Search

BACKGROUND Randomized trials of venetoclax plus anti-CD20 antibodies as first-line treatment in fit patients (i.e., those with a low burden of coexisting conditions) with advanced chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) have been lacking. METHODS In a phase 3, open-label trial, we randomly assigned, in a 1:1:1:1 ratio, fit patients with CLL who did not have TP53 aberrations to receive six cycles of chemoimmunotherapy (fludarabine–cyclophosphamide–rituximab or bendamustine–rituximab) or 12 cycles of venetoclax–rituximab, venetoclax–obinutuzumab, or venetoclax–obinutuzumab–ibrutinib. Ibrutinib was discontinued after two consecutive measurements of undetectable minimal residual disease or could be extended. The primary end points were undetectable minimal residual disease (sensitivity, <10−4 [i.e., <1 CLL cell in 10,000 leukocytes]) as assessed by flow cytometry in peripheral blood at month 15 and progression-free survival. RESULTS A total of 926 patients were assigned to one of the four treatment regimens (229 to chemoimmunotherapy, 237 to venetoclax–rituximab, 229 to venetoclax–obinutuzumab, and 231 to venetoclax–obinutuzumab–ibrutinib). At month 15, the percentage of patients with undetectable minimal residual disease was significantly higher in the venetoclax–obinutuzumab group (86.5%; 97.5% confidence interval [CI], 80.6 to 91.1) and the venetoclax–obinutuzumab–ibrutinib group (92.2%; 97.5% CI, 87.3 to 95.7) than in the chemoimmunotherapy group (52.0%; 97.5% CI, 44.4 to 59.5; P<0.001 for both comparisons), but it was not significantly higher in the venetoclax–rituximab group (57.0%; 97.5% CI, 49.5 to 64.2; P=0.32). Three-year progression-free survival was 90.5% in the venetoclax–obinutuzumab–ibrutinib group and 75.5% in the chemoimmunotherapy group (hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.32; 97.5% CI, 0.19 to 0.54; P<0.001). Progression-free survival at 3 years was also higher with venetoclax–obinutuzumab (87.7%; hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.42; 97.5% CI, 0.26 to 0.68; P<0.001), but not with venetoclax–rituximab (80.8%; hazard ratio, 0.79; 97.5% CI, 0.53 to 1.18; P=0.18). Grade 3 and grade 4 infections were more common with chemoimmunotherapy (18.5%) and venetoclax–obinutuzumab–ibrutinib (21.2%) than with venetoclax–rituximab (10.5%) or venetoclax–obinutuzumab (13.2%). CONCLUSIONS Venetoclax–obinutuzumab with or without ibrutinib was superior to chemoimmunotherapy as first-line treatment in fit patients with CLL. (Funded by AbbVie and others; GAIA–CLL13 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02950051. opens in new tab; EudraCT number, 2015-004936-36. opens in new tab.) [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Competing Interests: I declare no competing interests.

Abstract: Low levels of vitamin D are associated with a shorter time to first treatment (TTFT) and inferior overall survival in patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). But whether vitamin D supplement affects the clinical course of patients with CLL, remains an open question. In this study, we aimed to retrospectively explore the clinical benefit of vitamin D supplement or one of its analogs, on TTFT and treatment-free survival (TFS) in a large cohort of patients with asymptomatic CLL, who were under watch-and-wait approach. Among the 3474 patients included in the study, 931 patients (26.8%) received either vitamin D supplement or its analog, for a minimum of 6 months. We found that vitamin D supplement was statistically significant for longer TTFT in the young cohort (age ≤65) and was associated with a longer TFS for all ages (P = .004). Among non-vitamin-D users, the median TFS was found to be 84 months, whereas among vitamin D supplement users the median TFS extended to 169 months. In conclusion, our long-term retrospective study demonstrates that the administration of vitamin D to patients with CLL in a watch-and-wait active surveillance is significantly associated with a longer TFS (in any age) and a longer TTFT among young patients (age ≤65). A prospective clinical trial is needed to validate results., (© 2024 by The American Society of Hematology. Licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0), permitting only noncommercial, nonderivative use with attribution. All other rights reserved.)

Background/Objectives: Polycythemia vera (PV) is a chronic hematologic neoplasm commonly treated with hydroxyurea (HU). We utilized the advanced digitalized database of Maccabi Healthcare Services to retrospectively investigate the clinical and economic implications of HU intolerance in the routine clinical care of PV patients in Israel. Methods: We collected data on demographics, physician visits, hospitalizations, laboratory results, medication purchases, cardiovascular and thrombotic events, mental health, economic outcomes, and mortality. Outcomes included cardiovascular and other thrombotic events, disease progression, mental health events, economic outcomes, and overall mortality. Results: Of the 830 patients studied, 3 (0.4%) were resistant to HU treatment, 318 (38.3%) were intolerant to HU treatment, and 509 (61.3%) were stable on HU treatment. The venous thrombosis rate was significantly higher among HU-intolerant compared to HU-stable patients (1.58 vs. 0.47 per 100 person-years [PY], respectively; p < 0.001). The rate of progression to myelofibrosis was 6 vs. 0.9 per 100 PY in HU-intolerant patients vs. HU-stable patients, respectively ( p < 0.001), and the rate of progression to acute myeloid leukemia (AML) was 1.16 vs. 0.2 per 100 PY in HU-intolerant patients vs. HU-stable patients, respectively ( p < 0.001). The phlebotomy requirement, mortality rate, and total hospitalization days among HU-intolerant patients were significantly higher than in HU-stable patients ( p = 0.049, p < 0.001, p < 0.001, respectively). More mental health-related events were noted in HU-intolerant patients vs. HU-stable patients ( p = 0.007), and the total healthcare cost ratio was 2.65 for the HU-intolerant patients compared with HU-stable patients. Conclusions: This study suggests that HU-intolerant patients are more likely to have worse outcomes than HU-stable patients, highlighting the need for the close monitoring of these patients for disease-related complications or progression.

