, 12 of 119 patients had a baseline platelet count of

Purpose The eHealth self-management application ‘Oncokompas’ was developed to support cancer survivors in monitoring health-related quality of life (HRQOL) and symptoms, and obtaining personalized feedback and options for supportive care. The aim of this study was to assess the cost-utility of Oncokompas compared with care as usual (CAU) among cancer survivors. Methods Survivors were randomly allocated to the intervention or control group. Direct (non-)medical, indirect non-medical costs, and HRQOL were measured at 3- and 6-month follow-up, using iMTA Medical Consumption and Productivity Costs and the EuroQol-5D questionnaires. Mean cumulative costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were compared between both groups. Results In total, 625 survivors were randomized into intervention (n = 320) or control group (n = 305). Base case analysis showed that incremental costs from a societal perspective were − €163 (95% CI, − 665 to 326), and incremental QALYs were 0.0017 (95% CI, − 0.0121 to 0.0155) in the intervention group compared with those in the control group. The probability that, compared with CAU, Oncokompas is more effective was 60%, less costly 73%, and both more effective and less costly 47%. Sensitivity analyses showed that incremental costs vary between − €40 and €69, and incremental QALYs vary between − 0.0023 and − 0.0057. Conclusion Oncokompas is likely to be equally effective on utilities, and not more expensive than CAU, and will therefore contribute to sustainable cancer survivorship care in a (cost-)effective manner. Implications for Cancer Survivors Oncokompas seems to improve HRQOL and reduces the burden of several tumour-specific symptoms, while costs from a societal perspective are similar to CAU.

Introduction The web-based self-management application Oncokompas was developed to support cancer survivors to monitor health-related quality of life and symptoms (Measure) and to provide tailored information (Learn) and supportive care options (Act). In a previously reported randomised controlled trial (RCT), 68% of 655 recruited survivors were eligible, and of those 45% participated in the RCT. Among participants of the RCT that were randomised to the intervention group, 52% used Oncokompas as intended. The aim of this study was to explore reasons for not participating in the RCT, and reasons for not using Oncokompas among non-users, and the use and evaluation of Oncokompas among users. Methods Reasons for not participating were assessed with a study-specific questionnaire among 243 survivors who declined participation. Usage was investigated among 320 participants randomised to the intervention group of the RCT via system data and a study-specific questionnaire that was assessed during the 1 week follow-up (T1) assessment. Results Main reasons for not participating were not interested in participation in scientific research (40%) and not interested in scientific research and Oncokompas (28%). Main reasons for not being interested in Oncokompas were wanting to leave the period of being ill behind (29%), no symptom burden (23%), or lacking internet skills (18%). Out of the 320 participants in the intervention group 167 (52%) used Oncokompas as intended. Among 72 non-users, main reasons for not using Oncokompas were no symptom burden (32%) or lack of time (26%). Among 248 survivors that activated their account, satisfaction and user-friendliness were rated with a 7 (scale 0–10). Within 3 (IQR 1–4) sessions, users selected 32 (IQR 6–37) topics. Main reasons for not using healthcare options in Act were that the information in Learn was already sufficient (44%) or no supportive care needs (32%). Discussion Main reasons for not reaching or using Oncokompas were no symptom burden, no supportive care needs, or lack of time. Users selected many cancer-generic and tumour-specific topics to address, indicating added value of the wide range of available topics., Highlights • Main reason for not participating in the RCT was no interest in scientific research. • Main reason for no interest in Oncokompas was wanting to leave the period of being ill behind. • Main reason for not using Oncokompas was no symptom burden. • Many cancer-generic and tumour-specific symptoms were chosen in Oncokompas.

