Andrea Evangelista

Early vs late tracheotomy for prevention of pneumonia in mechanically ventilated adult ICU patients: a randomized controlled trial.

CONTEXT Tracheotomy is used to replace endotracheal intubation in patients requiring prolonged ventilation; however, there is considerable variability in the time considered optimal for performing tracheotomy. This is of clinical importance because timing is a key criterion for performing a tracheotomy and patients who receive one require a large amount of health care resources. OBJECTIVE To determine the effectiveness of early tracheotomy (after 6-8 days of laryngeal intubation) compared with late tracheotomy (after 13-15 days of laryngeal intubation) in reducing the incidence of pneumonia and increasing the number of ventilator-free and intensive care unit (ICU)-free days. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PATIENTS Randomized controlled trial performed in 12 Italian ICUs from June 2004 to June 2008 of 600 adult patients enrolled without lung infection, who had been ventilated for 24 hours, had a Simplified Acute Physiology Score II between 35 and 65, and had a sequential organ failure assessment score of 5 or greater. INTERVENTION Patients who had worsening of respiratory conditions, unchanged or worse sequential organ failure assessment score, and no pneumonia 48 hours after inclusion were randomized to early tracheotomy (n = 209; 145 received tracheotomy) or late tracheotomy (n = 210; 119 received tracheotomy). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES The primary endpoint was incidence of ventilator-associated pneumonia; secondary endpoints during the 28 days immediately following randomization were number of ventilator-free days, number of ICU-free days, and number of patients in each group who were still alive. RESULTS Ventilator-associated pneumonia was observed in 30 patients in the early tracheotomy group (14%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 10%-19%) and in 44 patients in the late tracheotomy group (21%; 95% CI, 15%-26%) (P = .07). During the 28 days immediately following randomization, the hazard ratio of developing ventilator-associated pneumonia was 0.66 (95% CI, 0.42-1.04), remaining connected to the ventilator was 0.70 (95% CI, 0.56-0.87), remaining in the ICU was 0.73 (95% CI, 0.55-0.97), and dying was 0.80 (95% CI, 0.56-1.15). CONCLUSION Among mechanically ventilated adult ICU patients, early tracheotomy compared with late tracheotomy did not result in statistically significant improvement in incidence of ventilator-associated pneumonia. TRIAL REGISTRATION clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00262431.

Autologous transplantation and maintenance therapy in multiple myeloma.

BACKGROUND This open-label, randomized, phase 3 study compared melphalan at a dose of 200 mg per square meter of body-surface area plus autologous stem-cell transplantation with melphalan-prednisone-lenalidomide (MPR) and compared lenalidomide maintenance therapy with no maintenance therapy in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. METHODS We randomly assigned 273 patients 65 years of age or younger to high-dose melphalan plus stem-cell transplantation or MPR consolidation therapy after induction, and 251 patients to lenalidomide maintenance therapy or no maintenance therapy. The primary end point was progression-free survival. RESULTS The median follow-up period was 51.2 months. Both progression-free and overall survival were significantly longer with high-dose melphalan plus stem-cell transplantation than with MPR (median progression-free survival, 43.0 months vs. 22.4 months; hazard ratio for progression or death, 0.44; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.32 to 0.61; P<0.001; and 4-year overall survival, 81.6% vs. 65.3%; hazard ratio for death, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.32 to 0.93; P=0.02). Median progression-free survival was significantly longer with lenalidomide maintenance than with no maintenance (41.9 months vs. 21.6 months; hazard ratio for progression or death, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.33 to 0.65; P<0.001), but 3-year overall survival was not significantly prolonged (88.0% vs. 79.2%; hazard ratio for death, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.36 to 1.15; P=0.14). Grade 3 or 4 neutropenia was significantly more frequent with high-dose melphalan than with MPR (94.3% vs. 51.5%), as were gastrointestinal adverse events (18.4% vs. 0%) and infections (16.3% vs. 0.8%); neutropenia and dermatologic toxic effects were more frequent with lenalidomide maintenance than with no maintenance (23.3% vs. 0% and 4.3% vs. 0%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS Consolidation therapy with high-dose melphalan plus stem-cell transplantation, as compared with MPR, significantly prolonged progression-free and overall survival among patients with multiple myeloma who were 65 years of age or younger. Lenalidomide maintenance, as compared with no maintenance, significantly prolonged progression-free survival. (Funded by Celgene; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00551928.).