Introduction: α-Klotho protein has three isoforms: a transmembrane (mKL), a shed- soluble isoform, and a circulating soluble isoform (sKL). mKL is expressed in the kidney and placenta, while sKL is detectable in blood and urine. It is known that α-Klotho levels fluctuate during pregnancy mainly in women with complications such as preeclampsia (PE) and intra-uterine growth restriction (IUGR)., Methods: Forty-nine participants were divided into two groups: healthy and complicated pregnancy (PE, IUGR or both). Tissue samples (2 cm3) from the maternal side, Blood and urine samples were collected during pregnancy and postpartum. Samples were subjected to biochemical (WB), histological (H&E and IHC) staining as well as genetic analysis (qPCR)., Results: Blood αKL levels were preserved in both healthy and complicated pregnancies. Significantly lower blood αKL concentrations were found in PE postpartum (PP) compared to levels during pregnancy, and were significantly lower compared with postpartum of a healthy pregnancy. αKL activity was reduced in complicated pregnancies vs. healthy pregnancies. Placen tal mKL levels (ELISA) and expression (WB) were lowered in complicated pregnancies compared with the healthy pregnancies group. Additionally, we found a significant decline in the expression of mKL mRNA in PE/IUGR placentas compared with the healthy group., Discussion: Several studies have focused on the involvement of αKL in normal placentation during pregnancy. Our results suggest lower function of sKL in complicated pregnancy compared with a control, and present differences in placental mKL levels as well as tissue and gene expression between healthy and complicated pregnancy. In light of our results, we conclude that complicated pregnancy is associated with in decline in mKL., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: Nakhoul Farid M.D reports was provided by The Galilee medical center Nahariya Israel., (Copyright © 2024 International Society for the Study of Hypertension in Pregnancy. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: In the primary analysis report of the GAIA/CLL13 trial, we found that venetoclax-obinutuzumab and venetoclax-obinutuzumab-ibrutinib improved undetectable measurable residual disease (MRD) rates and progression-free survival compared with chemoimmunotherapy in patients with previously untreated chronic lymphocytic leukaemia. However, to our knowledge, no data on direct comparisons of different venetoclax-based combinations are available., Methods: GAIA/CLL13 is an open-label, randomised, phase 3 study conducted at 159 sites in ten countries in Europe and the Middle East. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older, with a life expectancy of at least 6 months, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology group performance status of 0-2, a cumulative illness rating scale score of 6 or lower or a single score of 4 or lower, and no TP53 aberrations. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1:1), with a computer-generated list stratified by age, Binet stage, and regional study group, to either chemoimmunotherapy, venetoclax-rituximab, venetoclax-obinutuzumab, or venetoclax-obinutuzumab-ibrutinib. All treatments were administered in 28-day cycles. Patients in the chemoimmunotherapy group received six cycles of treatment, with patients older than 65 years receiving intravenous bendamustine (90 mg/m 2 , days 1-2), whereas patients aged 65 years or younger received intravenous fludarabine (25 mg/m 2 , days 1-3) and intravenous cyclophosphamide (250 mg/m 2 , days 1-3). Intravenous rituximab (375 mg/m 2 , day 1 of cycle 1; 500 mg/m 2 , day 1 of cycles 2-6) was added to chemotherapy. In the experimental groups, patients received daily venetoclax (400 mg orally) for ten cycles after a 5-week ramp-up phase starting on day 22 of cycle 1. In the venetoclax-rituximab group, intravenous rituximab (375 mg/m 2 , day 1 of cycle 1; 500 mg/m 2 , day 1 of cycles 2-6) was added. In the obinutuzumab-containing groups, obinutuzumab was added (cycle 1: 100 mg on day 1, 900 mg on day 2, and 1000 mg on days 8 and 15; cycles 2-6: 1000 mg on day 1). In the venetoclax-obinutuzumab-ibrutinib group, daily ibrutinib (420 mg orally, from day 1 of cycle 1) was added until undetectable MRD was reached in two consecutive measurements (3 months apart) or until cycle 36. The planned treatment duration was six cycles in the chemoimmunotherapy group, 12 cycles in the venetoclax-rituximab and the venetoclax-obinutuzumab group and between 12 and 36 cycles in the venetoclax-obinutuzumab-ibrutinib group. Coprimary endpoints were the undetectable MRD rate in peripheral blood at month 15 for the comparison of venetoclax-obinutuzumab versus standard chemoimmunotherapy and investigator-assessed progression-free survival for the comparison of venetoclax-obinutuzumab-ibrutinib versus standard chemoimmunotherapy, both analysed in the intention-to-treat population (ie, all patients randomly assigned to treatment) with a split α of 0·025 for each coprimary endpoint. Both coprimary endpoints have been reported elsewhere. Here we report a post-hoc exploratory analysis of updated progression-free survival results after a 4-year follow-up of our study population. Safety analyses included all patients who received at least one dose of study treatment. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02950051, recruitment is complete, and all patients are off study treatment., Findings: Between Dec 13, 2016, and Oct 13, 2019, 1080 patients were screened and 926 were randomly assigned to treatment (chemoimmunotherapy group n=229; venetoclax-rituximab group n=237; venetoclax-obinutuzumab group n=229; and venetoclax-obinutuzumab-ibrutinib group n=231); mean age 60·8 years (SD 10·2), 259 (28%) of 926 patients were female, and 667 (72%) were male (data on race and ethnicity are not reported). At data cutoff for this exploratory follow-up analysis (Jan 31, 2023; median follow-up 50·7 months [IQR 44·6-57·9]), patients in the venetoclax-obinutuzumab group had significantly longer progression-free survival than those in the chemoimmunotherapy group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·47 [97·5% CI 0·32-0·69], p<0·0001) and the venetoclax-rituximab group (0·57 [0·38-0·84], p=0·0011). The venetoclax-obinutuzumab-ibrutinib group also had a significantly longer progression-free survival than the chemoimmunotherapy group (0·30 [0·19-0·47]; p<0·0001) and the venetoclax-rituximab group (0·38 [0·24-0·59]; p<0·0001). There was no difference in progression-free survival between the venetoclax-obinutuzumab-ibrutinib and venetoclax-obinutuzumab groups (0·63 [0·39-1·02]; p=0·031), and the proportional hazards assumption was not met for the comparison between the venetoclax-rituximab group versus the chemoimmunotherapy group (log-rank p=0·10). The estimated 4-year progression-free survival rate was 85·5% (97·5% CI 79·9-91·1; 37 [16%] events) in the venetoclax-obinutuzumab-ibrutinib group, 81·8% (75·8-87·8; 55 [24%] events) in the venetoclax-obinutuzumab group, 70·1% (63·0-77·3; 84 [35%] events) in the venetoclax-rituximab group, and 62·0% (54·4-69·7; 90 [39%] events) in the chemoimmunotherapy group. The most common grade 3 or worse treatment-related adverse event was neutropenia (114 [53%] of 216 patients in the chemoimmunotherapy group, 109 [46%] of 237 in the venetoclax-rituximab group, 127 [56%] of 228 in the venetoclax-obinutuzumab group, and 112 [48%] of 231 in the venetoclax-obinutuzumab-ibrutinib group). Deaths determined to be associated with study treatment by the investigator occurred in three (1%) patients in the chemoimmunotherapy group (n=1 due to each of sepsis, metastatic squamous cell carcinoma, and Richter's syndrome), none in the venetoclax-rituximab and venetoclax-obinutuzumab groups, and four (2%) in the venetoclax-obinutuzumab-ibrutinib group (n=1 due to each of acute myeloid leukaemia, fungal encephalitis, small-cell lung cancer, and toxic leukoencephalopathy)., Interpretation: With more than 4 years of follow-up, venetoclax-obinutuzumab and venetoclax-obinutuzumab-ibrutinib significantly extended progression-free survival compared with both chemoimmunotherapy and venetoclax-rituximab in previously untreated, fit patients with chronic lymphocytic leukaemia, thereby supporting their use and further evaluation in this patient group, while still considering the higher toxicities observed with the triple combination., Funding: AbbVie, Janssen, and F Hoffmann-La Roche., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests MF reports research funding from AbbVie, AstraZeneca, BeiGene, Janssen, and Roche, and honoraria from AbbVie. JvT reports honoraria from AbbVie, BeiGene, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Janssen, Lilly, and Roche; travel grants from AbbVie, AstraZeneca, BeiGene, Roche, Lilly, and Janssen; and has received consulting fees from and participated on advisory boards for AbbVe, BeiGene, Amgen, and AstraZeneca. MG has received honoraria for participation in symposia and advisory boards from AbbVie, Amgen, AstraZeneca, BeiGene, Bristol Myers Squibb (BMS)/Celgene, GSK, Novartis, Incyte, Janssen-Cilag, Jazz, Roche, Pfizer, Sanofi, and Servier; travel support from AbbVie, BeiGene, Pfizer, and Roche; all fees went to their institution. GJ has received honoraria from Astellas and AbbVie and participated on advisory boards for AbbVie and Servier. M-DL reports travel grants from AbbVie and Janssen. CdC-B reports consulting fees from Janssen, honoraria for lectures from Octapharma, support for attending meetings from AbbVie and Octapharma, and participation on advisory boards for Janssen, BeiGene, and AstraZeneca. CSchn reports speakers fees from AstraZeneca and AbbVie, travel support from AbbVie, and participation on an advisory board for Janssen. RB reports travel support from BeiGene, Janssen, and AbbVie, and honoraria for participation on an advisory board from AbbVie. TN reports honoraria for lectures or presentations and has participated at advisory boards from AbbVie, Roche, AstraZeneca, Gilead, BeiGene, and Janssen. CBP is the chairman of the Danish CLL group. HF reports research funding from Sanofi, Novartis, and Alexion and honoraria for lectures from Sanofi. NK reports research funding from AstraZeneca; honoraria from AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Kite/Gilead, BMS, and Lilly; and travel support from AbbVie, AstraZeneca, BeiGene, Lilly, and Janssen; and participation on advisory boards for AstraZeneca and Janssen. JD reports consulting fees, honoraria, and travel support from AbbVie and Janssen. SB reports honoraria from and participation on speakers bureaus for Roche, Janssen, AbbVie, AstraZeneca, and Sanofi; travel support from Janssen, BeiGene, and Roche; and research funding from Janssen and Miltenyi. FS reports speakers fees from AstraZeneca, travel support from Lilly, and research funding from AstraZeneca. A-MF reports research funding and honoraria from AstraZeneca and travel support from AbbVie. KF reports research grants from AbbVie and Roche, honoraria for advisory boards from AstraZeneca, and travel support from Roche. K-AK reports consulting fees, participation on speakers bureaus, and research funding from Roche, AbbVie, and Janssen. MR reports honoraria from Janssen, Roche, and AstraZeneca; consulting fees from Roche, Janssen, AstraZeneca, and AbbVie; research funding from AbbVie and Roche, and travel support from AstraZeneca. MBr reports research funding and consulting fees from Amgen; honoraria for speakers bureaus from Amgen, Becton Dickinson, Janssen, and Pfizer; travel support from Janssen; and participation on advisory boards for Incyte and Amgen. ET reports participation on advisory boards and honoraria from AbbVie, Janssen-Cilag, and BeiGene, AstraZeneca, and Roche; and travel support from AstraZeneca, AbbVie, BeiGene, Janssen. SS reports honoraria from AbbVie, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Celgene, Gilead, GSK, Hoffmann-La Roche, Janssen, Novartis, and Sunesis; research funding from AbbVie, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Celgene, Gilead, GSK, Hoffmann-La Roche, Janssen, Novartis, and Sunesis; travel support from AbbVie, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Celgene, Gilead, GSK, Hoffmann-La Roche, Janssen, Novartis, Sunesis; and speaker fees from AbbVie, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Celgene, Gilead, GSK, Hoffmann-La Roche, Janssen, Novartis, and Sunesis. MH reports consulting fees from Roche, Gilead, Janssen, BMS, AbbVie, and AstraZeneca and honoraria from Roche, Gilead, Janssen, BMS, AbbVie, and AstraZeneca. APK reports honoraria from AbbVie, AstraZeneca, BMS, Janssen, LAVA, and Roche/Genentech; travel grants from AbbVie and Janssen; research funding from AstraZeneca, Janssen, Roche/Genentech, AbbVie, and BMS. CUN reports research funding from Octapharma and AstraZeneca; consultancy and speaker fees from AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Janssen, Genmab, BeiGene, Octapharma, CSL Behring, Takeda, Lilly, and MSD; and participation on advisory boards for AstraZeneca, MSD, Genmab, and Janssen. BE reports consulting fees fromJanssen, AbbVie, Gilead, AstraZeneca, MSD, BeiGene, and Lilly; participation on speakers bureau for Roche, AbbVie, BeiGene, AstraZeneca, and MSD; honoraria from Roche, AbbVie, AstraZeneca, BeiGene, and MSD; research funding from Janssen, Gilead, Roche, AbbVie, BeiGene, and AstraZeneca; and travel support from BeiGene. All other authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background/aim: The treatment for chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) has changed dramatically over the last two decades. The current study aimed to investigate the impact on overall survival (OS) and time to next treatment (TTT) among CLL patients from 1998 to 2022., Patients and Methods: The cohort was based on data obtained from electronic medical records of Maccabi, the second largest healthcare organization in Israel. All included patients were diagnosed with CLL based on the IWCLL criteria and complete clinical, laboratory, and treatment data were available. The study encompassed 3,964 patients diagnosed with CLL during the specified study period., Results: Patients with CLL who required therapy were divided into three eras based on the dominant treatment approach: chemotherapy alone before 2010, therapy with chemotherapy and anti-CD20 between 2010 and 2017, and therapy with targeted agents between 2017 and 2022. Median OS was 4.1 years, 7.5 years, and not reached, respectively. The six-year OS rates were 40%, 55%, and 69%, respectively, (p=0.0001). The median time to the next treatment improved from 5.5 years before 2010, to 8.3 between 2010-2017, to not reached after 2017 (p=0.0021)., Conclusion: Marked improvements in survival subsequent to fundamental changes in first-line therapy were found in patients with CLL from before 2010 to after 2017., (Copyright © 2024 International Institute of Anticancer Research (Dr. George J. Delinasios), All rights reserved.)