Background Campylobacter jejuni is a motile, gram-negative rod known for causing self-limiting enterocolitis while rarely causing extraintestinal infections. We report the first case of a patient with Campylobacter jejuni osteomyelitis in both femora. Case presentation A 54-year-old female presented with progressive pain in both upper extremities. Her past medical history mentioned a lymphoplasmacytic lymphoma (LPL) for which she had received dexamethasone, cyclophosphamide and fludarabine and was still receiving maintenance therapy with intravenous rituximab. Two months prior to presentation, she received oral fluoroquinolone for a recurrent enterocolitis with stool cultures positive for Campylobacter jejuni. Palpation of the left quadriceps femoris muscle was remarkably painful during physical examination. Laboratory testing showed elevated C-reactive protein and recent low gamma globulin levels. The presumptive diagnosis at this point was a transformation of LPL to a large B cell lymphoma. In order to determine the preferred site for biopsy, a fluorine-18 fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose positron emission tomography combined with computed tomography was done. However, blood cultures taken on admission showed growth of Campylobacter jejuni in both aerobic bottles, with a strain resistant to fluoroquinolones. Diagnosis of Campylobacter jejuni osteomyelitis was confirmed with 16S ribosomal RNA gene polymerase chain reaction performed on femoral bone obtained through biopsy. Treatment with intravenous imipenem/cilastatin followed by intravenous and oral doxycycline proved insufficient. Subsequently, the patient was treated successfully with intravenous meropenem for six weeks and concurrent intravenous immunoglobulin. Conclusion We report the first case of Campylobacter jejuni osteomyelitis in both femora in a patient with acquired hypogammaglobulinemia. Diagnosis was confirmed by blood cultures and positive 16S ribosomal RNA gene polymerase chain reaction for Campylobacter spp. on bone biopsy. Treatment was successful with intravenous meropenem and immunoglobulin. Our report showcases an unusual manifestation in a patient with immunodeficiency and discusses failure of initial antibiotic therapy.

Background: Knowledge about the efficacy of behavioural intervention technologies that can be used by cancer survivors independently from a health-care provider is scarce. We aimed to assess the efficacy, reach, and usage of Oncokompas, a web-based eHealth application that supports survivors in self-management by monitoring health-related quality of life (HRQOL) and cancer-generic and tumour-specific symptoms and obtaining tailored feedback with a personalised overview of supportive care options. Methods: In this non-blinded, randomised, controlled trial, we recruited patients treated at 14 hospitals in the Netherlands for head and neck cancer, colorectal cancer, breast cancer, Hodgkin lymphoma, or non-Hodgkin lymphoma. Adult survivors (aged ≥18 years) were recruited through the Netherlands Cancer Registry (NCR) and invited by their treating physician through the Patient Reported Outcomes Following Initial Treatment and Long term Evaluation of Survivorship (PROFILES) registry. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) by an independent researcher to the intervention group (access to Oncokompas) or control group (access to Oncokompas after 6 months), by use of block randomisation (block length of 68), stratified by tumour type. The primary outcome was patient activation (knowledge, skills, and confidence for self-management), assessed at baseline, post-intervention, and 3-month and 6-month follow-up. Linear mixed models (intention-to-treat) were used to assess group differences over time from baseline to 6-month follow-up. The trial is registered in the Netherlands Trial Register, NTR5774 and is completed. Findings: Between Oct 12, 2016, and May 24, 2018, 625 (21%) of 2953 survivors assessed for eligibility were recruited and randomly assigned to the intervention (320) or control group (305). Median follow-up was 6 months (IQR 6−6). Patient activation was not significantly different between intervention and control group over time (difference at 6-month follow-up 1·7 [95% CI −0·8–4·1], p=0·41). Interpretation: Oncokompas did not improve the amount of knowledge, skills, and confidence for self-management in cancer survivors. This study contributes to the evidence for the development of tailored strategies for development and implementation of behavioural intervention technologies among cancer survivors. Funding: Dutch Cancer Society (KWF Kankerbestrijding).

