Refine
Document Type
- Article (3)
Language
- English (3)
Has Fulltext
- yes (3)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (3)
Keywords
- Acute myeloid leukemia (1)
- Apixaban (1)
- Atrial Fibrillation (1)
- Biomarkers (1)
- Bleeding Risk (1)
- Bloodstream infections (1)
- Cancer (1)
- Gram negative bacteria (1)
- Hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (1)
- Intensive care units (1)
- Multivariate analysis (1)
- Neutropenia (1)
- Oncology (1)
- Rivaroxaban (1)
- Stenotrophomonas maltophilia (1)
- Stroke Risk (1)
Institute
- Medizin (3)
Hypomethylating agents decitabine and azacytidine are regarded as interchangeable in the treatment of acute myeloid leukemia (AML). However, their mechanisms of action remain incompletely understood, and predictive biomarkers for HMA efficacy are lacking. Here, we show that the bioactive metabolite decitabine triphosphate, but not azacytidine triphosphate, functions as activator and substrate of the triphosphohydrolase SAMHD1 and is subject to SAMHD1-mediated inactivation. Retrospective immunohistochemical analysis of bone marrow specimens from AML patients at diagnosis revealed that SAMHD1 expression in leukemic cells inversely correlates with clinical response to decitabine, but not to azacytidine. SAMHD1 ablation increases the antileukemic activity of decitabine in AML cell lines, primary leukemic blasts, and xenograft models. AML cells acquire resistance to decitabine partly by SAMHD1 up-regulation. Together, our data suggest that SAMHD1 is a biomarker for the stratified use of hypomethylating agents in AML patients and a potential target for the treatment of decitabine-resistant leukemia.
Objectives: Since the introduction of non-vitamin K antagonist (VKA) oral anticoagulants (NOACs), an additional treatment option, apart from VKAs, has become available for stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). For various reasons, it is important to consider patients’ preferences regarding type of medication, particularly in view of the established relationship between preferences towards treatment, associated burden of treatment, and treatment adherence. This review aimed to systematically analyse the scientific literature assessing the preferences of AF patients with regard to long-term oral anticoagulant (OAC) treatment.
Methods: We searched the MEDLINE, Scopus and EMBASE databases (from 1980 to 2015), added records from reference lists of publications found, and conducted a systematic review based on all identified publications. Outcomes of interest included any quantitative information regarding the opinions or preferences of AF patients towards OAC treatment, ideally specified according to different clinical or convenience attributes describing different OAC treatment options.
Results: Overall, 27 publications describing the results of studies conducted in 12 different countries were included in our review. Among these, 16 studies analysed patient preferences towards OACs in general. These studies predominantly assessed which benefits (mainly lower stroke risk) AF patients would require to tolerate harms (mainly higher bleeding risk) associated with an OAC. Most studies showed that patients were willing to accept higher bleeding risks if a certain threshold in stroke risk reduction could be reached. Nevertheless, most of the publications also showed that the preferences of AF patients towards OACs may differ from the perspective of clinical guidelines or the perspective of physicians. The remaining 11 studies included in our review assessed the preferences of AF patients towards specific OAC medication options, namely NOACs versus VKAs. Our review showed that AF patients prefer easy-to-administer treatments, such as treatments that are applied once daily without any food/drug interactions and without the need for bridging and frequent blood controls.
Conclusion: Stroke risk reduction and a moderate increase in the risk of bleeding are the most important attributes for an AF patient when deciding whether they are for or against OAC treatment. If different anticoagulation options have similar clinical characteristics, convenience attributes matter to patients. In this review, AF patients favour attribute levels that describe NOAC treatment.
Allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (allo-HSCT) offers potential cure to acute myeloid leukemia (AML) patients. However, infections with commensal bacteria are an important cause for non-relapse mortality (NRM). We have previously described the impact of multidrug-resistant organism (MDRO) colonization on the survival of allo-HSCT patients. In the aforementioned publication, according to consensus, we there did not consider the opportunistic gram-negative bacterium Stenotrophomonas maltophilia (S. maltophilia) to be an MDRO. Since rate of S. maltophilia colonization is increasing, and it is not known whether this poses a risk for allo-HSCT patients, we here analyzed here its effect on the previously described and now extended patient cohort. We report on 291 AML patients undergoing allo-HSCT. Twenty of 291 patients (6.9%) were colonized with S. maltophilia. Colonized patients did not differ from non-colonized patients with respect to their age, remission status before allo-HSCT, donor type and HSCT-comorbidity index. S. maltophilia colonized patients had a worse overall survival (OS) from 6 months up to 60 months (85% vs. 88.1% and 24.7% vs. 59.7%; p = 0.007) due to a higher NRM after allo-HSCT (6 months: 15% vs. 4.8% and 60 months: 40.1% vs. 16.2% p = 0.003). The main cause of mortality in colonized patients was infection (46.2% of all deaths) and in non-colonized patients relapse (58.8% of all deaths). 5/20 colonized patients developed an invasive infection with S. maltophilia. The worse OS after allo-HSCT due to higher infection related mortality might implicate the screening of allo-HSCT patients for S. maltophilia and a closer observation of colonized patients as outpatients.