Introduction Pre exposure prophylaxis with monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) were developed in addition to COVID19 vaccine for immunocompromised and those with insufficient immune response, among them patients with CLL. Omicron variant and its sublineages evolved mutations that escape mAbs neutralizing effect, yet the extent of which was not studied. Methods We evaluated anti-spike titters and neutralization activity of COVID-19 wild type (WT) , Delta , Omicron, BA2, BA4 and BA5 before and after tixagevimab-cilgavimab (TGM/CGM) dose of 150/150mg or 300/300mg in patients with CLL. Results 70 patients were tested 2 weeks before and 4 weeks after receiving TGM/CGM mAbs. After TGM/CGM anti-spike ab level increased 170 folds from 13.6 BAU/ml (IQR, 0.4-288) to 2328 BAU/ml (IQR, 1681-3500). Neutralization activity increased in all variants, and was 176 folds higher in WT and 55 folds higher in Delta compared to 10 folds higher in Omicron and its sublineages (BA2 x11, BA4 x4 , BA5 x18). Over follow-up period of 3 months, 20 patients (29%) with CLL acquired COVID-19 infection, all recovered uneventfully. In a multivariate analysis anti-spike antibody titer was found a significant predictor for post TGM/CGM COVID19 infection. Conclusion Efficacy of preexposure prophylaxis with TGM/CGM in patients with CLL is significantly reduced in era of Omicron and its sublineages BA2, BA4 and BA5., (The Author(s). Published by S. Karger AG, Basel.)

