Necrotizing fasciitis in two patients with myelodysplastic syndrome treated with azacitidine

Azacitidine is a novel agent for treating myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS). It has a relatively safe toxicity profile with very few reported skin toxicities. Patients with MDS were prone to get severe infections, especially via respiratory tract, urinary system, and bloodstream. However, necrotizing fasciitis (NF) is a relatively rare event in patients with MDS, and it is hard to diagnose early. Here, we report two MDS cases that developed NF in lower extremities while receiving azacitidine treatment. One of them survives after emergent fasciotomy along with the administration of broad‐spectrum antibiotics and intravenous immunoglobulin.     

Prognostic factors for response and overall survival in 282 patients with higher-risk myelodysplastic syndromes treated with azacitidine

Prognostic factors for response and survival in higher-risk myelodysplastic syndrome patients treated with azacitidine (AZA) remain largely unknown. Two hundred eighty-two consecutive high or intermediate-2 risk myelodysplastic syndrome patients received AZA in a compassionate, patient-named program. Diagnosis was RA/RARS/RCMD in 4%, RAEB-1 in 20%, RAEB-2 in 54%, and RAEB-t (AML with 21%-30% marrow blasts) in 22%. Cytogenetic risk was good in 31%, intermediate in 17%, and poor in 47%. Patients received AZA for a median of 6 cycles (1-52). Previous low-dose cytosine arabinoside treatment (P = .009), bone marrow blasts > 15% (P = .004), and abnormal karyotype (P = .03) independently predicted lower response rates. Complex karyotype predicted shorter responses (P = .0003). Performance status ≥ 2, intermediate- and poor-risk cytogenetics, presence of circulating blasts, and red blood cell transfusion dependency ≥ 4 units/8 weeks (all P < 10(-4)) independently predicted poorer overall survival (OS). A prognostic score based on those factors discriminated 3 risk groups with median OS not reached, 15.0 and 6.1 months, respectively (P < 10(-4)). This prognostic score was validated in an independent set of patients receiving AZA in the AZA-001 trial (P = .003). Achievement of hematological improvement in patients who did not obtain complete or partial remission was associated with improved OS (P < 10(-4)). In conclusion, routine tests can identify subgroups of patients with distinct prognosis with AZA treatment.     

Comparison of 7-day azacitidine and 5-day decitabine for treating myelodysplastic syndrome

Two DNA methyltransferase inhibitors, azacitidine and decitabine, are currently approved for the treatment of myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS). Choosing between these drugs is an important practical issue. In this retrospective study, patients receiving AZA-7d (azacitidine 75 mg/m² subcutaneously?×?7 days, n?=?75) or DEC-5d (decitabine 20 mg/m² intravenously?×?5 days, n?=?74) were compared. The rates of hematologic response (complete response [CR]/partial response [PR]/marrow CR) were 12.0 % (AZA-7d) vs. 29.7 % (DEC-5d) (P?=?0.008), and the overall response rates (CR/PR/marrow CR/hematologic improvement) were 52.0 % (AZA-7d) vs. 63.5 % (DEC-5d) (P?=?0.155). Grade 3 or higher neutropenia occurred more frequently with DEC-5d (79.6 %) than with AZA-7d (72.2 %) (P?=?0.040). Overall survival probabilities at 2 years were 42.1 % (AZA-7d) vs. 42.2 % (DEC-5d) (P?=?0.944). Subgroup analysis revealed that AZA-7d associated with higher survival rates than DEC-5d in patients whose MDS duration exceeded 1 year or who had poor performance status. In conclusion, both AZA-7d and DEC-5d regimens were effective in treating patients with MDS. However, the two regimens differed in terms of clinical responses and toxicities. One hypomethylating regimen may be superior to the other regimen in particular subgroups.     

Management and supportive care measures for adverse events in patients with myelodysplastic syndromes treated with azacitidine*

