暂无摘要。

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the prevalence of peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC)-related venous thrombosis in patients with hematological malignancies.
METHODS: A systematic review of observational studies that evaluated the occurrence of PICC-related venous thrombosis in children, adults, and older people with hematological malignancies was conducted. Searches were carried out on June 12th, 2023 on PubMed, CINAHL, Embase, Web of Science Core Collection, Scopus, and LILACS, and to gray literature on Google Scholar, and ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global. Eligibility criteria were applied independently by two reviewers, first on the titles and abstracts on the Rayyan platform and then on the full text of eligible studies. Risk of bias was assessed by the JBI checklist. Data were summarized descriptively, and the meta-analysis was carried out using the MetaXL 5.3 software. The review followed JBI guidelines and PRISMA for reporting.
RESULTS: In the 40 studies included, prevalence of PICC-related venous thrombosis was 9% in general, 9% in adults, and 6% in children with hematological malignancies. Most studies only evaluated cases of symptomatic thrombosis (n = 25; 64%).
CONCLUSIONS: Patients with hematological malignancies using PICC have an estimated prevalence of PICC-related venous thrombosis of 9%, and this rate may be underestimated due to the consideration of mostly symptomatic cases.

BACKGROUND: Hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) is a life-saving treatment for adolescents and young adults (ages 15-39) with hematologic malignancy. Given the significant developmental milestones usually achieved during this unique life stage, this population is especially vulnerable to the interruption caused by a cancer diagnosis and its treatment. HSCT is a particularly invasive form of cancer therapy with many negative physical, social, and psychological sequelae. The long-term impact of HSCT in adolescents and young adults with hematologic malignancies warrants a systematic investigation of its effects to best shape clinical care and health policy.
METHODS: This protocol for a systematic review will focus on the long-term physical, psychological, social, spiritual, and health behavior effects experienced by adolescents and young adults who undergo HSCT for hematologic malignancy. We have constructed a specific search strategy that queries these five domains, which will be applied to five databases-Embase, PubMed, Cochrane Trials and Reviews, PsychInfo, and CINAHL-to identify the key literature. Two independent reviewers will perform a title/abstract screen followed by a full-text screen using standard screening templates to ensure the inclusion of outcomes in the post-acute HSCT period. Risk of bias will be assessed using the University of Adelaide Joanna Briggs Institute Collaboration Critical Appraisal Tools. Data from included studies will be abstracted on study characteristics, study setting, sample characteristics, and outcomes. Given the broad scope of the research question, data synthesis will focus on qualitative methods in accordance with Institute of Medicine standards.
CONCLUSIONS: While adolescents and young adults undergoing hematopoietic stem cell transplantation for hematologic malignancy are understood to have a unique survivorship experience, the sequelae of this treatment approach in this population have not been previously aggregated. This systematic review intends to expand insight into the adolescent and young adult experiences with HSCT in order to inform age-appropriate survivorship care and deliver this life-saving intervention with the best possible outcomes.
BACKGROUND: PROSPERO CRD42022361663.

UNASSIGNED: PIM Kinases (PIM-1, PIM-2, and PIM-3) have been reported to play crucial role in signaling cascades that govern cell survival, proliferation, and differentiation. Over-expression of these kinases leads to hematological malignancies such as diffuse large B cell lymphomas (DLBCL), multiple myeloma, leukemia, lymphoma and prostate cancer etc. PIM kinases as biomarkers and potential therapeutic targets have shown promise toward precision cancer therapy. The selective PIM-1, PIM-2, and/or PIM-3 isoform inhibitors have shown significant results in patients with advanced stages of cancer including relapsed/refractory cancer.
UNASSIGNED: A comprehensive literature review of PIM Kinases (PIM-1, PIM-2, and PIM-3) in oncogenesis, the patented PIM kinase inhibitors (2016-Present), and their pharmacological and structural insights have been highlighted.
UNASSIGNED: Recently, PIM kinases viz. PIM-1, PIM-2, and PIM-3 (members of the serine/threonine protein kinase family) as therapeutic targets have attracted considerable interest in oncology especially in hematological malignancies. The patented PIM kinase inhibitors comprised of heterocyclic (fused)ring structure(s) like indole, pyridine, pyrazine, pyrazole, pyridazine, piperazine, thiazole, oxadiazole, quinoline, triazolo-pyridine, pyrazolo-pyridine, imidazo-pyridazine, oxadiazole-thione, pyrazolo-pyrimidine, triazolo-pyridazine, imidazo-pyridazine, pyrazolo-quinazoline and pyrazolo-pyridine etc. showed promising results in cancer chemotherapy.