Background: Tremendous developments in the field of chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) in recent years have led to a revolutionary change in the treatment approach, which today is based on targeted treatments with a good response and optimal prognosis. Nevertheless, CLL can present or progress to "accelerated CLL" (A-CLL) or to "Richter transformation" (RT) and these two entities have a more aggressive course and are still characterized by challenges in the fields of diagnosis and therapy. In the current review, we summarized the latest knowledge in terms of diagnostic approaches to A-CLL, available treatments and clinical trials, for both A-CLL and RT which still pose an unmet need and require additional basic and clinical investigations., Summary: A-CLL is a rare and underdiagnosed entity that probably stands in the "gray zone" between CLL and RT, generally holding an intermediate prognosis. Its diagnosis is mainly based on histological findings including expanded proliferation centers, increased mitotic activity, and/or high Ki-67 index. Due to its rarity, its treatment approach has still not been defined, but it seems that novel agents, especially Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitors (BTKi), are effective. As for RT, the standard therapy still consists of chemo-immunotherapy followed by stem-cell transplantation for fit responders with a dismal prognosis. New approaches are recently adopted including B-cell inhibition via novel agents (BTKi, venetoclax), T-cell engagers (checkpoint inhibitors, bispecific antibodies [BiTe] or the chimeric antigen receptor [CAR] technology), antibody-drug conjugates, or drug combinations. Although both CAR-T and BiTe seem promising, especially when combined with BTKi, evidence is still insufficient, and patients should generally be recruited in clinical trials., Key Messages: The field of CLL has been a subject of major advances in recent years, but A-CLL and RT remain topics of "unmet need" and require further studies to identify the best diagnostic approach and a more effective treatment., (© 2023 The Author(s). Published by S. Karger AG, Basel.)

The Lymphocyte-Activation Protein 3 (LAG-3) inhibitory receptor is expressed on regulatory plasma cells (PCs). Micro-environmental cells that express LAG-3 were found to be increased during the progression of smoldering multiple myeloma (SMM). To assess the possible role of LAG-3 expression on regulatory PCs in patients with plasma cell dyscrasia. Purified Cluster of Differentiation 138 (CD138 +) PCs from patients with premalignant conditions, active multiple myeloma (MM), and controls were analyzed for the expression of LAG-3 by flow cytometry. Autologous CD8 + T cells were incubated with sorted LAG-3 pos or LAG-3 neg PCs for 24 h. The expression of granzyme (Grz) in CD8 + T cells was assessed by flow cytometry. LAG-3 expression on PCs in active MM (newly diagnosed and relapse refractory MM) was significantly increased compared to monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance (MGUS)/ SMM. Grz expression was significantly decreased in CD8 + T cells incubated with CD138 + LAG-3 pos PCs, compared to CD138 + LAG-3 neg PCs in patients with plasma cell dyscrasia, n = 31, p = 0.0041. LAG-3 expression on malignant PCs can be involved in the development of MM from MGUS by decreasing the expression of Grz in CD8 + T cells.

