Search

Las náuseas y vómitos (NyV) constituyen dos de los efectos adversos frecuentemente asociados a la administración de quimioterapia además de otros fármacos empleados en hematología. La importancia que la prevención y el manejo de estos síntomas tiene en nuestros pacientes, radica en los riesgos que representan cuando no son tratados correctamente como por ejemplo: deshidratación, alteraciones hidroelectrolíticas e insuficiencia renal aguda. Para la elaboración este artículo se realizó una revisión de la literatura en función de la evidencia y esquemas disponibles para la prevención y tratamiento de NV inducido por medicamentos usados en el manejo de pacientes con patologías hematológicas.

We retrospectively analyzed 570 adult patients who received allogeneic stem cell transplantation for malignant diseases. The outcomes were compared according to donor type. Most of the patients (60%) were transplanted for acute leukemia. Median follow-up was 1.6 years. Haploidentical allogeneic stem cell transplantation was more frequently performed for acute myeloid leukemia and in late stages than any other donor type. Non-relapse mortality at 100 days and one year for unrelated and haploidentical donors were similar, 19%-29% vs. 17%-28%, respectively. A significant better non-relapse mortality was observed for matched sibling donors (7%-15%; p0.001). Relapse rate was higher in haploidentical donors compared to matched sibling and unrelated donors (three year relapse rate 46%, 39%, 28%; respectively p0.001). Haploidentical donors resulted in lower three year progression-free survival and worse 3 year overall survival (32%; p0.001 and 42%; p0.001) compared with other donors (44% and 55% MSD, 40% and 42% UD, respectively). The incidence of grade II-IV acute graft-versus-host disease was higher in unrelated donors (51% unrelated, 35% haploidentical, 36% matched sibling; respectively; p = 0.001), with no difference in grades III-IV (p = 0.73) or in chronic graft-versus-host disease (p = 0.2) between groups. After multivariate analysis, haploidentical and unrelated donors remained negatively associated with non-relapse mortality (HR 1.95; 95% CI 1.10-3.20 and HR 2.70; 95% CI 1.63-4.46, respectively). Haploidentical donors were associated with a higher risk of relapse and worse overall survival. This analysis shows that haploidentical donors were associated with similar non-relpase mortality and higher relapse rates than unrelated donors. Better results in non-relapse mortality were observed for matched sibling donors.Se efectuó un análisis retrospectivo de 570 pacientes adultos que recibieron un trasplante alogénico de precursores hematopoyéticos, comparando los resultados según el tipo de donante. La mediana de seguimiento fue de 1.6 años. El 60% de la población se trasplantó por leucemias agudas. Los trasplantes haploidénticos se hicieron en su mayoría en leucemia mieloide aguda y en estadios tardíos en comparación a otros donantes. La mortalidad libre de enfermedad al día +100 y a 1 año fue similar para los donantes no emparentados y haploidénticos (19% y 29% vs. 17% y 28%, respectivamente). Se obtuvieron mejores resultados con donantes relacionados idénticos (7% y 15%; p0.001). La recaída fue mayor en los donantes haploidénticos (tres años 46% haploidénticos, 39% relacionados idénticos, 28% no emparentados; p0.003). El trasplante con donante haploidéntico presentó una menor supervivencia libre de progresión y menor supervivencia global a tres años (32%; p0.001 y 42%; p0.001). La incidencia de enfermedad injerto contra huésped aguda fue mayor en no emparentados (51%, 35% haploidénticos, 36% relacionados idénticos; p = 0.001), sin diferencias en grados III-IV (p = 0.73) o en EICH crónica (p = 0.2). Los trasplantes con donante haploidéntico y no emparentado mantuvieron su asociación negativa con mortalidad libre de enfermedad (HR 1.95; 95%IC 1.10-3.20 y HR 2.70; 95%IC 1.63-4.46), en análisis multivariado. El trasplante haploidéntico se asoció a mayor recaída y a menor supervivencia global. Esta experiencia mostró similar mortalidad libre de enfermedad entre trasplantes con donantes haploidénticos y no emparentados. Los trasplantes relacionados idénticos mostraron menores tasas de mortalidad libre de enfermedad.

