Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology - Research Publications
Permanent URI for this collection
Search Results
1 - 5 of 5
-
ItemCytomegalovirus DNAemia and disease: current-era epidemiology, clinical characteristics and outcomes in cancer patients other than allogeneic haemopoietic transplantation(WILEY, 2022-10)BACKGROUND: High-intensity chemotherapy and advances in novel immunotherapies have seen the emergence of cytomegalovirus (CMV) infections in cancer patients other than allogeneic haemopoietic cell transplantation (HCT). Aim To evaluate the epidemiology, clinical characteristics and outcomes of CMV infection in this population. METHODS: A retrospective review of cancer patients other than allogeneic HCT who had CMV DNAemia and/or disease from July 2013 till May 2020 at a quaternary cancer centre was performed. RESULTS: Of 11 485 cancer patients who underwent treatment during this period, 953 patients had CMV DNA testing performed and 238 of them had CMV DNAemia. After excluding patients with allogeneic HCT, 62 patients with CMV DNAemia were identified, of whom 10 had concurrent CMV disease. The most frequent underlying malignancies were B-cell lymphoproliferative disease (LPD) (31%; 19/62), T-cell LPD (21%; 13/62), chronic lymphocytic leukaemia (11%; 7/62) and multiple myeloma (10%; 6/62). Most patients had lymphopenia (77%; 48/62), multiple cancer therapies (63%; 39/62 received ≥2 previous therapies), co-infection (56%; 35/62 had ≥1 co-infection) and corticosteroid therapy (48%; 30/62) within 1 month before CMV diagnosis. CMV DNAemia and disease were observed in patients receiving novel immunotherapies, including bispecific antibody therapy, chimeric-antigen receptor T-cell therapy and immune checkpoint inhibitors. CONCLUSION: Patients with haematological malignancy, particularly B-cell LPD, T-cell LPD, chronic lymphocytic leukaemia and multiple myeloma, were frequently identified to have CMV DNAemia and disease. Lymphopenia, multiple cancer therapies, co-infection and recent receipt of systemic corticosteroids were also commonly observed. Future studies are necessary to determine optimal identification and management of CMV in these patients.
-
Item[18F]FDG-PET-CT compared with CT for persistent or recurrent neutropenic fever in high-risk patients (PIPPIN): a multicentre, open-label, phase 3, randomised, controlled trial(ELSEVIER SCI LTD, 2022-08)BACKGROUND: Management of neutropenic fever in high-risk haematology patients is challenging; there are often few localising clinical features, and diagnostic tests have poor sensitivity and specificity. We aimed to compare how [18F]flurodeoxyglucose ([18F]FDG)-PET-CT scans and conventional CT scans affected the guidance of antimicrobial management and the outcomes of patients with persistent or recurrent neutropenic fever. METHODS: We did a multicentre, open-label, phase 3, randomised, controlled trial in two tertiary referral hospitals in Australia. We recruited adults aged 18 years or older who were receiving conditioning chemotherapy for haematopoietic stem-cell transplantation or chemotherapy for acute leukaemia and had persistent (>72 h) or recurrent (new fever beyond 72 h of initial onset interspersed with >48 h defervescence) neutropenic fever. Exclusion criteria were pregnancy, allergy to iodinated contrast, or estimated glomerular filtration rate of less than 30 mL/min. Patients were randomly assigned by computer-generated randomisation chart (1:1) to [18F]FDG-PET-CT or conventional CT. Masking was not possible because of the nature of the investigation. Scans were done within 3 days of random assignment. The primary endpoint was a composite of starting, stopping, or changing the spectrum (broadening or narrowing) of antimicrobial therapy-referred to here as antimicrobial rationalisation-within 96 h of the assigned scan, analysed per protocol. This trial is registered with clinicaltrials.gov, NCT03429387, and is complete. FINDINGS: Between Jan 8, 2018, and July 23, 2020, we assessed 316 patients for eligibility. 169 patients were excluded and 147 patients were randomly assigned to either [18F]FDG-PET-CT (n=73) or CT (n=74). Nine patients did not receive a scan per protocol, and two participants in each group were excluded for repeat entry into the study. 65 patients received [18F]FDG-PET-CT (38 [58%] male; 53 [82%] White) and 69 patients received CT (50 [72%] male; 58 [84%] White) per protocol. Median follow up was 6 months (IQR 6-6). Antimicrobial rationalisation occurred in 53 (82%) of 65 patients in the [18F]FDG-PET-CT group and 45 (65%) of 69 patients in the CT group (OR 2·36, 95% CI 1·06-5·24; p=0·033). The most frequent component of antimicrobial rationalisation was narrowing spectrum of therapy, in 28 (43%) of 65 patients in the [18F]FDG-PET-CT group compared with 17 (25%) of 69 patients in the CT group (OR 2·31, 95% CI 1·11-4·83; p=0·024). INTERPRETATION: [18F]FDG-PET-CT was associated with more frequent antimicrobial rationalisation than conventional CT. [18F]FDG-PET-CT can support decision making regarding antimicrobial cessation or de-escalation and should be considered in the management of patients with haematological diseases and persistent or recurrent high-risk neutropenic fever after chemotherapy or transplant conditioning. FUNDING: National Health and Medical Research Council Centre of Research Excellence (APP1116876), Melbourne Health foundation, Gilead Research Fellowship grants supported this study.
