Hematologic Oncology

A phase I study of AMN107 (Novartis) in Philadelphia-positive (Ph+) chronic myelogenous leukemia (CML) and acute lymphocytic leukemia (ALL) shows the new agent induces responses in patients with imatinib (Gleevec)-resistant Bcr-Abl mutations, according to a presentation at the 47th Annual Meeting of the American Society of Hematology (abstract 37).

The FDA has granted priority review to dasatinib (BMS-354825), developed by Bristol-Myers Squibb, for treatment of imatinib (Gleevec)-resistant or refractory chronic myelogenous leukemia (CML) in adults.

Concomitant administration of rituximab (Rituxan) and chemotherapy with cyclophosphamide, vincristine, and prednisone (CVP) appears effective in patients with stage III-IV follicular non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL).

Analysis of an early trial of a peptide vaccine, CMLVAX100, provides evidence of disease responses, including some complete molecular responses in patients with previously treated chronic myelogenous leukemia (CML), according to Monica Bocchia, MD, Department of Hematology, University of Siena, Italy. "Despite high rates of clinical and cytogenetic remission achieved by imatinib [Gleevec], most patients still have some degree of molecular residual disease," Dr. Bocchia said at the 47th Annual Meeting of the American College of Hematology (abstract 167). Furthermore, she noted that discontinuation of imatinib (Gleevec) usually results in recurrence of leukemia.

Rituxan (rituximab) in combination with CHOP (cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, prednisone) or other anthracycline-based chemotherapy regimens has received approval from the FDA for use as first-line treatment of diffuse large B cell non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (DLBCL) in CD20-positive patients.

An updated analysis of IRIS (International Randomized trial of Interferon/Ara-C versus ST1571), a trial of imatinib (Gleevec) vs interferon, shows that patients with chronic myelogenous leukemia (CML) who respond well to treatment after 12 months may go on to even further eradication of disease after 4 years.

The past 20 years have brought significant advances in our ability to manage patients with non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. More precise classification systems, improvements in diagnosis and staging, and effective new treatments have improved outcomes and made cure a reasonable goal for many patients with these disorders.

The past 20 years have brought significant advances in our ability to manage patients with non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. More precise classification systems, improvements in diagnosis and staging, and effective new treatments have improved outcomes and made cure a reasonable goal for many patients with these disorders.

The past 20 years have brought significant advances in our ability to manage patients with non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. More precise classification systems, improvements in diagnosis and staging, and effective new treatments have improved outcomes and made cure a reasonable goal for many patients with these disorders.

Standard therapy for multiple myeloma, which accounts for 10% ofall hematologic malignancies, has been autologous stem cell transplantation(ASCT), alkylator-based chemotherapy, and corticosteroids. Severaladvances have been made in the treatment of multiple myelomaover the past decade, especially the arrival of new, active agents suchas thalidomide (Thalomid), bortezomib (Velcade), and lenalidomide(Revlimid). These have shown significant clinical activity as singleagents. Trials are ongoing to incorporate these new agents into thevarious stages of treatment and to combine them with other effectivetreatment modalities, including ASCT.

Priming of leukemic cells with cytokines may enhance the efficacy of cell-cycle chemotherapy. In this study, we utilized these synergistic effects of granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF, sargramostim [Leukine]), hydroxyurea, and low-dose cytosine arabinoside to treat elderly patients with acute myelogenous leukemia (AML) or myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS). In a single-institution, retrospective study, we evaluated 94 treatments with concomitant hydroxyurea, cytosine arabinoside, and GM-CSF between the years of 1997 and 2003 in high-risk elderly patients with AML or MDS. A total of 80% of patients received all of the GM-CSF doses; 78% of patients received all of the cytosine arabinoside doses. Adverse events were minimal. No patient developed mucositis or alopecia. The most common adverse event was neutropenic fever, which was noted in 57% of patients. Twenty-one percent of patients remained neutropenic after treatment until death or relapse. Sixty-eight percent of patients reached an absolute neutrophil count of greater than 1,000 μL in a median of 33.5 days. Our data show an overall response rate of 52%, with a complete response rate of 39% and a partial response rate of 13%. Overall, our study showed that low-dose cytosine arabinoside given by continuous infusion together with continuous infusion GM-CSF and hydroxyurea was well-tolerated and effective in treating elderly AML and MDS patients who were not eligible for standard induction therapy.