Objective: Myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) treatment can initially worsen patients’ clinical condition and they may discontinue therapy before achieving benefit. We present previously unpublished data from two large phase III trials describing common adverse events (AEs) associated with azacitidine and methods to manage them. Methods: In the Cancer and Leukemia Group B (CALGB) 9221 study, patients with any French‐American‐British (FAB) subtype of MDS were randomized to azacitidine or best supportive care (BSC). After 56 d, patients randomized to BSC with disease progression could cross over to receive azacitidine. In the AZA‐001 study, patients with higher‐risk MDS (FAB‐defined refractory anemia with excess blasts (RAEB), RAEB in transformation, or chronic myelomonocitic leukaemia and IPSS int‐2 or high) were randomized to azacitidine or to conventional care regimens (CCR), which included low‐dose ara‐C, BSC, or intensive chemotherapy. In both studies, azacitidine dose was 75 mg/m²/d SC for 7 d every 28 d. AEs were graded per National Cancer Institute’s Common Toxicity Criteria version 2.0 (AZA‐001) or CALGB Expanded CTC (CALGB 9221). Results: In safety‐evaluable patients in AZA‐001 (N = 175) or CALGB 9221 (N = 150), the most common AEs with azacitidine included hematologic (eg, cytopenias) and non‐hematologic administration‐related events (eg, injection‐site reactions and gastrointestinal disorders). Most AEs were transient and resolved during ongoing therapy (> 83%). Hematologic AEs, most frequently observed during early treatment cycles, decreased during subsequent cycles and were usually managed with dosing delays (23–29%). Gastrointestinal symptoms were primarily managed with anti‐emetics and laxatives. Conclusion: Hematologic and non‐hematologic AEs with azacitidine decreased in frequency as treatment continued. Awareness of the onset, duration and management of AEs can facilitate treatment, permitting patients to continue therapy for maximum benefit.     

Predicting infections in high‐risk patients with myelodysplastic syndrome/acute myeloid leukemia treated with azacitidine: Aretrospective multicenter study

Hypomethylating agents have become the standard therapy for patients with high‐risk myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS). In Israel, azacitidine (AZA) is routinely used. Yet, infectious complications are common during AZA therapy. The current study was aimed to evaluate the incidence and predisposing risk factors for infections in AZA‐treated patients. This retrospective study included patients treated with AZA in 18 Israeli medical institutions between 2008 and 2011. Data on 184 patients [157 high‐risk MDS and 27 acute myeloid leukemia (AML)], with a median age of 71.6 (range 29–92) were recorded. Overall, 153 infectious events were reported during 928 treatment cycles (16.5%) administered to 100 patients. One hundred fourteen, 114/153 (75%) events required hospitalization and 30 (19.6%) were fatal. In a univariate analysis, unfavorable cytogenetics, low neutrophil, hemoglobin (Hb) and platelet (PLT) counts were found to be associated with infections (24.4% vs. 12.9%, P < 0.0001; 27% vs. 13.5%, P < 0.0001; 20.4% vs. 11%, P < 0.0001 and 29.2% vs. 14.2%, P < 0.0001, respectively). In multivariate analysis, only low Hb level, low PLT count, and unfavorable cytogenetics remained significant. Prior to therapy, poor cytogenetics, PLT count below 20 × 10⁹/L and neutrophil count below 0.5 × 10⁹/L were predictive of the risk of infection during the first two cycles of therapy. In conclusion, patients with unfavorable cytogenetics, presenting with low neutrophil and PLT counts, are susceptible to infections. Evaluation of infection risk should be repeated prior to each cycle. Patients with poor cytogenetics in whom AZA is prescribed despite low PLT count are particularly at high risk for infections and infection prophylaxis may be considered. Am. J. Hematol. 88:130–134, 2013. © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

13-cis-Retinoic acid treatment in patients with myelodysplastic syndrome

Twenty patients with primary myelodysplastic syndromes (16 refractory anemia without or with ringed sideroblasts, 2 refractory anemia with excess blasts, 2 refractory anemia with excess blasts in transformation) received 13-cis-retinoic acid at a dosage of 50-100 mg/m2/day for a minimum of 4 weeks. Twelve patients obtained an increase of hemoglobin levels greater than 1 g/dl and 7 showed an associated increase of granulocyte count greater than 50% of baseline values. No significant biochemical signs of dyslipidemia or liver damage were noted. A sustained response was noted only in refractory anemia without or with ringed sideroblasts and normal or hypercellular bone marrow. Five patients are still on therapy from 23 to 82 weeks without transfusion requirement and all have shown an improvement in performance status. We conclude that 13-retinoic acid may only be clinically useful in selected patients since in myelodysplastic syndromes with blast excess the drug does not seem to improve the course of the disease.     