-
ItemNo Preview AvailableManaging haematology and oncology patients during the COVID-19 pandemic: interim consensus guidance(WILEY, 2020-06)INTRODUCTION: A pandemic coronavirus, SARS-CoV-2, causes COVID-19, a potentially life-threatening respiratory disease. Patients with cancer may have compromised immunity due to their malignancy and/or treatment, and may be at elevated risk of severe COVID-19. Community transmission of COVID-19 could overwhelm health care services, compromising delivery of cancer care. This interim consensus guidance provides advice for clinicians managing patients with cancer during the pandemic. MAIN RECOMMENDATIONS: During the COVID-19 pandemic: In patients with cancer with fever and/or respiratory symptoms, consider causes in addition to COVID-19, including other infections and therapy-related pneumonitis. For suspected or confirmed COVID-19, discuss temporary cessation of cancer therapy with a relevant specialist. Provide information on COVID-19 for patients and carers. Adopt measures within cancer centres to reduce risk of nosocomial SARS-CoV-2 acquisition; support population-wide social distancing; reduce demand on acute services; ensure adequate staffing; and provide culturally safe care. Measures should be equitable, transparent and proportionate to the COVID-19 threat. Consider the risks and benefits of modifying cancer therapies due to COVID-19. Communicate treatment modifications, and review once health service capacity allows. Consider potential impacts of COVID-19 on the blood supply and availability of stem cell donors. Discuss and document goals of care, and involve palliative care services in contingency planning. CHANGES IN MANAGEMENT AS A RESULT OF THIS STATEMENT: This interim consensus guidance provides a framework for clinicians managing patients with cancer during the COVID-19 pandemic. In view of the rapidly changing situation, clinicians must also monitor national, state, local and institutional policies, which will take precedence. ENDORSED BY: Australasian Leukaemia and Lymphoma Group; Australasian Lung Cancer Trials Group; Australian and New Zealand Children's Haematology/Oncology Group; Australia and New Zealand Society of Palliative Medicine; Australasian Society for Infectious Diseases; Bone Marrow Transplantation Society of Australia and New Zealand; Cancer Council Australia; Cancer Nurses Society of Australia; Cancer Society of New Zealand; Clinical Oncology Society of Australia; Haematology Society of Australia and New Zealand; National Centre for Infections in Cancer; New Zealand Cancer Control Agency; New Zealand Society for Oncology; and Palliative Care Australia.
-
ItemConsensus guidelines for antifungal prophylaxis in haematological malignancy and haemopoietic stem cell transplantation, 2021(WILEY, 2021-11)Antifungal prophylaxis can reduce morbidity and mortality from invasive fungal disease (IFD). However, its use needs to be optimised and appropriately targeted to patients at highest risk to derive the most benefit. In addition to established risks for IFD, considerable recent progress in the treatment of malignancies has resulted in the development of new 'at-risk' groups. The changing epidemiology of IFD and emergence of drug resistance continue to impact choice of prophylaxis, highlighting the importance of active surveillance and knowledge of local epidemiology. These guidelines aim to highlight emerging risk groups and review the evidence and limitations around new formulations of established agents and new antifungal drugs. It provides recommendations around use and choice of antifungal prophylaxis, discusses the potential impact of the changing epidemiology of IFD and emergence of drug resistance, and future directions for risk stratification to assist optimal management of highly vulnerable patients.
-
ItemEpidemiology, treatment and outcomes of bloodstream infection due to vancomycin-resistant enterococci in cancer patients in a vanB endemic setting(Springer Nature, 2020-03-18)Background: Vancomycin-resistant enterococcus (VRE) is an important cause of infection in immunocompromised populations. Few studies have described the characteristics of vanB VRE infection. We sought to describe the epidemiology, treatment and outcomes of VRE bloodstream infections (BSI) in a vanB predominant setting in malignant hematology and oncology patients. Methods: A retrospective review was performed at two large Australian centres and spanning a 6-year period (2008–2014). Evaluable outcomes were intensive care admission (ICU) within 48 h of BSI, all-cause mortality (7 and 30 days) and length of admission. Results: Overall, 106 BSI episodes were observed in 96 patients, predominantly Enterococcus faecium vanB (105/106, 99%). Antibiotics were administered for a median of 17 days prior to BSI, and 76/96 (79%) were neutropenic at BSI onset. Of patients screened before BSI onset, 49/72 (68%) were found to be colonised. Treatment included teicoplanin (59), linezolid (6), daptomycin (2) and sequential/multiple agents (21). Mortality at 30-days was 31%. On multivariable analysis, teicoplanin was not associated with mortality at 30 days. Conclusions: VRE BSI in a vanB endemic setting occurred in the context of substantive prior antibiotic use and was associated with high 30-day mortality. Targeted screening identified 68% to be colonised prior to BSI. Teicoplanin therapy was not associated with poorer outcomes and warrants further study for vanB VRE BSI in cancer populations.