Purpose of Review: Lymphoma is the most frequent hematological malignancy with wide disease spectrum of watchful waiting period, active treatment, survivorship, and palliative care. All these steps impose unmet needs in terms of prevention, symptom alleviation, or prognosis. Complementary and integrative medicine (CIM) is widely used by patients with lymphoma to cope with such issues. Here, we describe the different CIM modalities that may be effective and safe for the management of patients with lymphoma., Recent Findings: Low inflammatory diet and ginseng seem effective for lymphoma prevention. Pain and neuropathy may be improved using acupuncture, touch therapy and specific dietary supplements. Nausea/vomiting, fatigue, and insomnia may be relieved by acupuncture, mind-body, touch therapy, and certain dietary supplements. Vitamin D, curcumin, and some traditional medicine herbs may positively impact lymphoma prognosis. Finally, safety issues should be considered especially for the concomitant use of dietary supplements and lymphoma-directed therapies. CIM may be beneficial along the continuum of lymphoma management although safety concerns should be considered when used concomitantly with conventional therapy., (© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

In this study, we aim to explore the outcomes of Covid-19 infection in patients with Hairy cell leukemia (HCL). The cohort is based on data obtained from electronic medical records. It includes 218 consecutive patients diagnosed with HCL between 16 June 1998, and 20 September 2022, out of which the coronavirus has infected 85 patients during the Omicron surge. Out of 85 patients with HCL who were infected by Covid-19; 7 patients (8.2%) have been hospitalized, and the mortality rate was 2.3% (two patients). Thirteen of the 85 patients had been infected by Covid-19 in previous waves, including 9/13 after vaccination, and none of them developed a severe disease. Humoral immune response after three doses of the BNT162b2 mRNA vaccination regimen was evaluated in 40 patients and was attained in 67.5%. Based on multivariate analysis: unfavorable outcome was significantly more common in patients with HCL above 65 years old, who had at least one cytopenia, and with comorbidity of cardiovascular disease or asplenia. Our results indicates that the course of COVID-19 in patients with HCL during the Omicron wave has been improved relatively favorable., (© 2023 The Authors. Hematological Oncology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