Acute myelogenous leukemia (AML) is a disorder marked by infiltration of the bone marrow by abnormal hematopoietic progenitors. These cells are unable to differentiate in a normal fashion into myeloid, erythroid, and/or megakaryocytic cell lines and, unlike normal progenitors, are capable of infiltrating vital organs.

Drs. Thompson and Luger’spaper provides a comprehensivesurvey of issues surroundinghematopoietic stem celltransplantation (HSCT) in myelodysplasticsyndrome (MDS). Whilefinding much of value in the paper, Istrongly disagree with the authors’opinion that “it is clear that youngpatients with [human leukocyte antigen(HLA)]–identical siblings. . .should undergo allogeneic HSCT assoon as possible.” This view wouldseem to rest on two premises: first,that allogeneic HSCT is, as the authorscontend, the only therapy“shown to alter the natural history ofMDS,” and second, that results withallogeneic HSCT are sufficiently“good” that the procedure can be regardedas a fixed, standard elementof medical practice.

The curability of the aggressive, large-cell lymphomas was first convincinglyreported by Levitt et al in 1972.[1] Patients with “reticulum cellsarcoma” were treated with a regimen that came to be known as COMLA(cyclophosphamide, vincristine [Oncovin], methotrexate, leucovorin, cytarabine[Ara-C]). A more commonly quoted paper was published in 1975 by DeVita et aldescribing the cure of advanced “diffuse histiocytic lymphoma” with COPP (cyclophosphamide,vincristine [Oncovin], procarbazine, prednisone).[2] During the 1970sthe CHOP regimen (cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin HCl, vincristine [Oncovin],prednisone) was described by McKelvey et al[3]; it quickly became the mostwidely used treatment for the aggressive large-cell lymphomas. Patients treatedwith two cycles of CHOP beyond documentation of a complete remission wereoften cured.[4]

Drs. Thompson and Luger have written a thoughtful and comprehensive review of the therapeutic options and issues facing physicians caring for patients with myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS). In our commentary, we would like to highlight and expand on several areas of their analysis.

Chronic myelogenous leukemia (CML) is a clonal myeloproliferative disorder resulting from the neoplastic transformation of the primitive hemopoietic stem cell [1-4]. The disease is monoclonal in origin, affecting myeloid, monocytic, erythroid, megakaryocytic, B-cell, and, sometimes, T-cell lineages [4,5].

Supportive care remains the mainstay of therapy for patients withmyelodysplastic syndrome (MDS). Although allogeneic bone marrowtransplantation is the only known curative therapy for MDS, its risksmake this treatment prohibitive in many patients, who tend to be olderand have other medical problems. With advances in hematopoietic stemcell transplantation (HSCT), we can offer transplant to an increasingnumber of patients. It is, however, necessary to assess each patient andhis or her disease individually and evaluate prognostic factors, treatmentoptions, appropriateness of HSCT, and, if appropriate, type andtiming of HSCT. We will review the data on HSCT in MDS in order toexamine each of these issues and clarify the decision-making process.

The most common indolent lymphoma, follicular lymphoma comprises 35% of adult non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma (NHL) in the United States and 22% worldwide. Features associated with adverse outcome include age, male gender, disease stage, and performance status, with the International Prognostic Index being the most widely used risk classification system. Long-term disease-free survival is possible in select patient subgroups after treatment, but very late relapses suggest that quiescent lymphoma cells might be harbored for long periods of time. Radiation therapy is the mainstay of treatment for limited-stage follicular lymphoma, but there is some experience with chemotherapy and combined chemoradiation. When to initiate treatment in patients with advanced disease is controversial, but options include various combined chemotherapy regimens, monoclonal antibodies, radiolabeled antibodies, and bone marrow or stem cell transplantation. Future directions in the treatment of follicular lymphoma include vaccines, antisense therapy, and proteasome inhibitors.