Efficacy and safety of once-weekly bortezomib in multiple myeloma patients

In a recent phase 3 trial, bortezomib-melphalan-prednisone-thalidomide followed by maintenance treatment with bortezomib-thalidomide demonstrated superior efficacy compared with bortezomib-melphalan-prednisone. To decrease neurologic toxicities, the protocol was amended and patients in both arms received once-weekly instead of the initial twice-weekly bortezomib infusions: 372 patients received once-weekly and 139 twice-weekly bortezomib. In this post-hoc analysis we assessed the impact of the schedule change on clinical outcomes and safety. Long-term outcomes appeared similar: 3-year progression-free survival rate was 50% in the once-weekly and 47% in the twice-weekly group (P > .999), and 3-year overall survival rate was 88% and 89%, respectively (P = .54). The complete response rate was 30% in the once-weekly and 35% in the twice-weekly group (P = .27). Nonhematologic grade 3/4 adverse events were reported in 35% of once-weekly patients and 51% of twice-weekly patients (P = .003). The incidence of grade 3/4 peripheral neuropathy was 8% in the once-weekly and 28% in the twice-weekly group (P < .001); 5% of patients in the once-weekly and 15% in the twice-weekly group discontinued therapy because of peripheral neuropathy (P < .001). This improvement in safety did not appear to affect efficacy. This study is registered at http://www.clinicaltrials.gov as NCT01063179.

Aspirin, Warfarin, or Enoxaparin Thromboprophylaxis in Patients With Multiple Myeloma Treated With Thalidomide: A Phase III, Open-Label, Randomized Trial

PURPOSE In patients with myeloma, thalidomide significantly improves outcomes but increases the risk of thromboembolic events. In this randomized, open-label, multicenter trial, we compared aspirin (ASA) or fixed low-dose warfarin (WAR) versus low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) for preventing thromboembolism in patients with myeloma treated with thalidomide-based regimens. PATIENTS AND METHODS A total of 667 patients with previously untreated myeloma who received thalidomide-containing regimens and had no clinical indication or contraindication for a specific antiplatelet or anticoagulant therapy were randomly assigned to receive ASA (100 mg/d), WAR (1.25 mg/d), or LMWH (enoxaparin 40 mg/d). A composite primary end point included serious thromboembolic events, acute cardiovascular events, or sudden deaths during the first 6 months of treatment. RESULTS Of 659 analyzed patients, 43 (6.5%) had serious thromboembolic events, acute cardiovascular events, or sudden death during the first 6 months (6.4% in the ASA group, 8.2% in the WAR group, and 5.0% in the LMWH group). Compared with LMWH, the absolute differences were +1.3% (95% CI, -3.0% to 5.7%; P = .544) in the ASA group and +3.2% (95% CI, -1.5% to 7.8%; P = .183) in the WAR group. The risk of thromboembolism was 1.38 times higher in patients treated with thalidomide without bortezomib. Three major (0.5%) and 10 minor (1.5%) bleeding episodes were recorded. CONCLUSION In patients with myeloma treated with thalidomide-based regimens, ASA and WAR showed similar efficacy in reducing serious thromboembolic events, acute cardiovascular events, and sudden deaths compared with LMWH, except in elderly patients where WAR showed less efficacy than LMWH.

Geriatric assessment predicts survival and toxicities in elderly myeloma patients: An International Myeloma Working Group report

We conducted a pooled analysis of 869 individual newly diagnosed elderly patient data from 3 prospective trials. At diagnosis, a geriatric assessment had been performed. An additive scoring system (range 0-5), based on age, comorbidities, and cognitive and physical conditions, was developed to identify 3 groups: fit (score = 0, 39%), intermediate fitness (score = 1, 31%), and frail (score ≥2, 30%). The 3-year overall survival was 84% in fit, 76% in intermediate-fitness (hazard ratio [HR], 1.61; P = .042), and 57% in frail (HR, 3.57; P < .001) patients. The cumulative incidence of grade ≥3 nonhematologic adverse events at 12 months was 22.2% in fit, 26.4% in intermediate-fitness (HR, 1.23; P = .217), and 34.0% in frail (HR, 1.74; P < .001) patients. The cumulative incidence of treatment discontinuation at 12 months was 16.5% in fit, 20.8% in intermediate-fitness (HR, 1.41; P = .052), and 31.2% in frail (HR, 2.21; P < .001) patients. Our frailty score predicts mortality and the risk of toxicity in elderly myeloma patients. The International Myeloma Working group proposes this score for the measurement of frailty in designing future clinical trials. These trials are registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT01093136 (EMN01), #NCT01190787 (26866138MMY2069), and #NCT01346787 (IST-CAR-506).