There have been several efforts to predict mortality after autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT), such as the hematopoietic cell transplant-comorbidity index (HCT-CI), described for allogeneic stemcell transplantation and validated for ASCT, but there is no composite score in the setting of ASCT combining comorbidities with other clinical characteristics. Our aim is to describe a comprehensive score combining comorbidities with other clinical factors and to analyze the impact of this score on nonrelapse mortality (NRM), overall survival (OS), and early morbidity endpoints (mechanical ventilation, shock or dialysis) after ASCT. For the training cohort, we retrospectively reviewed data of 2068 adult patients who received an ASCT in Argentina (October 2002 to June 2017) for multiple myeloma or lymphoma. For the validation cohort, we analyzed 2168 ASCTs performed in the Medical College of Wisconsin and Spanish stem cell transplant group (Grupo Espanol de Trasplante Hematopoyetico (GETH)) (January 2012 to December 2018). We first performed a multivariate analysis for NRM in order to select and assign weight to the risk factors included in the score (male patients, aged 55 to 64 and >= 65 years, HCT-CI >= 3, Hodgkin lymphoma and non-Hodgkin lymphoma). The hazard ratio for NRM increased proportionally with the score. Patients were grouped as low risk (LR) with a score of 0 to 1 (686, 33%), intermediate risk (IR) with a score of 2 to 3 (1109, 53%), high risk (HR) with a score of 4 (198, 10%), and very high risk (VHR) with a score of >= 5 (75, 4%). The score was associated with a progressive increase in all the early morbidity endpoints. Moreover, the score was significantly associated with early NRM (day 100: 1.5% versus 2.4% versus 7.6% versus 17.6%) as well as long term (1 to 3 years; 1.8% to 2.3% versus 3.8% to 4.9% versus 11.7% to 14.5% versus 25.0% to 27.4%, respectively; P

We aimed at analyzing the outcome of allogeneic stem cell transplant (ASCT) in adult patients with acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL), comparing Haploidentical (Haplo) with HLA-matched (sibling and unrelated) donors. Between 2008 and 2017, we collected data from 236 patients (median age 31 years; range 16–64; 90% HCT-CI 0–1) who underwent unmanipulated ASCT in first complete remission and subsequent remissions in 15 Argentinian centers. Donors were HLA-matched (n = 175; 74%) and Haplo (n = 61; 26%). Two-year overall survival (OS) was 55% (95% CI 47–63) for the HLA-matched group and 49% (95% CI 34–62) for the Haplo group (p = 0.351). For OS, crude HR, adjusted HR for covariates (HR 1.24; 95% CI 0.77–1.99; p = 0.363) and HR including a propensity score in the model (HR 1.22; 95% CI 0.71–2.08; p = 0.414) showed no impact of donor category on the OS. No difference was found in terms of nonrelapse mortality, relapse, leukemia-free survival, and grade 3–4 acute graft-versus-host disease (GVHD); 2-year incidence of chronic GVHD was higher in HLA-matched vs Haplo group (p = 0.028). Patients with ALL who underwent ASCT were young subjects with low HCT-CI. In this setting, a Haplo donor represents an alternative widely available in the absence of an HLA-matched donor. Relapse remains a challenge for all donor categories.

