Tag Archive for: neutropenia

HCP Roundtable: Overcoming Practice Barriers to Enhance Small Cell Lung Cancer Care

How can healthcare providers overcome practice barriers to enhance care for patients facing small cell lung cancer (SCLC)? Dr. Nagashree Seetharamu from Northwell Health and Nurse Practitioner Beth Sandy from Penn Medicine explore actionable clinical approaches and strategies to address the unique challenges in SCLC care.

Download Guide | Descargar Guía

See More from EPEP SCLC

Related Resources:

Improving Communication Around Lung Cancer Biomarker Testing

Improving Communication Around Lung Cancer Biomarker Testing 

Methods to Improve Lung Cancer Physician-Patient Communication

Methods to Improve Lung Cancer Physician-Patient Communication 

Patient-Provider Relationship Role in Lung Cancer Biomarker TestingPatient-Provider Relationship Role in Lung Cancer Biomarker Testing

Transcript:

Dr. Nicole Rochester:

Welcome to this Empowering Providers to Empower Patients Program. I’m Dr. Nicole Rochester, founder and CEO of Your GPS Doc. EPEP is a Patient Empowerment Network program that serves as a secure space for healthcare providers to learn techniques for improving physician-patient communication and to overcome practice barriers. How can healthcare providers overcome practice barriers to enhance care for patients facing small cell lung cancer? What strategies can be implemented to ensure that patients with extensive stage small cell lung cancer have access to participate in clinical trials and to receive cutting-edge therapies?

It is my privilege to be joined by Dr. Nagashree Seetharamu of Northwell Health. Dr. Seetharamu is an Associate Professor of Medicine at the Donald and Barbara Zucker School of Medicine at Hofstra Northwell Health, and has established a reputation at the national level through her active involvement and leadership within influential oncology organizations that steer the direction of clinical cancer care and research across the United States and globally. Thank you so much for joining this EPEP program, Dr. Seetharamu.

Dr. Nagashree Seetharamu:

Thank you.

Dr. Nicole Rochester:

It is also my honor to be joined by Ms. Beth Sandy, a thoracic oncology nurse practitioner at the University of Pennsylvania Abramson Cancer Center. In addition to regularly presenting at several national and international nursing and thoracic oncology meetings, Ms. Sandy has published in a number of peer-reviewed medical and nursing journals. Thank you so much for joining this EPEP program, Ms. Sandy.

Beth Sandy:

Thank you for having me.

Dr. Nicole Rochester:

I’d like to start our discussion by talking about current practice barriers in small cell lung cancer care. So I’m going to start with you, Dr. Seetharamu. What are the barriers to implementing patient-centered care in the management of small cell lung cancer, and what are we learning from the existing evidence?

Dr. Nagashree Seetharamu:

Yeah, thank you. It’s a great question. I would start by saying that I think the first thing is really limited treatment advances compared to other types of cancers and clinical trial access. So compared to other types of cancers, including non-small cell lung cancer, we have very, you know, fewer options. Patients, despite all the advances, the outcomes are still suboptimal. Many of our patients present with very advanced disease and have multiple other comorbid conditions. So it makes it difficult to deliver optimal care or to enroll patients in clinical trials. In addition, we do know that palliative care improves outcomes in non-small cell lung cancer. We do not have this data as much in small cell, and there is a stigma around it. People do not avail palliative care options, which are perhaps most appropriate for patients with small cell lung cancer.

Lastly, I think there’s also streamlining the processes. We do have the low dose CT scan, lung cancer screening, fewer patients avail it. With increased availability, increased acceptance and increased uptake, probably we can see more small cell lung cancer cases in early stages that will ensure cure.

Also, there are many of our patients with small cell lung cancer have lapses in supportive, you know, social support, and that’s something that we are working with. There’s also quite a bit of disparity when we talk about small cell lung cancer, and that’s been extensively published. So delays from screening to diagnosis to treatment.

Dr. Nicole Rochester:

Thank you so much, Dr. Seetharamu. So given those barriers that you just outlined for us, how can healthcare providers overcome those practice barriers to actually enhance care for patients facing small cell lung cancer?

Dr. Nagashree Seetharamu:

So I think there…I have a few ideas, a few suggestions. I think first and foremost, is to make sure that the screening program is well-adapted. We still see less than 10 percent of patients being screened, so that is something important. Hand in hand with that is tobacco cessation. So decreasing the incidence, early detection is number one and number two for sure. In addition to that, once patients are diagnosed and are presenting, you know, improving the, or having streamlined processes for diagnosis from the patients enter care to the time they start treatment, reducing the time to treatment is extremely important.