In this retrospective international multicenter study, we describe the clinical characteristics and outcomes of patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) and related disorders (small lymphocytic lymphoma and high-count monoclonal B lymphocytosis) infected by SARS-CoV-2, including the development of post-COVID condition. Data from 1540 patients with CLL infected by SARS-CoV-2 from January 2020 to May 2022 were included in the analysis and assigned to four phases based on cases disposition and SARS-CoV-2 variants emergence. Post-COVID condition was defined according to the WHO criteria. Patients infected during the most recent phases of the pandemic, though carrying a higher comorbidity burden, were less often hospitalized, rarely needed intensive care unit admission, or died compared to patients infected during the initial phases. The 4-month overall survival (OS) improved through the phases, from 68% to 83%, p = .0015. Age, comorbidity, CLL-directed treatment, but not vaccination status, emerged as risk factors for mortality. Among survivors, 6.65% patients had a reinfection, usually milder than the initial one, and 16.5% developed post-COVID condition. The latter was characterized by fatigue, dyspnea, lasting cough, and impaired concentration. Infection severity was the only risk factor for developing post-COVID. The median time to resolution of the post-COVID condition was 4.7 months. OS in patients with CLL improved during the different phases of the pandemic, likely due to the improvement of prophylactic and therapeutic measures against SARS-CoV-2 as well as the emergence of milder variants. However, mortality remained relevant and a significant number of patients developed post-COVID conditions, warranting further investigations., (© 2023 The Authors. American Journal of Hematology published by Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Background: Patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) have a higher risk of developing other malignancies (OMs) compared to the general population. However, the impact of CLL-related risk factors and CLL-directed treatment is still unclear and represents the focus of this work., Methods: We conducted a retrospective international multicenter study to assess the incidence of OMs and detect potential risk factors in 19,705 patients with CLL, small lymphocytic lymphoma, or high-count CLL-like monoclonal B-cell lymphocytosis, diagnosed between 2000 and 2016. Data collection took place between October 2020 and March 2022., Findings: In 129,254 years of follow-up after CLL diagnosis, 3513 OMs were diagnosed (27.2 OMs/1000 person-years). The most common hematological OMs were Richter transformation, myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) and acute myeloid leukemia (AML). Non-melanoma skin (NMSC) and prostate cancers were the most common solid tumors (STs).The only predictor for MDS and AML development was treatment with fludarabine and cyclophosphamide with/without rituximab (FC ± R) (OR = 3.7; 95% CI = 2.79-4.91; p < 0.001). STs were more frequent in males and patients with unmutated immunoglobulin heavy variable genes (OR = 1.77; 95% CI = 1.49-2.11; p < 0.001/OR = 1.89; 95% CI = 1.6-2.24; p < 0.001).CLL-directed treatment was associated with non-melanoma skin and prostate cancers (OR = 1.8; 95% CI = 1.36-2.41; p < 0.001/OR = 2.11; 95% CI = 1.12-3.97; p = 0.021). In contrast, breast cancers were more frequent in untreated patients (OR = 0.17; 95% CI = 0.08-0.33; p < 0.001).Patients with CLL and an OM had inferior overall survival (OS) than those without. AML and MDS conferred the worst OS (p < 0.001)., Interpretation: OMs in CLL impact on OS. Treatment for CLL increased the risk for AML/MDS, prostate cancer, and NMSC. FCR was associated with increased risk for AML/MDS., Funding: AbbVie, and EU/EFPIAInnovative Medicines Initiative Joint Undertaking HARMONY grant n° 116026., Competing Interests: TC received honoraria from AbbVie. LS received consulting fees from AbbVie, BeiGene, AstraZeneca, Lilly, and Janssen, honoraria from Janssen and Octapharma, support for attending meetings from BeiGene and Janssen and advisory board fees from Merck. SMu received advisory board fees from AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Janssen, Roche and BeiGene. JAHR received honoraria as a consultant from Janssen, AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Lilly, and BeiGene and support for attending meetings from Janssen, AbbVie, AstraZeneca, and BeiGene. LI received honoraria from AbbVie, Roche, and Janssen-Cilag. APK received advisory board fees and research money from Janssen, AbbVie, BMS, AstraZeneca, Roche/Genentech, support for attending meetings from Janssen and AbbVie. M-DL received travel expenses from Janssen and AbbVie. GMR received honoraria for participation to speaker's bureau from AbbVie, Astra Zeneca, Beigene, and Janssen, and support for attending meetings from Janssen. JVT received consulting fees from AbbVie, AstraZeneca, BeiGene, and Janssen, honoraria for scientific talks from AbbVie, AstraZeneca, BeiGene, Janssen, Lilly, and Roche, travel support from AbbVie, AstraZeneca, BeiGene, Janssen, Roche, and Lilly, and advisory boards fees for AbbVie, Amgen, AstraZeneca, BeiGene. GI received honoraria from Novartis, BMS, Sandoz, AstraZeneca, Janssen, Kite/Gilead, and Miltenyi, support for attending meetings from Kite/Gilead, AstraZeneca, and AbbVie and advisory board fees from Kite/Gilead, Novartis, BMS, and Autolus. FBi received support for attending meetings from AbbVie. RCo received support for attending meetings from Janssen-Cilag and S.A. SG received honoraria support for attending meetings from AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Jazz, Novartis, and Incyte, honoraria from Roche, Celgene, Pfizer, and Janssen, and support for attending meetings from Jazz, AstraZeneca, and Roche. RGS received support for attending meetings from AbbVie and S.L.U. RG received honoraria, consulting fees, and support for attending meetings from AbbVie, Beigene, Roche, Janssen, AstraZeneca. YH received honoraria from Janssen, AbbVie, Roche, AstraZeneca, Medion, and Lilly. OJ received honoraria from Johnson and Johnson, AstraZeneca, and Lilly, honoraria from Johnson and Johnson, AbbVie, AstraZeneca, and Lilly, and support for attending meetings from Johnson and Johnson, and AbbVie. LK received consulting fees from AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Janssen, Beigene, Takeda, and Novartis. MKM received honoraria from Novartis, Pfizer, and Gad Medical LTD and support for attending meetings from Novartis. IKo received honoraria and consulting fees from AbbVie and Janssen. IM received honoraria from AbbVie, Roche, Sandoz, AstraZeneca, and Janssen, and support for attending meetings from AbbVie, Roche, and Takeda. ANB received honoraria, advisory board fees and support for attending meetings from AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Takeda, Janssen, and Beigene. JO received honoraria from AbbVie, AstraZeneca, and Janssen. GR received consulting fees from AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Janssen, and Beigene, and is currently employed by AstraZeneca. TP received honoraria and advisory board fees from AbbVie, Janssen-Cilag, and AstraZeneca and support for attending meeting from AstraZeneca. MS received honoraria and support for attending meeting from AstraZeneca, AbbVie, and Janssen-Cilag and owns shares of stock in AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Merck, Eli Lilly, Sanofi, Johnson and Johnson, Pfizer, Gilead, and GSK. MSp received honoraria and consulting and advisory board fees, and support for attending meeting from AbbVie, AstraZeneca, and Janssen. ET received support for attending meetings from Takeda. TV received honoraria from Takeda, Roche, Genesis Pharma, Merck, Novartis, Gilead, Sandoz, AstraZeneca, Integris, and Servier and support for attending meetings from Takeda, Roche, Genesis Pharma, Merck, Pfizer, and Winmedica. CV received honoraria from AbbVie, consulting fees from AstraZeneca and support for attending meeting from AstraZeneca, Takeda, and Janssen. RW received honoraria from AbbVie, AstraZeneca, and Beigene, support for attending meetings from Janssen, AbbVie, and AstraZeneca and advisory board fees from AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Janssen, Beigene, and SecuraBio. EWS received honoraria from AbbVie, Roche, and Janssen-Cilag and support for attending meetings from AbbVie. LY received honoraria from AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Novartis, Gilead, Janssen, Jazz, MSD, and Pfizer, support for attending meetings from AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Gilead, Janssen, and Pfizer, and advisory board fees from AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Jazz, Janssen, Beigene, and Celgene. MAn received consulting fees from AbbVie, Takeda, Janssen, Roche, Genesis, Gilead, and Amgen and honoraria from AbbVie, Takeda, Roche, Genesis, Gilead, and Novartis. MC received honoraria, advisory board fees, and support for attending meetings from AbbVie, AstraZeneca, and Janssen. ACu received honoraria, advisory board fees, and support for attending meetings from AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Beigene, Janssen, and Lilly. FD support for attending meetings from Janssen and AbbVie. GG received honoraria, and advisory board fees from AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Beigene, Janssen and advisory board fees from Lilly. EN received honoraria from AbbVie. LSm received consulting fees, honoraria and support for attending meetings from AbbVie, AstraZeneca, and Janssen and advisory board fees from AbbVie and AstraZeneca. NS received honoraria from Janssen, AbbVie, AstraZeneca, and Lilly, and support for attending meetings from Janssen and AstraZeneca. CT received honoraria from AbbVie, Beigene, Janssen, and LOXO. FB received consulting fees, honoraria and payment for expert testimony from AbbVie, Genentech, Novartis, Takeda, Janssen, Roche, Mundipharma, Celgene/BMS, AstraZeneca, Lilly, Beigene, Gilead and TG Therapeutics, Advantage Allogene, Lava Therapeutics, and Enterome. MDo received honoraria and advisory board fees from AbbVie, AstraZeneca and Janssen, advisory board fees from Swixx, and support for attending meetings from Janssen. PG received honoraria and consulting fees from AbbVie, AstraZeneca, BMS, Janssen, Lilly/Loxo Oncology, MSD, and Roche; grant support from AbbVie, AstraZeneca, BMS, Janssen. KS received honoraria from Janssen, AbbVie, Lilly and AstraZeneca, consulting fees and support for attending meetings from Janssen and AstraZeneca. GK, EM, DC, JK, CD, MA, SA, TAS, FBa, MB, ACa, AM, AKM, RC, SC, ACh, ZD, MDi, DD, GDS, BD, ME, SEA, AE, AF, AG, EG, IGGM, AGo, AjG, RGu, SH, EH, SJ, EKa, VK, BK, MK, EK, RJK, JL, DL, IL, TL, ALG, JM, LMR, MMa, SM, CMB, BM, FM, RM, MMo, RMu, UKN, ACO, DO, IPS, MP, ZK, PP, CP, AP, LR, RR, MDDS, AS, YS, MSi, SS, DSAS, TT, KT, AV, GV, VV, ZX, MYa, MY, JZ, DA, BB, MCa, RCl, BE, OBK, LL, GP, PPa, VMP, SP, PS, LT, AC, have no conflict of interest to disclose., (© 2023 Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