Introduction Non-transplant eligible newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NTE-NDMM) patients have a heterogeneous clinical outcome, which can be partly explained by differences in frailty level. Accordingly, intermediate-fit patients, according to the IMWG frailty index, have an inferior survival and higher rates of treatment discontinuation as compared to fit NTE-NDMM patients. The aim of this study was to prospectively investigate the efficacy and tolerability of the novel regimen ixazomib-daratumumab-low dose dexamethasone in intermediate-fit NTE-NDMM patients. This trail is registered at www.trialregister.nl as NTR6297. Methods In the phase II HOVON 143 study, intermediate-fit NTE-NDMM patients were treated with nine 28-day induction cycles, consisting of ixazomib 4mg (day 1, 8, 15), daratumumab 16mg/kg (cycle 1-2 on day 1, 8, 15, 22; cycle 3-6 on day 1, 15; cycle 7-9 on day 1) and dexamethasone (on days of daratumumab; cycle 1-2 20mg, subsequent cycles 10mg), followed by maintenance therapy of 8-week cycles with ixazomib (days 1, 8, 15, 29, 36, 43), and daratumumab (day 1), of maximum 2 years or until earlier progression. Inclusion criteria were NTE-NDMM patients who were intermediate-fit according to the IMWG frailty index. Main exclusion criteria were severe cardiac dysfunction, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease with an FEV1 The primary endpoint was overall response rate (ORR) after nine induction cycles, defined by having at least a partial response (≥PR). Secondary endpoints were PFS, OS, event free survival (EFS, defined as either treatment discontinuation, progressive disease (PD), death, hematological adverse events (AE) grade 4 or non-hematological AE grade 3/4), and health-related quality of life (using the EORTC-QLQ C30 and -MY20). Results Sixty-five NTE-NDMM patients were included in the study of whom the demographics are described in Table 1. Median age was 76 years (range 65-80), 14% had a WHO≥2, 18% had ISS3 and 14% had high-risk cytogenetic abnormalities. The ORR was 71% (95% CI 63-73), including 23 (35%) patients with a very good partial response and 1 (2%) with a complete response. After a median follow-up time of 18.1 months (range 9.5-27.8), the median PFS was 17.4 months (95% CI 10.4-22.6), the median OS was not reached and 12-month OS was 92% (95% CI 82-97)(Figure 1). Eight patients died, 3/65 (5%) due to relapse and 5/65 (8%) due to other reasons, including one early death (≤60 days from registration). The median EFS was 5.3 months (95% CI 2.8-8.3). EFS defining events were non-hematological AEs grade 3/4 in 31 (48%), PD in 15 (23%), hematological AEs grade 4 in 2 (3%), treatment discontinuation in 2 (3%) and death in 1 (2%) patients (Figure 1). Thirty/65 (46%) patients did not proceed to maintenance therapy, due to PD (19/65 (29%)), toxicity (4/65 (6%)), incompliance (3/65 (5%)), sudden death (1/65 (2%)) or other reasons (3/65 (5%)). In addition, 7/65 (11%) patients had to discontinue ixazomib-only, all 7 due to PNP. Cumulative grade 3 or higher hematological AEs occurred in 8/65 (12%), mainly neutropenia (6%), whereas grade ≥3 non-hematological AEs were reported in 33/65 (51%) patients. Most common non-hematological grade ≥3 AEs were gastro-intestinal (14%), central nervous system AEs (11%) or infections (9%). Of 27/65 (42%) patients experiencing PNP, 4 (8%) had PNP grade 3. During induction, patients experienced a statistically and clinically (reaching minimal important difference thresholds) significant improvement in GHS/QoL, role functioning, and future perspective. In contrast, PNP worsened over time. Conclusion In intermediate-fit patients, ixazomib, daratumumab and dexamethasone is an effective and feasible regime, which improves QoL. However, treatment discontinuation due to toxicity (either the whole regimen (6%), but especially ixazomib only (11%)) or incompliance, which negatively affects PFS, remains a concern. This underscores the need to investigate novel monoclonal antibody-based treatment combinations with a higher efficacy to tolerability balance for intermediate-fit patients with NDMM. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Vekemans: Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol Myers Squibb: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. van de Donk: Janssen Pharmaceuticals: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Cellectis: Research Funding; Servier: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Adaptive Biotechnologies: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bayer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Timmers: Gilead Sciences: Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses; Daiichi Sankyo Ned: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Servier: Speakers Bureau; Janssen-Cilag: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Speakers Bureau. Sonneveld: Karyopharm: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene/BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; SkylineDx: Honoraria, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. van der Spek: Amgen: Other. De Waal: Celgene: Speakers Bureau; Roche: Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses. Nijhof: Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene/Bristol Myers Squibb: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Levin: Roche, Janssen, Abbvie: Other: Travel Expenses, Ad-Board. Zweegman: Oncopeptides: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sanofi: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding.