The hematopoietic cell transplantation-specific comorbidity index (HCT-CI) score is a useful tool to assess the risk for nonrelapse mortality (NRM) after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Although the HCT-CI has been investigated in autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT), its use is limited. To improve on the current use of the HCT-CI score on the morbidity and mortality after ASCT, we assessed the 100-day morbidity defined as orotracheal intubation (OTI), dialysis or shock (vasopressors need), 100-day NRM, early composite morbidity-mortality (combined endpoint that included any previous endpoints), and long-term NRM. We retrospectively reviewed a cohort of 1730 records of adult patients who received an ASCT in Argentinean center's between October 2002 and August 2016. Median follow-up was 1.15 years, and median age was 53 years. Diseases were multiple myeloma (48%), non-Hodgkin lymphoma (27%), and Hodgkin lymphoma (17%); 51% were in complete or partial remission; and 13% received ≥ 3 chemotherapy lines before transplant (heavily pretreated). Early NRM (100-day) was 2.7%, 5.4% required OTI, 4.5% required vasopressors, and 2.1% dialysis, with an early composite morbidity-mortality of 6.8%. Long-term (1 and 3 years) NRM was 4% and 5.2% and overall survival 89% and 77%, respectively. High-risk HCT-CI patients had a significant increase in 100-day NRM compared with intermediate and low risk (6.1% versus 3.4% versus 1.8%, respectively; P = .002), OTI (11% versus 6% versus 4%, P = .001), shock (8.7% versus 5.8% versus 3%, P = .001), early composite morbidity-mortality (13% versus 9 % versus 4.7%, P .001), and long-term NRM (1 year, 7.7% versus 4% versus 3.3%; and 3 years, 10.8% versus 4% versus 4.8%, respectively; P = .002). After multivariate analysis these outcomes remained significant: early composite morbidity-mortality (odds ratio [95% confidence interval] compared with low risk: intermediate risk 2.1 [1.3 to 3.5] and high risk 3.3 [1.9 to 5.9]) and NRM (hazard ratio [95% confidence interval] compared with low risk: intermediate risk .97 [.8 to 2.4] and high risk 3.05 [1.3 to 4.5]). No significant impact was observed in overall survival. Other than comorbidities, significant impact was observed for heavily pretreated patients, age ≥ 55 years, non-Hodgkin lymphoma, and bendamustine-etoposide-citarabine-melphalan conditioning. We confirmed that the HCT-CI had a significant impact on NRM after ASCT, and these findings are mainly due to early toxicity express as 100-day NRM and the 3 main morbidity outcomes as well as the composite endpoint.

INTRODUCTION Acute leukemia relapsing after allogeneic stem cell transplantation (AlloSCT) is usually associated with dismal prognosis. Treatment options in this population remain limited. We evaluated the outcomes of second AlloSCT in patients with acute leukemia relapsed after previous AlloSCT in centers from Grupo Argentino de Trasplante de Médula Ósea (GATMO) METHODS AND RESULTS We carried out a retrospective analysis in 21 adult patients who received a second transplant as a salvage treatment for relapsed acute leukemia. Main outcomes were overall survival (OS) and leukemia free survival (LFS). Variables evaluated were re-induction chemotherapy regimen, conditioning regimen, donor type, early immunosuppression tapering, and the use of maintenance treatment. Mean age was 28 years old (range 16-53). Thirteen were under 30 years, 11 were women, 16 were acute myeloid leukemia. Median time from the first transplant to the relapse was 16,3 months (range 2 to 91 moths). Fourteen patients were MRD negative at the time of second AlloSCT (4 of them in aplasia) and 7 were either positive MRD or refractory disease. Almost all patients received a different re-induction chemotherapy regimen as well as a different conditioning compared to the first transplant. Sixteen out of 21 patients were transplanted with a different donor. Patients without graft versus host disease (GVHD) at day 100 started immunosuppression tapering. Considering the 16 patients alive/relapse free at day 100, half of them received maintenance therapy (6 azacitidine, one sorafenib and one dasatinib). With a median follow up of 24 months, 1-year OS and LFS was 62% and 38%. Age was a strong predictor of survival. There were no patients ≥30 years alive or relapse free beyond 6 months of the procedure, while LFS at 2 years was 58% (8/13) in patients younger than 30 years (p=0.0007). One year LFS was 60% for patients receiving any type of maintenance, compared to 33% of patients who did not receive maintenance (p=0.2). There were no differences in changing the donor or the pre-transplant status. CONCLUSION Second AlloSCT for relapsed acute leukemia is a potential curative option. Younger patients showed better outcomes. Patients relapsing after 6 months could have better prognosis. Maintenance treatment after second transplant should be evaluated, however prospective studies are needed in this scenario to draw better conclusions. Figure. Figure. Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