Dr. Ganti and colleagues from the University of Nebraska provide a thorough review of the management of patients with follicular lymphoma, including many recent additions to the therapeutic armamentarium. The field is rapidly changing, and this article will be an enduring resource both for clinicians currently managing these patients and for anyone in the future who wants to understand what the state of the art was in 2004. Follicular lymphoma accounts for about one-third of non- Hodgkin’s lymphomas in the United States, making it likely that an individual oncologist will see one to three patients with follicular lymphoma each year. As the authors point out, numerous active agents have been developed for use in patients with follicular lymphoma over the past 5 years and additional promising new therapeutic agents and novel approaches (eg, vaccination) are in the development pipeline.

In their manuscript, Ganti et al tackle a very intricate and controversial subject: follicular non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma (NHL). The manuscript attempts to exhaustively cover multiple aspects of the disease, including pathology, prognostic factors, natural history, treatment of early-stage as well as advanced disease, relapsed disease, newer agents, monoclonal antibodies, interferon, radioimmunotherapy, stem cell transplantation, and future directions. To review all these topics thoroughly would almost require a textbook. To meticulously cover all of these aspects in a review article is a nearly impossible task. From my standpoint as a reviewer, to critique this article is an equally complicated task. I will therefore focus on only a few major issues.

Ganti et al present quite an extensive overview of follicular lymphoma, with most of their emphasis on clinical practice. Many of the issues they touch upon demonstrate that we cannot draw firm conclusions about the superiority of various treatments over others, due to a variety of study limitations. These challenges to interpretation include the indolent course of the disease in most patients (and thus the long follow-up needed to draw firm conclusions), the often small number of patients in this category, the retrospective nature of most studies, differences in risk factors, and the relative lack of randomized studies. As is also the case with efficacy, the most beneficial treatment strategy in follicular lymphoma remains to be established.

Chronic myelogenous leukemia (CML) is a clonal myeloproliferative disorderresulting from the neoplastic transformation of the primitive hematopoietic stemcell. The disease is monoclonal in origin, affecting myeloid, monocytic, erythroid,megakaryocytic, B-cell, and, sometimes, T-cell lineages. Bone marrowstromal cells are not involved.

Bcl-2 functions as a key survival factor for lymphocytes and is highlyexpressed in a majority of non-Hodgkin's lymphomas. The ability ofoblimersen sodium (Genasense, previously known as G3139) to targetbcl-2 messenger RNA and decrease Bcl-2 protein levels has the potentialto enhance the activity of cytotoxic chemotherapy. Pretreatmentwith oblimersen followed by cyclophosphamide (Cytoxan, Neosar)markedly improved survival relative to single-agent cyclophosphamidein a murine xenograft model. Oblimersen has also enhanced the cytotoxicityof a variety of other agents against non-Hodgkin's lymphoma,including etoposide, rituximab (Rituxan), and alemtuzumab (Campath).An initial phase I study of oblimersen in non-Hodgkin's lymphomademonstrated modest single-agent activity. Recent reports suggest thatoblimersen may add to the activity of R-CHOP (rituximab-cyclophosphamide/doxorubicin/vincristine/prednisone) in previously untreatedmantle cell lymphoma and to rituximab alone in a variety of subtypesof relapsed non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. Additional studies in both treatment-naive and relapsed patients will define the role of oblimersen inthe treatment of non-Hodgkin's lymphoma.

The 14 reports in this special supplement discuss theuse of the cytoprotectant amifostine in patients withcancer of the head and neck, esophagus, lung, andcervix, as well as those with lymphoma and acutemyelogenous leukemia. Discussions focus on thepotential of this agent to both reduce radiation sideeffects such as xerostomia and permit doseescalation of chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy.Improvements in treatment outcome and quality oflife as a result of cytoprotection are examined.