Patients with hematologic malignancies (HMs) are at a significantly higher risk of contracting COVID-19 and experiencing severe outcomes compared to individuals without HMs. This heightened risk is influenced by various factors, including the underlying malignancy, immunosuppressive treatments, and patient-related factors. Notably, immunosuppressive regimens commonly used for HM treatment can lead to the depletion of B cells and T cells, which is associated with increased COVID-19-related complications and mortality in these patients. As the pandemic transitions into an endemic state, it remains crucial to acknowledge and address the ongoing risk for individuals with HMs. In this review, we aim to summarize the current evidence to enhance our understanding of the impact of HMs on COVID-19 risks and outcomes, identify particularly vulnerable individuals, and emphasize the need for specialized clinical attention and management. Furthermore, the impaired immune response to COVID-19 vaccination observed in these patients underscores the importance of implementing additional mitigation strategies. This may include targeted prophylaxis and treatment with antivirals and monoclonal antibodies as indicated. To provide practical guidance and considerations, we present two illustrative cases to highlight the real-life challenges faced by physicians caring for patients with HMs, emphasizing the need for individualized management based on disease severity, type, and the unique circumstances of each patient.

UNASSIGNED: Published research suggests that patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are neither commonly collected nor reported in randomized clinical trials (RCTs) for solid tumors. Little is known about these practices in RCTs for hematological malignant neoplasms.
UNASSIGNED: To evaluate the prevalence of PROs as prespecified end points in RCTs of hematological malignant neoplasms, and to assess reporting of PROs in associated trial publications.
UNASSIGNED: All issues of 8 journals known for publishing high-impact RCTs (NEJM, Lancet, Lancet Hematology, Lancet Oncology, Journal of Clinical Oncology, Blood, JAMA, and JAMA Oncology) between January 1, 2018, and December 13, 2022, were searched for primary publications of therapeutic phase 3 trials for adults with hematological malignant neoplasms. Studies that evaluated pretransplant conditioning regimens, graft-vs-host disease treatment, or radiotherapy as experimental treatment were excluded. Data regarding trial characteristics and PROs were extracted from manuscripts and trial protocols. Univariable analyses assessed associations between trial characteristics and PRO collection or reporting.
UNASSIGNED: Ninety RCTs were eligible for analysis. PROs were an end point in 66 (73%) trials: in 1 trial (1%) as a primary end point, in 50 (56%) as a secondary end point, and in 15 (17%) as an exploratory end point. PRO data were reported in 26 of 66 primary publications (39%): outcomes were unchanged in 18 and improved in 8, with none reporting worse PROs with experimental treatment. Trials sponsored by for-profit entities were more likely to include PROs as an end point (49 of 55 [89%] vs 17 of 35 [49%]; P < .001) but were not significantly more likely to report PRO data (20 of 49 [41%] vs 6 of 17 [35%]; P = .69). Compared with trials involving lymphoma (18 of 29 [62%]) or leukemia or myelodysplastic syndrome (18 of 28 [64%]), those involving plasma cell disorders or multiple myeloma (27 of 30 [90%]) or myeloproliferative neoplasms (3 of 3 [100%]) were more likely to include PROs as an end point (P = .03). Similarly, compared with trials involving lymphoma (3 of 18 [17%]) or leukemia or myelodysplastic syndrome (5 of 18 [28%]), those involving plasma cell disorders or multiple myeloma (16 of 27 [59%]) or myeloproliferative neoplasms (2 of 3 [67%]) were more likely to report PROs in the primary publication (P = .01).
UNASSIGNED: In this systematic review, almost 3 of every 4 therapeutic RCTs for blood cancers collected PRO data; however, only 1 RCT included PROs as a primary end point. Moreover, most did not report resulting PRO data in the primary publication and when reported, PROs were either better or unchanged, raising concern for publication bias. This analysis suggests a critical gap in dissemination of data on the lived experiences of patients enrolled in RCTs for hematological malignant neoplasms.