Introduction: Early reduction of BCR-ABL transcript level has been associated with improved outcomes in CML treatment. Inability to achieve early molecular response(MR) at 3 months (M3>10%) is considered a predictor factor for unfavourable outcome. However, the kinetics of BCR-ABL transcript level reduction measured at early time points have shown to be an independent predictor of response.The aim of this analysis was to determine whether the "M3-M6" status is critical to categorize CML patients (pts) focusing in high-risk group. Method: Molecular monitoring was performed in all pts prior treatment (M0), at months 3 (M3), 6 (M6), 12 (M12) and every 6 months thereafter, applying Q-PCR method according international recommendations. Results of BCR-ABL1 transcript level were reported on the international scale as IS-BCR-ABL %. Optimal responses: M3≤10%, M6≤1%, M12≤0,1%. Deep responses (MR4.0): ≤0,01% or undetectable/10.000 ABL copies. Results: A total of 70 CML pts were included, median age 49 (19-82), female 39%. First line treatment: sustained branded 81% and generic 19% TKIs. Imatinib 59%, Dasatinib and Nilotinib 41%. Sokal risk score: low (L) 51%, intermediate (In) and high (H) 49%. Optimal responses at molecular milestones: 75% at M3, 72% at M6, 61% at M12 and 53% pts achieved MR4.0. Event-free survival (EFS) was evaluated according to time point M3: M3≤10% group had significantly better EFS compared with the M3>10% (96% vs 70%; P=0.028). M3-M6 status defined 4 groups of pts: M3≤10%-M6≤1%, M3≤10%-M6>1%, M3>10%-M6≤1%, M3>10%-M6>1%. Molecular response evolution by M3-M6 status is described in Table 1. EFS stratified by groups according to combined M3-M6 responses showed significant differences: 92% for group 1, 87% for group 2, 68% for group 3, 54% for group 4. (P=0.002). M6 time point was shown to be critical in 32 high-risk pts (H+In): 17 pts with M6 ≤1% showed significant differences in MR4.0 achievement compared to 15 pts with M6 >1% (82% vs 27% P=0.02). Better EFS was observed in this high-risk group under branded vs generic TKIs treatment (97% vs 54% P=0.04). Statistical differences in deep responses and MMR at M12 were observed between branded and generic TKIs independently of Sokal risk (P=0.06, P=0.02). Conclusions: M3≤10% pts showed a favourable evolution with better EFS than M3>10% group. However not all patients with M31%. In pts with M3 >10% and optimal response at M6 also showed higher MR4.0 rate. Our study supports that M6 is a crucial endpoint to predict MMR at M12 and deep responses in CML pts.Pts with M3≤10% without optimal response at M6 (>1%) had a worse evolution than those slow responders who showed M3>10% and M6≤1%.High-risk pts are still a challenge, observing better outcomes in those under branded TKIs treatment. The M3-M6 status would be a prognostic marker of responses and EFS in chronic phase CML pts treated with TKIs. Our data support the critical role of M6 response in non-optimal M3>10% pts and intermediate and high risk Sokal score. Treatment adherence is mandatory for achieving and sustaining optimal responses. This multicentric Argentine study, reinforces the importance of clinical follow-up and molecular monitoring under IS standardization at early time points. Education on early molecular monitoring with adequate resources must continue to be an objective in our region. Table 1 Table 1. Disclosures Pavlovsky: Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Moiraghi:Novartis: Speakers Bureau; Bristol: Speakers Bureau. Varela:Novartis: Speakers Bureau; Bristol: Speakers Bureau. Enrico:Novartis: Honoraria, Patents & Royalties; Bristol Myers squib: Speakers Bureau. Brodsky:International PNH Registry: Other: -; Alexion Pharma Argentina: Speakers Bureau. Pavlovsky:Novartis: Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Speakers Bureau; Bristol Myers Squib: Speakers Bureau.

Background DVT is the main cause of death in hospitalized patients and thromboprophylaxis is the only way to prevent these deaths. International recommendations suggested that active monitoring of DVT/PE prophylaxis can improve the efficacy in Hospitals. Methods We performed a cohort study in three consecutives periods to evaluate DVT prophylaxis in 388 adults hospitalized in a General Hospital. Results 85% of the population had high risk factors for DVT. Thromboprophylaxis was in accordance with local and International guidelines (ACCP 2008) in 72.7% and 86% of the patients respectively. No significant difference could be founded between clinical and surgical patients. One every 10 patients received higher prophylaxis than suggested by guidelines and two out of ten received deficient or no prophylaxis. The worst 2 groups of patients were those with moderate/low risk of DVT and the group with a contraindication to pharmacologic prophylaxis. We observed a progressive improvement of the DVT prophylaxis in the 3 periods of evaluation. Conclusions Although the rate of recommended thromboprophylaxis is higher than many other reports in the region we still have some areas where we need to improve. Regular audits like these are very helpful to find out what specific areas of the hospital needs some careful attention in order to have a better quality of assistance.