Aspirin or enoxaparin thromboprophylaxis for patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma treated with lenalidomide

Lenalidomide plus dexamethasone is effective in the treatment of multiple myeloma (MM) but is associated with an increased risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE). This prospective, open-label, randomized substudy of a phase 3 trial compared the efficacy and safety of thromboprophylaxis with low-dose aspirin (ASA) or low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) in patients with newly diagnosed MM, treated with lenalidomide and low-dose dexamethasone induction and melphalan-prednisone-lenalidomide consolidation. Overall, 342 patients who did not have clinical indications or contraindications to antiplatelet or anticoagulant therapy were randomly assigned to receive ASA 100 mg/d (n = 176) or LMWH enoxaparin 40 mg/d (n = 166). The incidence of VTE was 2.27% in the ASA group and 1.20% in the LMWH group. Compared with LMWH, the absolute difference in the proportion of VTE was 1.07% (95% confidence interval, -1.69-3.83; P = .452) in the ASA group. Pulmonary embolism was observed in 1.70% of patients in the ASA group and none in the LMWH group. No arterial thrombosis, acute cardiovascular events, or sudden deaths were reported. No major hemorrhagic complications were reported. In previously untreated patients with MM receiving lenalidomide with a low thromboembolic risk, ASA could be an effective and less-expensive alternative to LMWH thromboprophylaxis.

Second primary malignancies with lenalidomide therapy for newly diagnosed myeloma: a meta-analysis of individual patient data

BACKGROUND Lenalidomide has been linked to second primary malignancies in myeloma. We aimed to pool and analyse available data to compare the incidence of second primary malignancies in patients with and without lenalidomide exposure. METHODS We identified relevant studies through a search of PubMed and abstracts from the American Society of Clinical Oncology, American Society of Hematology, and the International Myeloma Workshop. Randomised, controlled, phase 3 trials that recruited patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma between Jan 1, 2000, and Dec 15, 2012, and in which at least one group received lenalidomide were eligible for inclusion. We obtained individual patient data (age, sex, date of diagnosis, allocated treatment and received treatment, duration of treatment and cause of discontinuation, maintenance treatment, date of first relapse, date of second primary malignancy diagnosis, type of second primary malignancy, date of death or last contact, and cause of death) by direct collaboration with the principal investigators of eligible trials. Primary outcomes of interest were cumulative incidence of all second primary malignancies, solid second primary malignancies, and haematological second primary malignancies, and were analysed by a one-step meta-analysis. FINDINGS We found nine eligible trials, of which seven had available data for 3254 patients. 3218 of these patients received treatment (2620 had received lenalidomide and 598 had not), and were included in our analyses. Cumulative incidences of all second primary malignancies at 5 years were 6·9% (95% CI 5·3-8·5) in patients who received lenalidomide and 4·8% (2·0-7·6) in those who did not (hazard ratio [HR] 1·55 [95% CI 1·03-2·34]; p=0·037). Cumulative 5-year incidences of solid second primary malignancies were 3·8% (95% CI 2·7-4·9) in patients who received lenalidomide and 3·4% (1·6-5·2) in those that did not (HR 1·1 [95% CI 0·62-2·00]; p=0·72), and of haematological second primary malignancies were 3·1% (95% CI 1·9-4·3) and 1·4% (0·0-3·6), respectively (HR 3·8 [95% CI 1·15-12·62]; p=0·029). Exposure to lenalidomide plus oral melphalan significantly increased haematological second primary malignancy risk versus melphalan alone (HR 4·86 [95% CI 2·79-8·46]; p<0·0001). Exposure to lenalidomide plus cyclophosphamide (HR 1·26 [95% CI 0·30-5·38]; p=0·75) or lenalidomide plus dexamethasone (HR 0·86 [95% CI 0·33-2·24]; p=0·76) did not increase haematological second primary malignancy risk versus melphalan alone. INTERPRETATION Patients with newly diagnosed myeloma who received lenalidomide had an increased risk of developing haematological second primary malignancies, driven mainly by treatment strategies that included a combination of lenalidomide and oral melphalan. These results suggest that alternatives, such as cyclophosphamide or alkylating-free combinations, should be considered instead of oral melphalan in combination with lenalidomide for myeloma. FUNDING Celgene Corporation.