Background: Bortezomib, thalidomide, and dexamethasone (VTd) plus autologous stem-cell transplantation is standard treatment in Europe for transplant-eligible patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. We evaluated whether the addition of daratumumab to VTd before and after autologous stem-cell transplantation would improve stringent complete response rate in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. Methods: In this two-part, randomised, open-label, phase 3 CASSIOPEIA trial, we recruited transplant-eligible patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma at 111 European sites. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive four pre-transplant induction and two post-transplant consolidation cycles of VTd alone (VTd group) or in combination with daratumumab (D-VTd group). The primary endpoint of part 1 was stringent complete response assessed 100 days after transplantation. Part 2 (maintenance) is ongoing. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02541383. Findings: Between Sept 22, 2015, and Aug 1, 2017, 1085 patients were enrolled at 111 European sites and were randomly assigned to the D-VTd group (n=543) or the VTd group (n=542). At day 100 after transplantation, 157 (29%) of 543 patients in the D-VTd group and 110 (20%) of 542 patients in the VTd group in the intention-to-treat population had achieved a stringent complete response (odds ratio 1·60, 95% CI 1·21–2·12, p=0·0010). 211 (39%) patients in the D-VTd group versus 141 (26%) in the VTd group achieved a complete response or better, and 346 (64%) of 543 versus 236 (44%) of 542 achieved minimal residual disease-negativity (10−5 sensitivity threshold, assessed by multiparametric flow cytometry; both p

Allogeneic stem cell transplantation (alloSCT) remains the only curative option for CLL patients. Whereas active disease at the time of alloSCT predicts poor outcome, no standard remission-induction regimen exists. We prospectively assessed outcome after cisplatin-containing immune-chemotherapy (R-DHAP) followed by alloSCT in 46 patients (median age 58 years) fulfilling modified European Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation (EBMT) CLL Transplant Consensus criteria being refractory to or relapsed (R/R)

Introduction Elderly non-transplant eligible newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (nte-NDMM) patients also benefit from novel therapies, however, overall survival (OS) is inferior in unfit and frail compared to fit patients as defined by the International Myeloma Working Group (IMWG) frailty index. This is caused by a high discontinuation rate due to toxicity. Therefore, a less toxic effective treatment for unfit and frail patients is needed. In view of the favorable safety profile of ixazomib (Ixa) and daratumumab (Dara), we investigated the efficacy and feasibility of treatment with Ixa and Dara plus low dose dexamethasone (Ixa-Dara-dex) in unfit and frail patients. This trial was registered at www.trialregister.nlwww.trialregister.nl as NTR6297. Methods In this prospective multicenter phase II trial, treatment consisted of nine 28 day-induction cycles consisting of Ixa 4 mg (days 1, 8, 15), Dara 16 mg/kg (cycle 1-2: days 1, 8, 15, 22; cycle 3-6: days 1, 15; cycle 7-9: day 1) and dex (in combination with Dara; cycle 1-2: 20 mg; subsequent cycles 10 mg) followed by maintenance therapy with Ixa (days 1, 8, 15, 29, 36, 43) and Dara (day 1) of 8-week cycles, until progression for a maximum of 2 years. A pre-specified efficacy analysis was planned for the first eligible 23 unfit and 23 frail patients separately at the time the data of the first 9 cycles induction therapy was available. Inclusion criteria were unfit or frail NDMM patients according to the IMWG frailty index. Main exclusion criteria were severe cardiac dysfunction, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease with an FEV1 We here report the overall response rate (ORR) on induction treatment, progression free survival (PFS) and OS, treatment discontinuation and toxicity of the first 23/65 eligible unfit and 23/65 frail patients during induction therapy. In addition, we present the mortality rate for all patients who were included in the study (65 unfit, 67 frail), with data cut-off June 18, 2019. Results The demographics of the first 23 unfit and 23 frail patients are described in Table 1. Median follow-up of these first 23 unfit and 23 frail patients is 12.7 months (range 9.1-18.3) and 13.4 months (range 9.2-17.7), respectively. ORR during induction was 87% in unfit (48% partial response [PR] and 39% very good partial response [VGPR]) and 78% in frail (48% PR, 26% VGPR, 4% stringent complete response). Nine months PFS rates were 78% (95% Confidence Interval [CI] 55-90) and 61% (95% CI 38-77), respectively. Nine months OS rates were 100% and 83% (95% CI 60-93), respectively. Sixteen/23 (70%) unfit and 14/23 (61%) frail patients completed induction treatment with Ixa-Dara-dex. Reasons for treatment discontinuation were progressive disease (PD, n=5), toxicity (n=1) and incompliance (n=1) in unfit and intercurrent death (n=3, all within 3 cycles), PD (n=2), incompliance (n=2) and other reasons (n=2) in frail. The median and inter-quartile range of relative dose intensity (RDI) for respectively unfit and frail were 0.96 and 0.91 for Ixa, 0.98 and 0.96 for Dara and 1.0 and 0.99 for dex. Toxicity is described in Table 2. Hematological toxicity was limited, being mainly neutropenia (in unfit both 4% grade 3 and 4; in frail 4% grade 3 and 13% grade 4) and thrombocytopenia occurring only in frail (17% grade 3, 4% grade 4). Non-hematological toxicity was manageable, with grade 3 infections occurring in 9% of both unfit and frail patients. In both arms, there were no infusion related reactions and only 4% grade 3 neuropathy was reported. Additionally, we investigated the mortality rate of all included 65 unfit and 67 frail patients, with a limited follow-up of 7.1 months (range 1-18.3) and 8.8 months (range 0.4-17.7), respectively. The mortality rate was only 2% in unfit (1/65 due to PD). Thirteen/67 (19%) of frail patients died, which was caused by infections (n=6; 3 pneumonia, 1 influenza B, 1 erysipelas), sudden death (n=2), organ dysfunction (n=2), incompliance (n=1) and PD (n=2). Early death rate (≤3 months of registration) was 0% in unfit and 8/67 (12%) in frail. Conclusion Ixa-Dara-dex is an effective therapeutic regimen in unfit patients with limited toxicity, not giving rise to (early) mortality. Additionally, in the majority of frail patients this regimen is active and feasible. However, better identification and support of those patients is warranted, as we observed early mortality due to vulnerability and infections. Disclosures Van De Donk: Janssen Pharmaceuticals: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; AMGEN: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Bayer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Servier: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Sonneveld:SkylineDx: Research Funding; Takeda: Honoraria, Research Funding; Karyopharm: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; BMS: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria, Research Funding. Levin:Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Educational grant ; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Educational Grant; Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Educational Grant; Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Educational Grant; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Educational grant . Zweegman:Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen Pharmaceuticals: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding.