Comparative clinical effectiveness of azacitidine versus decitabine in older patients with myelodysplastic syndromes

The hypomethylating agents (HMAs) azacitidine and decitabine are both approved for treatment of myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) in the USA. In Europe, decitabine is not approved due to lack of survival advantage in randomized trials. The two drugs have not been compared in clinical trials. We identified patients diagnosed with MDS between 2004 and 2011 from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)‐Medicare linked database in the USA who received ≥ 10 doses of either HMA. We estimated survival from HMA initiation with Kaplan–Meier methods and used multivariate Cox proportional hazards models to adjust for covariates. Analyses controlled for histological subtype and we conducted a subset analysis limited to patients with refractory anaemia with excess blasts (RAEB). In 2025 HMA‐treated patients, median survival was 15 months with no difference in survival based on the HMA received in adjusted analysis (decitabine versus azacitidine, hazard ratio = 1·06, 95% confidence interval: 0·94–1·19, P = 0·37). For RAEB patients (n = 523), median survival was 12 months, with no significant difference based on HMA received. No significant survival difference was found between azacitidine and decitabine in patients with MDS, including RAEB. Importantly, population‐based survival of azacitidine‐treated RAEB patients was substantially shorter than in the AZA‐001 clinical trial (11 versus 24·5 months).     

Surgical treatment for esophageal cancer patients with myelodysplastic syndrome

Background

Myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) is a clinical condition with pancytopenia, dysfunction of neutrophils and poor prognosis caused by dysplasia of the bone marrow. MDS patients tend to have other malignant diseases, and the treatment is complicated because of high morbidity and mortality. Moreover, esophageal cancer is one of the most aggressive cancers, and its surgical treatment has high morbidity.

Methods

Among 450 patients with esophageal cancer who underwent surgical treatment, 4 (0.8 %) had MDS. We describe esophageal cancer patients with MDS who underwent radical surgical treatment and estimate the perioperative management and postoperative outcome.

Results

Two patients underwent transhiatal resection involving lower esophagectomy and proximal gastrectomy, and two other patients underwent thoracoscopic thoracoabdominal resection. Important critical points for the surgical treatment of esophageal cancer patients with MDS were as follows: hematological examination for patients with cytopenia, surgical indication for patients with WHO classification of RA or RARS and IPSS of low or intermediate-1 risk, planning transfusions for patients with thrombocytopenia, expecting postoperative complications such as pneumonia or bleeding, and careful follow-up for the early detection of relapse of disease.

Conclusion

With careful management, we were able to treat esophageal cancer patients with MDS surgically.     

Prolonged responses in patients with MDS and CMML treated with azacitidine and etanercept

Combination therapy with azacitidine and etanercept was hypothesized to lead to improved responses in myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) patients. Thirty‐two patients with MDS/chronic myelomonocytic leukaemia were treated with azacitidine + etanercept; 30 completed at least three therapy cycles. At 3 months, nine patients had achieved complete response (CR), two had partial response, 10 had marrow CRs, seven had stable disease, two patients had haematological improvement without marrow response and two patients had disease progression. The overall response rate was 72%; median duration of response was not reached at 2 years. Marrow response rates and duration were improved with azacitidine + etanercept compared to azacitidine alone.     

Danazol for the treatment of thrombocytopenia in patients with myelodysplastic syndrome

Thrombocytopenia is a poor prognostic indicator in the myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS). Treatment options for patients with symptomatic thrombocytopenia are limited. Danazol, an attenuated androgen, may have some efficacy in increasing the platelet count of patients with MDS. We retrospectively reviewed 33 patients with primary MDS who were treated with danazol for 6 or more weeks. After 6 weeks on danazol, the mean platelet count increased from 42 x 10(9)/L to 60 x 10(9)/L (P < 0.015), and 25 out of 33 patients (76%) had an increase in their platelet counts. Following 12 weeks of treatment, the mean platelet count increased to 67 x 10(9)/L (P < 0.005), and 21 out of 29 patients (72%) had an increase in their platelet counts. Seven out of nine patients no longer required platelet transfusions because bleeding stopped after 6 weeks on danazol. Mean duration of response was 10 months (range 2-68 months). Responses were seen in all French-American-British (FAB) subtypes and in all International Prognostic Scoring System (IPSS) scores. Therapy was well tolerated. Danazol may be effective in MDS patients who are thrombocytopenic.     

Differentiation syndrome in acute myeloid leukemia after treatment with azacitidine

We report a case report of hyperleukocytosis, fever, hypotension, pulmonary and pericardial effusions, and acute kidney injury during initial treatment with azacitidine in a patient with AML‐MRC. Collectively, the symptomatology resembled differentiation syndrome. Azacitidine has been previously associated with fever, peripheral edema, and hyperleukocytosis, but its side effect profile has never been described as similar to differentiation syndrome. The patient's deteriorating course quickly turned around after treatment with dexamethasone. This potential reaction, and potential treatment, is important for clinicians to be aware of.