Age and organ damage correlate with poor survival in myeloma patients: Meta-analysis of 1435 individual patient data from 4 randomized trials

Thalidomide and bortezomib are extensively used to treat elderly myeloma patients. In these patients, treatment-related side effects are frequent and full drug doses difficult to tolerate. We retrospectively analyzed data from 1435 elderly patients enrolled in 4 European phase III trials including thalidomide and/or bortezomib. After a median follow up of 33 months (95%CI: 10–56 months), 513 of 1435 patients (36%) died; median overall survival was 50 months (95%CI: 46–60 months). The risk of death was increased in patients aged 75 years or over (HR 1.44, 95%CI: 1.20–1.72; P<0.001), in patients with renal failure (HR 2.02, 95%CI: 1.51–2.70; P<0.001), in those who experienced grade 3–4 infections, cardiac or gastrointestinal adverse events during treatment (HR 2.53, 95%CI: 1.75–3.64; P<0.001) and in those who required drug discontinuation due to adverse events (HR 1.67, 95%CI; 1.12–2.51; P=0.01). This increased risk was restricted to the first six months after occurrence of adverse events or drug discontinuation and declined over time. More intensive approaches, such as the combination of bortezomib-thalidomide, negatively affected outcome. Bortezomib-based combinations may overcome the negative impact of renal failure. Age 75 years or over or renal failure at presentation, occurrence of infections, cardiac or gastrointestinal adverse events negatively affected survival. A detailed geriatric assessment, organ evaluation and less intense individualized approaches are suggested in elderly unfit subjects.

Extracorporeal Co2 removal in hypercapnic patients at risk of noninvasive ventilation failure: a matched cohort study with historical control.

Objectives:To assess efficacy and safety of noninvasive ventilation-plus-extracorporeal Co2 removal in comparison to noninvasive ventilation-only to prevent endotracheal intubation patients with acute hypercapnic respiratory failure at risk of failing noninvasive ventilation. Design:Matched cohort study with historical control. Setting:Two academic Italian ICUs. Patients:Patients treated with noninvasive ventilation for acute hypercapnic respiratory failure due to exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (May 2011 to November 2013). Interventions:Extracorporeal CO2 removal was added to noninvasive ventilation when noninvasive ventilation was at risk of failure (arterial pH ⩽ 7.30 with arterial PCO2 > 20% of baseline, and respiratory rate ≥ 30 breaths/min or use of accessory muscles/paradoxical abdominal movements). The noninvasive ventilation-only group was created applying the genetic matching technique (GenMatch) on a dataset including patients enrolled in two previous studies. Exclusion criteria for both groups were mean arterial pressure less than 60 mm Hg, contraindications to anticoagulation, body weight greater than 120 kg, contraindication to continuation of active treatment, and failure to obtain consent. Measurements and Main Results:Primary endpoint was the cumulative prevalence of endotracheal intubation. Twenty-five patients were included in the noninvasive ventilation-plus-extracorporeal CO2 removal group. The GenMatch identified 21 patients for the noninvasive ventilation-only group. Risk of being intubated was three times higher in patients treated with noninvasive ventilation-only than in patients treated with noninvasive ventilation-plus-extracorporeal CO2 removal (hazard ratio, 0.27; 95% CI, 0.07–0.98; p = 0.047). Intubation rate in noninvasive ventilation-plus-extracorporeal CO2 removal was 12% (95% CI, 2.5–31.2) and in noninvasive ventilation-only was 33% (95% CI, 14.6–57.0), but the difference was not statistically different (p = 0.1495). Thirteen patients (52%) experienced adverse events related to extracorporeal CO2 removal. Bleeding episodes were observed in three patients, and one patient experienced vein perforation. Malfunctioning of the system caused all other adverse events. Conclusions:These data provide the rationale for future randomized clinical trials that are required to validate extracorporeal CO2 removal in patients with hypercapnic respiratory failure and respiratory acidosis nonresponsive to noninvasive ventilation.

Final results of a multicenter trial addressing role of CSF flow cytometric analysis in NHL patients at high risk for CNS dissemination

This prospective study compared diagnostic and prognostic value of conventional cytologic (CC) examination and flow cytometry (FCM) of baseline samples of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) in 174 patients with newly diagnosed aggressive non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL). FCM detected a neoplastic population in the CSF of 18 of 174 patients (10%), CC only in 7 (4%; P < .001); 11 patients (14%) were discordant (FCM(+)/CC(-)). At a median follow-up of 46 months, there were 64 systemic progressions and 10 CNS relapses, including 2 patients with both systemic and CNS relapses. Two-year progression-free and overall survival were significantly higher in patients with FCM(-) CSF (62% and 72%) compared with those FCM(+) CSF (39% and 50%, respectively), with a 2-year CNS relapse cumulative incidence of 3% (95% confidence interval [CI], 0-7) versus 17% (95% CI, 0-34; P = .004), respectively. The risk of CNS progression was significantly higher in FMC(+)/CC(-) versus FCM(-)/CC(-) patients (hazard ratio = 8.16, 95% CI, 1.45-46). In conclusion, FCM positivity in the CSF of patients with high-risk NHL is associated with a significantly higher CNS relapse risk and poorer outcome. The combination of IV drugs with a higher CNS bioavailability and intrathecal chemotherapy is advisable to prevent CNS relapses in FCM(+) patients.