We are really kind of sitting on a time machine, you’re really trying to get things done in a very quick order. So streamlining the processes, whether the patient is in the hospital or presents as an outpatient. Lastly, making sure that clinical trials, if they’re available, making sure that patients are screened for it, making clinical trials available to patients, making criteria broader so that patients can be enrolled. And then ensuring that everyone within a particular health system or network is aware of recent advances, and patients get optimal care wherever they are located throughout the country.

Dr. Nicole Rochester:

Thank you very much. I’m going to turn to you, Ms. Sandy. As a nurse practitioner in this space, what is your perspective regarding the primary barriers to accessing effective patient-centered care for small cell lung cancer? And then similarly, what are some strategies that you believe can be implemented to overcome these barriers?

Beth Sandy:

Thanks, Dr. Rochester. I think Dr. Seetharamu covered a lot of the barriers really, it’s getting patients to treatment quickly. As we know, this disease is very aggressive. So, this is not a disease where a patient might say, “Well, I have a two week trip to Europe planned. I’d like to go there and then start treatment.” Actually, in non-small cell lung cancer maybe, but in small cell lung cancer, it’s so important to get them started very quickly on treatment because of the aggressive nature of the disease. And it is a very chemo-sensitive disease, so they may feel better very quickly.

One thing that we do in our practice is if we see that a patient is coming in who’s newly diagnosed with small cell lung cancer, whether it be extensive or limited stage, many times our nurse navigator is looking at this in advance and we’re pre-starting the chemotherapy before they even get there. Because many of these regimens are a three-day regimen, so we want to make sure that our next three days are available for infusion that we get this patient started right away.  So sort of looking ahead can be really helpful, especially if the patient’s coming on a Thursday or Friday, we’re not open generally on the weekends to give chemo, so we’ll make sure that we get them scheduled that following week. Again, getting these patients to treatment very quickly can help them feel better quickly.

Dr. Nicole Rochester:

Wonderful, thank you both. So I’m going to go back to you, Dr. Seetharamu. What are the gaps in current research regarding patient-centered care in small cell lung cancer, and how can these gaps be addressed?

Dr. Nagashree Seetharamu:

Yeah, I think I alluded to this a little earlier, but the…mean, this is kind of a pitch for funding agencies. I think the funding, first of all, it starts there. I think the funding that is available for other types of cancers perhaps is not so much for small cell. Despite decades of extensive research, we are still kind of stuck in the same regimen that we used to use decades ago, with a few modifications. So, first of all, novel treatment ideas, novel treatment regimens definitely can be hugely beneficial for these patients.

Secondly, it is also making sure that patients are actually able to get enrolled in the studies. A lot of these studies are overly exclusionary for reasons that it shouldn’t be. And, for example, if a patient receives a treatment as inpatient, like Ms. Sandy said, a lot of our patients get treated in the hospital, and they get excluded from the first-line regimens many times. So that’s something that can be accommodated. Clinical trials should be tailored around real world experience, not just based on what might be beneficial in preclinical models or some early experience. That’s the second thing.

Thirdly, I think small cell lung cancer, while we use the same term, I think it’s a heterogeneous disease. Using biomarkers to kind of stratify patients or subgroup patients, and then tailor regimens specific to, for example, when a transformed small cell lung cancer, when non-small cell lung cancer transforms to small cell, it’s still small cell lung cancer. From a histological perspective, it looks very similar, biologically it’s a very different disease. So I think it is important to kind of stratify or differentiate those subgroups and then create clinical trials that are more specific, you know, patient-centric like you mentioned. And I think lastly, mostly it’s important to make sure that the disparities are addressed. The socioeconomic disparities, racial barriers are addressed while we are talking about small cell lung cancer research. I think it should be an integral part of every clinical trial.

Dr. Nicole Rochester:

Absolutely. Thank you for highlighting that, Dr. Seetharamu. So, Sandy, we’ve been talking about the barriers that patients face with regard to treatment. Can you speak to some of the obstacles or barriers that are faced by healthcare providers with regard to treatment for small cell lung cancer?

Beth Sandy:

Yeah. Well, there are a couple ways to look at it. First, if you just look at a clinical trial perspective, sometimes it’s hard for us to enroll patients with small cell lung cancer for several reasons. You know, when we enroll in a clinical trial, a lot of times we need to wait for a slot to open. Well, we don’t have time to wait for a slot when they have small cell lung cancer. Again, it’s a very aggressive disease that’s rapidly moving. So we run into this barrier all the time here because they’ll say, “Well, I have a slot that opened up in three or four weeks or four weeks.” I don’t want to wait that long to treat my patient. So I think when we design these trials, we have to think about those kinds of things.