The COVID-19 pandemic continues to pose challenges to the treatment of hemato-oncology patients. Emergence of COVID-19 variants, availability of vaccine boosters and antiviral treatments could impact their outcome. We retrospectively studied patients with hematologic malignancies and confirmed COVID-19 during the Omicron outbreak. Of 116 evaluated patients, 16% developed severe or critical COVID-19. Diagnosis of chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) was significantly associated with severe COVID-19 (p = 0.01). The vaccine effectiveness was related to the timing of the vaccine, with patients who received a mRNA vaccine within 7-90 days prior to COVID-19 being less likely to develop severe disease compared to all other patients (p = 0.019). There was no correlation between disease severity and antiviral therapies. Importantly, 45% of patients undergoing active hematological treatment had to interrupt their treatment due to COVID-19. In conclusion, patients with hematologic malignancies are at a considerable risk for severe COVID-19 during the Omicron outbreak, with patients with CLL being the most vulnerable. mRNA vaccines have the potential to protect hematological patients from severe COVID-19 if administered within the previous 3 months. Hematological treatment interruption is a frequent adverse outcome of COVID-19 infection., (© 2023 The Authors. Cancer Medicine published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Complex karyotypes have been associated with inferior outcomes in chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) treated with chemoimmunotherapy (CIT), whereas their prognostic impact in the context of venetoclax-based treatments is still debated. In this prospective analysis on karyotype complexity in CLL, we evaluated the impact of complex (≥3 chromosomal aberrations [CAs], CKTs) and highly complex karyotypes (≥5 CAs; hCKTs) as well as specific aberrations in previously untreated patients without TP53 aberrations undergoing either CIT or time-limited venetoclax-based therapies in the phase 3 GAIA/CLL13 trial. Karyotype analyses were available for 895 of 926 patients (96.7%), of whom 153 (17%) had a CKT and 43 (5%) hCKT. In the CIT arm, CKT was associated with shorter progression-free survival (PFS) (hazard ratio [HR] 2.58; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 1.54-4.32; P < .001) and overall survival (HR, 3.25; 95% CI, 1.03-10.26; P = .044). In the pooled venetoclax arms, a multivariable analysis identified hCKTs (HR, 1.96; 95% CI, 1.03-3.72; P = .041), but not CKTs, as independent adverse prognosticators for PFS. The presence of translocations (unbalanced and/or balanced) was also independently associated with shorter PFSs in the venetoclax arms. CIT led to the acquisition of additional CAs (mean CAs, 2.0-3.4; from baseline to CLL progression), whereas karyotype complexity remained stable after venetoclax-based treatments (2.0, both time points). This analysis establishes highly complex karyotypes and translocations as adverse prognostic factors in the context of venetoclax-based combination treatments. The findings of this study support the incorporation of karyotyping into the standard diagnostic workup of CLL, because it identifies patients at high risk of poor treatment outcomes and thereby improves prognostication. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT02950051., (© 2023 by The American Society of Hematology.)

Background/aim: Last year was characterized by the appearance of novel SARS-CoV-2 virus variants, mainly the omicron sub-lineages BA.2.12.1, BA.4, and BA.5, which have confirmed resistance to the acquired immune response developed following first-generation mRNA vaccines. Given the ability to use mRNA technology to respond quickly to variant strains, novel bivalent vaccines against novel omicron variants were generated. In the current work, we evaluated the efficacy and safety of novel bivalent mRNA Omicron-containing booster vaccines among patients with hematological neoplasms, including both lymphoproliferative and myeloid malignancies., Patients and Methods: Cohort patients were obtained from electronic medical records of Maccabi Healthcare Services (MHS), the second-largest healthcare organization in Israel. We analyzed the outcome of all patients with hematological neoplasms, between September 21, 2022, and December 31, 2022, who were identified as having SARS-CoV-2 infection based on polymerase chain reaction (PCR) tests. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to compare the proportion of patients hospitalized for SARS-CoV-2 infection within 30 days among recipients and non-recipients of omicron vaccine., Results: During the study period, 472 patients were infected with Omicron. We compared the outcome of 70 patients who received the bivalent mRNA booster to 402 who did not. Fewer bivalent recipients needed COVID-19-related hospitalization [2 of 70 (2.9%)] in comparison to the non-vaccinated cohort [42 of 402 (10.4%)] (p-value=0.0304). This represents an 89% relative risk reduction in COVID-19-related hospitalization in patients with hematological neoplasms. The median duration of hospitalization was 7 days for the non-vaccinated group and 4 for the vaccinated group. A statistically significant increase in ischemic stroke rates due to bivalent mRNA Omicron-containing booster vaccine was not observed., Conclusion: The bivalent Omicron-containing vaccine mRNA booster has a protective effect in preventing and shortening hospitalization in patients with hematological neoplasms with an acceptable safety profile., (Copyright © 2023 International Institute of Anticancer Research (Dr. George J. Delinasios), All rights reserved.)

Patients with chronic lymphoid leukemia (CLL), even in the Omicron era and after vaccination, suffer from persistent COVID-19 infection, higher complications, and mortality compared with the general population. In this study, we evaluated retrospectively the effectiveness of nirmatrelvir + ritonavir among 1080 patients with CLL who were infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2. Nirmatrelvir administration was associated with a reduction in COVID-19-related hospitalization or death by day 35. Specifically, the rate of COVID-19-related hospitalization or death in the treated group compared with the untreated group was 4.8% (14 out of 292) vs 10.2% (75 out of 733), respectively. Moreover, we report a 69% relative risk reduction in COVID-19-related hospitalization or death in patients with CLL at the age of ≥65 years. Multivariate analysis indicates that patients aged >65 years, patients who received heavy treatment (>2 previous treatments), patients with recent hospitalizations, intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) treatment, and comorbidity had significant improvement outcomes after treatment with nirmatrelvir., (© 2023 by The American Society of Hematology.)