The field of radioimmunotherapy for the treatment of non-Hodgkin'slymphoma (NHL) has advanced significantly over the past decade, andseveral radioimmunoconjugates are being tested in clinical trials. Twoof these antibodies target CD20: yttrium-90 (Y-90)-labeled ibritumomabtiuxetan (Zevalin) and tositumomab/iodine-131 (I-131)-labeledtositumomab (Bexxar). Other agents target either CD22 (Y-90epratuzumab) or human leukocyte antigen (HLA)-DR (I-131 Lym-1),respectively. In February 2002, Y-90-labeled ibritumomab tiuxetanbecame the first radioimmunoconjugate to be approved by the US Foodand Drug Administration (FDA) for the treatment of cancer.Tositumomab/I-131 tositumomab was approved in June 2003. Thus,two radioimmunoconjugates have been approved for the treatment ofNHL. Both agents, when administered as a single dose, have producedimpressive tumor response rates with an acceptable toxicity profile. Themain side effect is reversible myelosuppression. Radioimmunotherapyproduces overall response rates of approximately 80% in patients withlow-grade lymphomas, and 25% to 30% of patients achieve a completeremission. Lower response rates (approximately 40%) have been reportedin patients with large-cell lymphomas. This review discusses theclinical trials of radioimmunotherapeutic agents for NHL that demonstratedtheir safety and efficacy and outlines the current status of theseagents.

SAN DIEGO-In the IRIS study, newly diagnosed chronic myelogenous leukemia (CML) patients who crossed over from interferon (IFN)-alfa plus cytarabine (ara-C) to imatinib mesylate (Gleevec) and achieved a complete cytogenetic response (CCR = elimination of Ph+ cells), had reductions in bcr-abl similar to those on first-line imatinib, according to a presentation at the 45th Annual Meeting of the American Society of Hematology (ASH abstract 635). Their probability of achieving a CCR, is somewhat diminished, however, compared with those treated with first-line imatinib, said Jerald P. Radich, MD, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle.

It has been demonstrated that completemolecular remission in follicularlymphoma is associatedwith an improved outcome. Therefore,the object of modern therapyfor indolent lymphoma should be toachieve this goal.

With the increasing successof both autologous and allogeneicmarrow transplantationin achieving cure of inheritedand acquired disorders, the numberof people who have become longtermsurvivors has steadily increasedworldwide. Concomitant with thisincrease has been greater attention tothe long-term health needs of theserecipients. Many studies have outlinedthe problems experienced bylong-term survivors and have betterinformed physicians about the medicalproblems that may require interventionand consultation.[1]

As increasing numbers of stemcell transplant recipients becomelong-term survivors, interestin understanding their longtermimmune status also assumesgreater urgency. One important strategyfor protecting patients againstcertain infections is the use of vaccinations.Just a few years ago, therewere no published recommendationsregarding this issue. Since then, boththe European Group for Blood andMarrow Transplantation (EBMT)and the Centers for Disease Controland Prevention (CDC) have publishedrecommendations. Drs. Goldberg,Cicogna, Rowley, and Pecoracritically review the CDC recommendationsin a nicely written articleand provide important backgroundinformation.

Blood and marrow transplantation, a curative treatment for avariety of serious diseases, induces a period of sustained immunosuppressionpredisposing recipients to opportunistic infections. Both forthe protection of the individual transplant recipient and as a matter ofpublic health policy, the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention(CDC) has developed guidelines for the use of vaccination in theprevention of infectious disease following transplantation. This reviewexamines the primary clinical research supporting vaccinationpolicies in this target population. Widely accepted recommendationsfor transplant recipients based on scientific data are sparse, as fewlarge studies have been conducted in this population. Anecdotalreports, expert advice, summaries, and limited series involving lessthan 50 patients using surrogate end points form the basis of thescientific literature, with the result being a wide variation in practice.Although based largely on inadequate scientific data, the CDC recommendationsoffer a pragmatic approach to the prevention of opportunisticdisease in hematopoietic transplant recipients and serve as auseful starting point for standardization of practice while defining thedirection of future studies in transplant recipients and other immunocompromisedhosts.