Use of a dual lumen port for automated red cell exchange in adults with sickle cell disease

Red cell exchange (RCE) is a common procedure in adults with sickle cell disease (SCD). Implantable dual lumen Vortex (DLV) ports can be used for RCE in patients with poor peripheral venous access. We performed a retrospective cohort study of RCE procedures performed in adults with SCD. The main objective of the study was to compare the inlet speed, duration of procedures and rate of complications performed through DLV ports to those performed through temporary central venous and peripheral catheters. Twenty‐nine adults with SCD underwent a total of 318 RCE procedures. Twenty adults had DLV ports placed and 218 procedures were performed using DLV ports. Mean length of follow‐up after DLV port placement was 397 ± 263 days. Six DLV ports were removed due to infection and 1 for malfunction after a mean of 171 ± 120 days. Compared to temporary central venous and peripheral catheters, DLV port procedures had a greater rate of procedural complications, a longer duration, and a lower inlet speed (all P < 0.01). When accounting for the maximum allowable inlet speed to avoid citrate toxicity, 40% of DLV port procedures were greater than 10% below maximum speed, compared to 7 and 14% of procedures performed through temporary central venous and peripheral catheters (P < 0.0001). In conclusion, DLV ports can be used for RCE in adults with SCD, albeit with more procedural complications and longer duration. The smaller internal diameter and longer catheter of DLV ports compared to temporary central venous catheters likely accounts for the differences noted. J. Clin. Apheresis 30:353–358, 2015. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

The efficacy and toxicity of immune checkpoint inhibitors in a real-world older patient population

ImportanceImmunotherapy has emerged as an effective treatment option for the management of advanced cancers. The effects of these immune checkpoint inhibitors in the older patient population has not been adequately assessed.ObjectiveTo understand the impact of aging on CTLA-4 and PDL-1 inhibitors efficacy and immune-related adverse events (irAE) in the context of real-world management of advanced solid cancers.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsThis retrospective study involved all non-study patients with histologically-confirmed metastatic or inoperable solid cancers receiving immunotherapy at Kingston Health Sciences Centre. We defined ‘older patient’ as age ≥ 75. All statistical analyses were conducted under SPSS IBM for Windows version 24.0.Main Outcomes and MeasuresStudy outcomes included immunotherapy treatment response, survival, as well as number, type, and severity of irAEs.ResultsOur study (N = 78) had 29 (37%) patients age <65, 26 (33%) patients age 65–74, and 23 (30%) patients age ≥75. Melanoma, non-small cell lung cancer, and renal cell carcinoma accounted for 70%, 22%, and 8% of the study population, respectively. Distributions of ipilimumab (32%), nivolumab (33%), and pembrolizumab (35%) were similar in the study. The response rates were 28%, 27%, and 39% in the age <65, age 64–74, age ≥75 groups, respectively (P = 0.585). Kaplan-Meier curve showed a median survival of 28 months (12.28–43.9, 95% CI) and 17 months (0–36.9, 95% CI) in the age <65 and age 64–74 groups, respectively; the estimated survival probability did not reach 50% in the age ≥75 group (P = 0.319). There were no statistically significant differences found in terms of irAEs, multiple irAEs, severity of grade 3 or higher, types of irAEs, and irAEs resolution status when comparing between different age groups.Conclusion and RelevanceOur results suggest that patients age ≥75 are able to gain as much benefit from immunotherapy as younger patients, without excess toxicity. Our findings suggest that single agent immunotherapy is generally well-tolerated across different age groups with no significant difference in the type, frequency or severity of irAEs. Future studies evaluating aging and combination immunotherapy are warranted.     

Challenges with Forecasting Budget Impact: A Case Study of Six ICER Reports

Background

Payers frequently rely on budget impact model (BIM) results to help determine drug coverage policy and its effect on their bottom line. It is unclear whether BIMs typically overestimate or underestimate real-world budget impact.