Introduction: Chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) is the most common leukemia in the Western world. Liver function tests (LFT) revealing impairment are described in 5% of CLL patients. Although these effects are described in the literature, their occurrence at the diagnosis of CLL and correlation with prognostic data have rarely been evaluated. We aimed to evaluate the prevalence of impairment of different LFT at CLL diagnosis and its correlation with prognosis., Methods: This is a descriptive observational retrospective study. Diagnostic and prognostic data from CLL patients followed at Bnai Zion Medical Center were collected from charts for the period January 1st, 2000 until October 6, 2020. A t-test for continuous variables, Chi-2 and Fisher-exact tests for discrete variables, and log-rank test for survival analysis, were performed to evaluate prognostic correlations of impaired as compared with normal LFT. The significance level was defined as p value < 0.05., Results: Overall, 153 patients with CLL diagnosed from 2000 until 2020 were included. The median age was 66 (42-89) years, and 62 were women (40.5%). Before CLL treatment initiation, mildly elevated cholestatic enzymes were encountered among 12% patients, while hepatocellular enzymes were elevated in only 2%. After excluding patients with hemolysis, hyperbilirubinemia was found among 5% of the patients. Cholestatic impairment was associated with negative prognostic data, especially increased alkaline phosphatase levels which was associated with a shorter overall survival (p=0.001)., Conclusions: Impairment of cholestatic enzymes and hyperbilirubinemia is not rare before CLL treatment. Despite its mild impairment, it seems to be associated with worse prognosis.

Central nervous system (CNS) involvement is rare in primary mediastinal large B-cell lymphoma (PMLBCL). We aimed to evaluate the incidence of CNS relapse as first treatment failure event and the effect of the induction chemotherapy regimen, central nervous system - international prognostic index (CNS-IPI) and other clinical and laboratory variables on the risk of CNS relapse in 564 PMLBCL patients treated with immunochemotherapy. Only 17 patients (3.0%) received CNS prophylaxis. During a 55-month median follow-up only 8 patients experienced CNS relapse as first event, always isolated. The 2-year cumulative incidence of CNS relapse (CI-CNSR) was 1.47% and remained unchanged thereafter. The CI-CNSR was not affected by the chemotherapy regimen (R-CHOP or R-da-EPOCH). None of the established International Prognostic Index factors for aggressive lymphomas predicted CNS relapse in PMLBCL. The 2-year CI-CNSR in patients with versus without kidney involvement was 13.3% versus 0.96% (p < 0.001); 14.3% versus 1.13% with versus without adrenal involvement (p < 0.001); and 10.2% versus 0.97% with versus without either kidney or adrenal involvement. CNS-IPI was also predictive (2-year CI-CNSR in high-risk vs. intermediate/low-risk: 10.37% vs. 0.84%, p < 0.001). However, this association may be driven mainly by kidney and/or adrenal involvement. In conclusion, in PMLBCL, CNS relapse is rare and appears to be strongly associated with kidney and/or adrenal involvement., (© 2022 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Belantamab mafodotin, an immuno-conjugate targeting B-cell maturation antigen, showed single-agent activity in phase 1 and 2 studies, and was recently approved for heavily pretreated relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) patients. Real-world data and long-term follow-up are scarce. We conducted a multisite retrospective study aimed to assess safety and efficacy of belantamab mafodotin monotherapy administered via the GSK expanded access compassionate care programme. One-hundred and six RRMM patients were treated with belantamab mafodotin between July 2019 and March 2021. The median age was 69.4 years. Patients were heavily pretreated with a median of six (range 2-11) prior therapy lines. Major adverse effects included ocular toxicity (keratopathy 68.4%, grade ≥3: 40.5%; blurred vision 36.8%, grade ≥3: 6.3%), thrombocytopenia (27.4%, grade ≥3: 17.9%) and infections (11.3%, grade ≥3: 7.5%). Median follow-up time was 11.9 [95% confidence interval (CI) 10.0-13.8] months. Overall response rate was 45.5%. Median progression-free survival was 4.7 (95% CI 3.5-5.9) months in the entire cohort and 8.8 (95% CI 6.6-10.9) months among responders. Median overall survival was 14.5 (95% CI 9.5-19.6) months, and not reached for responders. To conclude, in a real-world setting, belantamab mafodotin monotherapy showed efficacy comparable with the prospective clinical trials, with a tolerable toxicity profile., (© 2022 The Authors. British Journal of Haematology published by British Society for Haematology and John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Introduction: Haemato-oncologic patients are more susceptible to severe infections with SARS-CoV-2. We aimed to assess the clinical outcomes of SARS-CoV-2 infection among patients with Mycosis Fungoides and Sezary Syndrome (MF/SS)., Methods: The data were retrieved from anonymized electronic medical records of Maccabi Healthcare Services (MHS), the second-largest healthcare organization in Israel. Patients diagnosed with MF/SS were included in the study. COVID-19 PCR test results together with sociodemographic and clinical data were extracted and analyzed to evaluate the association of COVID-19 with clinical outcomes., Results: In the period of 2020-2022, 1,472 MF/SS patients were included in the study. Among them, 768 (52%) had SARS-CoV-2 infection. The hospitalization rate was 2.9% and infection by the Delta variant was associated with the highest hospitalization rate (7.7%). The hospitalization rate was lower among fully vaccinated patients (p = 0.032) but higher for patients older than 65 (p &lt; 0.001) and patients with SS (vs. MF) (p &lt; 0.001) or COPD (p = 0.024) diagnosis. There was a tendency for decreased hospitalization among patients treated with nirmatrelvir + ritonavir within 5 days of infection, with a 79% risk reduction, although it was not statistically significant (p = 0.164)., Conclusion: Patients with MF/SS do not necessarily have worse COVID-19 outcomes compared to the general population., (© 2023 The Author(s). Published by S. Karger AG, Basel.)

A significant body of literature has been generated related to the detection of measurable residual disease (MRD) at the time of achieving complete remission (CR) in patients with hairy cell leukemia (HCL). However, due to the indolent nature of the disease as well as reports suggesting long-term survival in patients treated with a single course of a nucleoside analog albeit without evidence of cure, the merits of detection of MRD and attempts to eradicate it have been debated. Studies utilizing novel strategies in the relapse setting have demonstrated the utility of achieving CR with undetectable MRD (uMRD) in prolonging the duration of remission. Several assays including immunohistochemical analysis of bone marrow specimens, multi-parameter flow cytometry and molecular assays to detect the mutant BRAF V600E gene or the consensus primer for the immunoglobulin heavy chain gene (IGH) rearrangement have been utilized with few comparative studies. Here we provide a consensus report on the available data, the potential merits of MRD assessment in the front-line and relapse settings and recommendations on future role of MRD assessment in HCL., (© 2022. The Author(s).)