Several population pharmacokinetic (PPK) models of B cell lymphoma-2 (BCL-2) venetoclax (VEN) have been developed and published to characterize the influencing factors of pharmacokinetics in hematologic malignancies. This review described PPK models of VEN examining the magnitude and types of covariate effects in PK parameters, as well as identified areas that require further investigation in order to facilitate their use. Currently, there are six analyses on PPK models of VEN summarized in this review. Most analyses described the pharmacokinetics of VEN with a two-compartment model and all covariates are categorical. The median estimated apparent clearance (CL/F) was 446 L/Day and apparent volume of distribution of the central compartment (V2/F) was 114.5 L. The median IIV of CL/F reported was 39.5% and V2/F was 46.7%. Most commonly, CYP3A inhibitors, OATP1B3 inhibitors and rituximab co-administration were found to be significant covariates on CL/F. In addition, sex and population were influential covariates on V2/F. A detailed description of the characteristics of PPK models of VEN is provided in this review, as well as the effects of covariates on the PK parameters. For future development of the VEN PPK model, CYP3A inhibitors, rituximab co-administration, OATP1B1 transporter inhibitors, sex, population, and food might be considered. Further research and comprehensive investigations should be undertaken to explore reference ranges for therapeutic drug monitoring, define the potential role of patients with cerebrospinal fluid complications, and assess new or potential covariates. These endeavors will facilitate the development of personalized VEN therapy.

Hydrogen sulfide (H2S) is one of the three most crucial gaseous messengers in the body. The discovery of H2S donors, coupled with its endogenous synthesis capability, has sparked hope for the treatment of hematologic malignancies. In the last decade, the investigation into the impact of H2S has expanded, particularly within the fields of cardiovascular function, inflammation, infection, and neuromodulation. Hematologic malignancies refer to a diverse group of cancers originating from abnormal proliferation and differentiation of blood-forming cells, including leukemia, lymphoma, and myeloma. In this review, we delve deeply into the complex interrelation between H2S and hematologic malignancies. In addition, we comprehensively elucidate the intricate molecular mechanisms by which both H2S and its donors intricately modulate the progression of tumor growth. Furthermore, we systematically examine their impact on pivotal aspects, encompassing the proliferation, invasion, and migration capacities of hematologic malignancies. Therefore, this review may contribute novel insights to our understanding of the prospective therapeutic significance of H2S and its donors within the realm of hematologic malignancies.

Chimeric Antigen Receptor T-cell (CAR-T) therapy has transformed the treatment landscape for hematological malignancies, showing high efficacy in patients with relapsed or refractory (R/R) disease and otherwise poor prognosis in the pre-CAR-T era. These therapies have been usually administered in the inpatient setting due to the risk of cytokine release syndrome (CRS) and immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome (ICANS). However, there is a growing interest in the transition to outpatient administration due to multiple reasons. We review available evidence regarding safety and feasibility of outpatient administration of CD19 targeted and BCMA targeted CAR T-cell therapy with an emphasis on the implementation of outpatient CAR-T programs in community-based centers.

OBJECTIVE: Patients with hematological malignancies are likely to develop hypogammaglobulinemia. Immunoglobulin (Ig) is commonly given to prevent infections, but its overall costs and cost-effectiveness are unknown.
METHODS: A systematic review was conducted following the PRISMA guidelines to assess the evidence on the costs and cost-effectiveness of Ig, administered intravenously (IVIg) or subcutaneously (SCIg), in adults with hematological malignancies.
RESULTS: Six studies met the inclusion criteria, and only two economic evaluations were identified; one cost-utility analysis (CUA) of IVIg versus no Ig, and another comparing IVIg with SCIg. The quality of the evidence was low. Compared to no treatment, Ig reduced hospitalization rates. One study reported no significant change in hospitalizations following a program to reduce IVIg use, and an observational study comparing IVIg with SCIg suggested that there were more hospitalizations with SCIg but lower overall costs per patient. The CUA comparing IVIg versus no Ig suggested that IVIg treatment was not cost-effective, and the other CUA comparing IVIg to SCIg found that home-based SCIg was more cost-effective than IVIg, but both studies had serious limitations.
CONCLUSIONS: Our review highlighted key gaps in the literature: the cost-effectiveness of Ig in patients with hematological malignancies is very uncertain. Despite increasing Ig use worldwide, there are limited data regarding the total direct and indirect costs of treatment, and the optimal use of Ig and downstream implications for healthcare resource use and costs remain unclear. Given the paucity of evidence on the costs and cost-effectiveness of Ig treatment in this population, further health economic research is warranted.