8042 Background: High-dose therapy (HDT) followed by autologous stem-cell transplantation (ASCT) is the standard of care in TE NDMM. In the phase 3 CASSIOPEIA study, D-VTd significantly improved stringent complete response (sCR), ≥CR, and minimal residual disease (MRD)-negative rates and reduced the risk of progression/death vs VTd in TE NDMM pts. We assessed SC yield and transplantation results among pts receiving D-VTd vs VTd induction prior to HDT/ASCT in Part 1 of CASSIOPEIA. Methods: In Part 1, TE NDMM pts ages 18-65 y were randomized 1:1 to 4 pre-transplant induction and 2 post-transplant consolidation cycles of DARA + VTd or VTd alone. After induction, pts underwent SC mobilization with cyclophosphamide 3 g/m2 (recommended dose) and GCSF. Peripheral blood SCs were harvested based on response to mobilization. Plerixafor was given if SC collection failed at first attempt and in accordance with institutional practice. Melphalan 200 mg/m2 IV was given as HDT prior to ASCT. Results: A total of 1085 pts were randomized (D-VTd, 543; VTd, 542). Among pts who completed mobilization (D-VTd, 506; VTd, 492), more pts receiving D-VTd vs VTd received plerixafor during mobilization (21.7% vs 7.9%). Pts underwent a median (range) of 2 (1-6) vs 1 (1-4) days of apheresis for D-VTd vs VTd. The median number of CD34+ cells collected was lower for D-VTd vs VTd (6.3×106/kg vs 8.9×106/kg). Nevertheless, a similar percentage of ITT pts receiving D-VTd vs VTd underwent ASCT (90.1% vs 89.3%). The median number of CD34+ cells transplanted for D-VTd vs VTd was 3.3×106/kg vs 4.3×106/kg. Hematopoietic reconstitution rates were high and similar for transplanted pts receiving D-VTd vs VTd (99.8% vs 99.6%). For D-VTd vs VTd, a median (range) of 13.0 (6-54) vs 13.0 (4-43) days was required to achieve sustained ANC > 500 cells/mm3, and a median (range) of 14.0 (2-56) vs 12.0 (1-47) days was required to achieve sustained platelets > 20,000 cells/mm3 without transfusion. Conclusions: SC mobilization and collection was feasible with D-VTd induction. Adding DARA to VTd allowed successful transplantation in pts with TE NDMM. Clinical trial information: NCT02541383.