Different treatment guidelines suggest that advanced follicular lymphoma (AFL) subjects should be treated only when meeting criteria treatment, such as GELF, are present. Conversely, when absent the watch and wait (W&W) approach is recommended. However, in our country, we had the impression that in real life, a high percentage of patients without the above-mentioned criteria were treated. With the purpose of unravelling the medical approach of AFL patients at diagnosis and subsequent evolution, the Lymphoma Subcommittee of the Argentinian Society of Haematology undertook this retrospective survey. Results: From years 2006 to 2014 305 patients from 23 institutions were included. GELF criteria were encountered in 62% of patients at diagnosis and all of them were treated with immunochemotherapy (ICT). Among the 116 (38%) patients without meeting GELF criteria (GELF negative group), in only 30 (26%) W&W was the approach chosen, while the rest received ICT. The survey questionnaire revealed that own assessment of the treating physician was the main reason for treating the GELF negative group. In the W&W group, 60% required ICT at a mean of 17 months, being 15% of them transformed to DLBCL at time of treatment. The 89% of cases (271/305) received ICT at some time; 66% R-CHOP, 29% R-CVP, and 5% other regimes. Patient median age receiving R-CHOP and R-CVP was 57 and 62 years (p Conclusion: 1) When comparing with international reports, the percentage (62%) of patients with positive GELF criteria was higher at diagnosis. This fact may be due to delay in access to health care; 2) we found a remarkable discrepancy among guidelines recommendations and real life medical behaviour. Three out of four patients received treatment at diagnosis, when W&W ought to have been the guideline-recommended approach; 3) R-CHOP was the most used ICT scheme, while R-CVP was mostly reserved for the elderly. RM was indicated in the majority of patients, particularly after year 2011; 4) despite acknowledging the methodological limitations of this retrospective analysis, a high tumor mass (GELF positive) picture conferred a worse prognosis in term of PFS, while a W&W approach did not affect the OS for the GELF negative group. Disclosures Riveros: Roche: Speakers Bureau.

The FLIPI prognosis score for follicular lymphoma (FL) was developed based on cases diagnosed between 1985 and 1992, and treated with different schemes that did not include rituximab (R). In the present study, we report the evolution of all FL treated in a single institution through the last decade and analize whether FLIPI mantains its effectiveness to identify different risk groups within patients treated with the new therapeutic alternatives available. Material and Methods: We identified sixty two patients with diagnosis of grade I-II-IIIa FL. Patients characteristics: median age 57.5 yr (r, 30–80); 36 males; 63% stages III–IV, and 37% with bone marrow infiltration at the time of diagnosis. Thirty eight percent had a low risk by FLIPI, 34% had an intermediate risk and 27.4% had a high risk. In 19 pts (30.6%) the initial decision was “watch and wait” but 82% received a form of treatment at some point. R was used in 36 pts (58%) with some of the following regimes: chemotherapy (chemo) + R and/or R as consolidation therapy and/or R as monotherapy and/or R as maintenance therapy. Of all prescribed treatments (excluding R as monotherapy and/or maintenance treatment), 52.8% were chemo alone, 20.2% chemo + R, 21.3% radiotherapy and 5.6% received a bone marrow transplant. Results: we considered the analysis of overall survival (OS) the most appropiate approach, since most treatments were seeking the control of the FL, and not the complete remission or cure. The follow up median time was 53.2 months ± 34.8 1SD. The 5-yr OS for the 62 pts was 81.8% ± 11.3 CI 95%. The 5-yr OS for those with a low, intermediate and high risk FLIPI was 100% −5, 84.2% ± 21 and 52% ±26.2, respectively. The difference in 5-yr OS was statistically significant between low and high risk, intermediate and high risk, but failed to prove a significant difference between low and intermediate risk. Among the different risk factors tested in a univariate analysis only age ≥ < 60 yr old demonstrated a significant difference, 60.7% vs 90%, respectively. Conclusions: The 5-yr OS in our series is higher than the one described in the original FLIPI study (Blood2004; 104:1258–65) which was 81.8% vs 71% for the whole group; 90% vs 78.1% for pts