The combination of melphalan, prednisone, and thalidomide (MPT) is considered standard therapy for newly diagnosed patients with multiple myeloma who are ineligible for stem cell transplantation. Long-term treatment with thalidomide is hampered by neurotoxicity. Melphalan, prednisone, and lenalidomide, followed by lenalidomide maintenance therapy, showed promising results without severe neuropathy emerging. We randomly assigned 668 patients between nine 4-week cycles of MPT followed by thalidomide maintenance until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity (MPT-T) and the same MP regimen with thalidomide being replaced by lenalidomide (MPR-R). This multicenter, open-label, randomized phase 3 trial was undertaken by Dutch-Belgium Cooperative Trial Group for Hematology Oncology and the Nordic Myeloma Study Group (the HOVON87/NMSG18 trial). The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS). A total of 318 patients were randomly assigned to receive MPT-T, and 319 received MPR-R. After a median follow-up of 36 months, PFS with MPT-T was 20 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 18-23 months) vs 23 months (95% CI, 19-27 months) with MPR-R (hazard ratio, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.72-1.04; P = .12). Response rates were similar, with at least a very good partial response of 47% and 45%, respectively. Hematologic toxicity was more pronounced with MPR-R, especially grades 3 and 4 neutropenia: 64% vs 27%. Neuropathy of at least grade 3 was significantly higher in the MPT-T arm: 16% vs 2% in MPR-R, resulting in a significant shorter duration of maintenance therapy (5 vs 17 months in MPR-R), irrespective of age. MPR-R has no advantage over MPT-T concerning efficacy. The toxicity profile differed with clinically significant neuropathy during thalidomide maintenance vs myelosuppression with MPR.

Background: Patients receiving chemotherapy are at increased risk for influenza virus infection. Little is known about the preferred moment of vaccination during chemotherapy. Patients and methods: Breast cancer patients received influenza vaccination during FEC (5-fluorouracil, epirubicin and cyclophosphamide)-containing chemotherapy regimens. Patients were randomised for early (day 4) or late (day 16) vaccination during the chemotherapy cycle. Influenza virus-specific antibody titres were determined before and 3 weeks after vaccination by haemagglutination inhibition. Results: We included 38 breast cancer patients (20 in the early and 18 in the late group) and 21 healthy controls. The overall patient group had significant lower responses to the vaccine compared with healthy controls. Patients vaccinated at day 4 tended to have higher antibody titres as compared with patients vaccinated at day 16, although the difference in post-vaccination titres is not statistically significant. Geometric mean titres post-vaccination for day 4 versus day 16 were 63.7 versus 29.5 (H3N2), 28.2 versus 19.6 (H1N1) and 29.8 versus 16.0 (B/Brisbane), respectively. Conclusions: Patients on chemotherapy have significantly lower responses to influenza virus vaccination compared with healthy controls. Vaccination early during the chemotherapy cycle induces better responses than does vaccination at day 16 of the cycle. Follow-up studies are needed to confirm this effect.

Introduction Data from clinical trials indicate that elderly non-transplant eligible newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (nte-NDMM) patients also benefit from novel therapies. However, overall survival is inferior in unfit and frail compared to fit patients as defined by the International Myeloma Working Group (IMWG) frailty index, caused by a high discontinuation rate due to toxicity. Therefore, there is a need for less toxic treatment for unfit and frail patients. In view of the favorable safety profile of ixazomib and daratumumab, we investigated the efficacy and feasibility of treatment with ixazomib, daratumumab and low dose dexamethasone (IDd) in unfit and frail patients. This trial was registered at www.trialregister.nl as NTR6297. Methods In this prospective multicenter phase II trial treatment consisted of 9 28 day-induction cycles consisting of ixazomib (I) 4 mg (days 1, 8, 15), daratumumab (D) 16 mg/kg (cycle 1-2: days 1, 8, 15, 22; cycle 3-6: days 1, 15; cycle 7-9: day 1) and dexamethasone (in combination with daratumumab (d); cycle 1-2: 20 mg; subsequent cycles 10 mg) followed by maintenance therapy with I (days 1, 8, 15, 29, 36, 43) and D (day 1) of 8-week cycles, until progression for a maximum of 2 years. The primary objective is to determine the overall response rate (ORR) on induction therapy. Aiming for an ORR of at least 65% and considering 50% as a too low ORR, with an optimal Simon 2-Stage design, α = 0.10 and β = 0.20, 60 unfit and 60 frail patients should be included, increased to 66 for both populations to account for ineligibility. A pre-specified safety analysis was planned when for the first 10 unfit and 10 frail patients separately the data of the first 4 cycles of induction therapy are available. Inclusion criteria were NDMM, either being unfit or frail according to the IMWG frailty index. Main exclusion criteria were severe cardiac dysfunction, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease with an FEV1 We here report the results of the planned safety interim analysis of the first 10/32 included frail patients who completed the first 4 induction cycles. The safety interim analysis of the first 10 unfit patients is planned in September, of which the results will be available at the ASH meeting. In addition, we here report the severe adverse events (SAE) for 58 eligible patients (26 unfit, 32 frail) who were included in the study until July 16, 2018. Results The demographic data of the first 10 frail patients are described in Table 1. Median FU of the first 10 frail patients is 5.2 months (range 0.6-9) and of the 58 included patients 1.6 months (range 0-9). Toxicity is described in Table 2. Hematological toxicity was limited, being mainly thrombocytopenia; 3/10 grade 3, 1/10 grade 4, the latter being disease-related. Non-hematological toxicity was manageable, with only 2 grade 3 gastro-intestinal events and 1 pulmonary embolism. No infusion related reactions and neuropathy were reported. There were minor dose reductions only. The median and inter-quartile range of relative dose intensity (RDI) were 1.0 (0.9, 1.0) for ixazomib, 0.9 (0.9, 1.0) for daratumumab and 1.0 (0.9, 1.0) for dexamethasone. SAEs occurred in 9/26 unfit and 14/32 frail patients, mainly caused by prolongation of hospitalization (82% and 88% respectively). Two patients died during cycle 1, both not related to therapy. One 81-year old patient unexpectedly died at home at day 35 of cycle 1 (delay due to low platelet count) after having recovered from thrombocytopenia and a decreased renal function, grade 3, probably caused by cotrimoxazole and valaciclovir. The second 81-year old patient had a thrombocytopenia of 18x109/l related to MM and died of gastrointestinal bleeding for which he declined therapy at day 15 of cycle 1. In the first included 58 patients a total of 4 patients died (6.9%, 4/32 frail (12.5%) and 0/26 unfit (0%)), of whom 2 not related to therapy (see above) and 2 possibly therapy-related; 1 due to Influenza B and 1 acute pre-renal failure due to vomiting and diarrhea. Preliminary response during the first 4 cycles of therapy is promising is; ORR 70% of which 20% VGPR, 10% MR, 10% SD and 10% not evaluable. Conclusion This planned safety analysis of frail patients in the HOVON 143 showed that Ixazomib-Daratumumab-low dose dexamethasone is feasible with a low rate of therapy-related toxicity and mortality. Preliminary response rates are promising. Disclosures Levin: Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. van de Donk:Janssen Pharmceuticals: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding. Sonneveld:Amgen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding; BMS: Honoraria, Research Funding; Karyopharm: Honoraria, Research Funding. Zweegman:Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene Corp.: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding.

A 56-years-old woman was admitted to the emergency department because of fatigue since 6 weeks. Laboratory investigation revealed pancytopenia with teardrop cells and hypersegmentation. Teardrop cells are a characteristic finding in myelofibrosis, but in this case they were caused by severe vitamin B12 deficiency.

BACKGROUND There is a high rate of toxicity-related discontinuation in elderly patients with NDMM, which in general is higher in patients ≥75 years. Therefore, we investigated the feasibility of a dose-adapted MPV scheme in patients ≥75 years and whether the International Myeloma Working Group frailty score (fit, unfit, and frail) predicts feasibility. Moreover, geriatric assessments, including functional assessments, were performed in order to design a model for more precise prediction of feasibility of treatment. METHODS Patients were treated with 9 cycles of MPV: Mel 6 mg/m2, day 1-4; Pred 30 mg/m2, day 1-4; and Bort 1.3 mg/m2 day 1,8,15 and 22 of a 35-day cycle. This first planned analysis on discontinuation rate was restricted to the first 100 eligible consecutive patients out of 240 planned patients. A preliminary analysis of grip strength and walking speed was performed, comparing tertiles. RESULTS Of the 96/100 evaluable patients, none were fit (because of age ≥75 years), 23/96 (24%) were unfit and 64/96 (67%) were frail (9/96 (9%) unknown). 28/64 (44%) frail patients were aged 75-80, and 8/64 (13%) patients were defined frail based on age >80 years only. Frail patients were found to have significantly less grip strength and lower walking speed as compared to unfit patients (see table 1), both for men and women. However, 19% (male) and 15% (female) of the patients with low grip strength were not frail, but unfit. For slow walking speed these percentages were 13% and 7% respectively, indicating these tools might be complementary to the IMWG frailty score in predicting outcome. The median follow up was 16 months. The discontinuation rate of MPV in the total population was 49%; 30% in unfit and 55% (including 7% discontinuation of bortezomib only) in frail patients (p=0.055). In patients >80 years (by definition frail) discontinuation rate was higher (69% (including 11% bortezomib only)) than in patients aged 75-80 years (37%; p=0.003). Reasons for early discontinuation in unfit versus frail were: progressive disease 1/7 vs 4/31, toxicity 3/7 vs 10/31, death 0/7 vs 4/31, non-compliance 1/7 vs 8/31, other 2/7 vs 5/31. In 72% 6 cycles of MPV were found to be feasible, both in unfit (78%) and frail (73%) patients. Response on protocol was ≥PR 69%, ≥VGPR 29% and ≥CR 7%, not significantly different in unfit versus frail patients. Median progression free survival (PFS) was 17 months: 22 for unfit and 17 months for frail patients (p=0.38). Overall survival (OS) at 18 months was 76%: 88% for unfit and 71% for frail (p=0.26) patients. Conclusions Treatment of elderly NDMM patients ≥75 years with 9 cycles of dose-adjusted MPV results in a high discontinuation rate of 49%: 30% in unfit versus 55% in frail patients, indicating the need for further treatment adjustment and more precise selection of patients. Concerning the first; 6 cycles were found to be feasible in the majority of both unfit and frail patients. Concerning the latter; a preliminary analysis of functional geriatric assessments showed significantly lower performance in frail compared to unfit patients. Moreover, the results of functional geriatric assessments were found to add to the IMWG frailty score, hopefully leading to a better prediction of the feasibility of treatment in elderly NDMM patients. Functional assessments in unfit versus frail patients 1 p=0.18 2 p=0.012 3 p=0.037 4 p=0.014 Additional cognitive and nutritional geriatric assessments and biomarkers (sarcopenia and senescence markers) were performed in all patients. FISH analysis of isolated plasma cells will be available in the majority of patients. This trial was registered at www.trialregister.nl (NTR 4244), EudraCT 2013-000320-33, and supported by the Dutch Cancer Society (project number VU 2013-6411 ) and by an unrestricted grant from Janssen-Cilag. Disclosures Zweegman: Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Takeda: Honoraria, Research Funding. Ypma:Advisory Board Sanofi (Plerixafor): Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Minnema:Celgene: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; Jansen Cilag: Consultancy. van de Donk:BMS: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding. Sonneveld:Karyopharm: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding.

Background Higher rates of hospitalization and mortality are described in oncology patients with influenza virus infection compared to the general population. Yearly influenza vaccination is recommended for patients treated with chemotherapy. The optimal moment to administer the vaccine during a treatment cycle has not been studied extensively. Patients and methods During the influenza season 2011–2012 we conducted a multicenter randomized controlled trial (OFLUVAC, NTR2858, no sponsoring) in the Netherlands. Patients receiving adjuvant chemotherapy for breast or colorectal cancer were randomized between early (day 5 after chemotherapy) and late (day 16 after chemotherapy) vaccination with the influenza virus vaccine (Influvac ® 2011/2012—Vaxigrip ® 2011/2012). Influenza virus-specific antibody titres were determined before, 3 and 12 weeks after vaccination by haemagglutination inhibition. Results Thirty-eight breast cancer patients (early = 21; late = 17) and 18 colorectal cancer patients (early = 8; late = 10) were analyzed. In breast cancer patients overall serologic responses were adequate. A statistically significant higher response in patients who received early compared to late vaccination in the chemotherapy cycle was observed. Geometric mean titres post vaccination on day 5 versus day 16 were 69.3 versus 27.4 (H3N2), 76.4 versus 17.5 (H1N1) and 34.4 versus 26.0 (B/Brisbane), respectively. In colorectal cancer patients overall serologic responses were adequate, no significant difference was found between early and late vaccination. Geometric mean titres post vaccination on day 5 versus day 16 were 170.1 versus 192.4 (H3N2), 233.0 versus 280.8 (H1N1) and 62.6 versus 75.9 (B/Brisbane), respectively. Conclusion Overall antibody response to the influenza virus vaccine in patients treated with chemotherapy for breast or colorectal cancer patients is adequate. Breast cancer patients seem to mount the best antibody response when vaccinated early after a chemotherapy cycle (≤day 5). No difference was found between early and late vaccination in colorectal cancer patients.