Another point of putting patients on clinical trials is a lot of trial ineligibility criteria is for patients with brain metastases, but in small cell lung cancer, we know that like up to 75 percent of them are going to develop brain mets over the lifetime of their disease. So it’s not really a real world trial if we exclude patients with brain metastases. So we need to design our trials in a good way.

There are a lot of other barriers that we end up facing. Some of the treatments for small cell lung cancer, especially a very new treatment that’s a BiTE therapy, a bispecific T-cell engager, is very hard to administer. It requires an overnight admission for the first two treatments, it has taken us actually a pretty long time to operationalize how we were trying to give this, so it’s not easy. And we finally have figured out how to give this, but this is a drug that holds a lot of promise for our patients, but it is hard for us to administer, and it’s hard for patients as well, because then they have to say, “Oh, I have to block off an entire day for this.”

So, some of these treatments are not easy. Most treatments for small cell lung cancer are not fancy targeted therapies that can minimize toxicity. These are chemotherapies that can cause nausea, fatigue, lowering of blood counts, the majority of the treatments. So if our patients aren’t healthy, robust, and able to deliver, or we can deliver the treatment, but they’re not able to handle the treatment, that’s also worrisome and can cause a barrier for us. So they’re not easy treatments. We need to really do our best to help support the patient and help figure out from an operationalization, there I made up a word, [laughter] but standpoint on how we can administer these safely, but in a quick, efficient way to these patients.

Dr. Nicole Rochester:

Thank you, Ms. Sandy. So both of you have really done a great job elaborating the many barriers. The barriers that patients face, the barriers that healthcare providers face. Are there any tactical strategies or things that either of you or your institutions have done to actually address some of these barriers, some of the challenges that you all have mentioned?

Beth Sandy:

I mean, for us, our nurse navigator is huge. She is a dedicated lung cancer nurse navigator. She’s looking at these patients in advance, when they’re new patients and really trying to say, okay, if they have small cell, we need to get them in quickly. You know, if our new patient wait is two weeks, she’ll say, “Well, this one needs to be prioritized. We need to see them within a week.” She’ll say, “We need to make sure that we have the ability to treat them within a week. We want to really get on top of that quickly.” So that’s been, I think for us, one of the biggest helps with small cell lung cancer.

Dr. Nicole Rochester:

Wonderful. You have anything to add, Dr. Seetharamu?

Dr. Nagashree Seetharamu:

Yeah, I mean, it’s… similarly I think our navigator program is extremely helpful. In addition to that, I think, I know with the bispecific that was mentioned, you know, the tarlatamab-dlle (Imdelltra), we have a process in place, where it’s very streamlined, patients get admitted. The whole protocol is in place for admission and then subsequent treatment as outpatient.  With larger centers where there are multiple, larger institutions with multiple centers that might be a little smaller and not able to monitor patients while they’re receiving this treatment, we have adapted this approach where the first two treatments are given at the main hub, and that’s also been adapted by a few other institutions in the neighborhood where they refer the patients to us just for those first two infusions and when patients are settled and ready to continue the treatment, they’re able to continue it in a more community-based setting.

So that’s something I think that can be done in those regions where patients are referred to places where you can call hubs where these treatments can be initiated and then continued in their regional places so not to inconvenience the patients.

I think for this particular cohort of patients, social work involvement is extremely helpful, in addition to addressing the support systems, transportation assistance, financial support systems, and then involving palliative care early on has been something that has been extremely helpful. This is a multidisciplinary disease, despite that the majority of the patients are on systemic treatment, it is a multidisciplinary disease. We have multiple, we touch minor patients, touch multiple departments. And again, the role of nurse navigator is extremely helpful, because they can help make sure the patients are not inundated by these appointments.

Dr. Nicole Rochester:

Thank you both. Thank you very much for sharing that. So we’re going to shift a little bit and talk about strategies and innovations that may offer enhanced care for patients and families facing small cell lung cancer. We know that survival outcomes in small cell lung cancer remain challenging as both of you have pointed out, particularly for those with extensive stage small cell lung cancer despite incremental improvements in treatment strategies. For your colleagues that are watching this program, what are some strategies and innovations that may offer improved survival outcomes? Now I’ll start with you, Dr. Seetharamu.

Dr. Nagashree Seetharamu:

I think having your group in place, identifying the providers that are dedicated to this disease. Making sure there are processes in place from early diagnosis through the treatments and seeing multiple providers is in place. Making sure that every treatment, there’s a pathway attached to it, there’s a protocol attached to it so that we are not scrambling last minute. Like Ms. Sandy said, it’s the same issue. It’s a three-day regimen. The first line, we want to make sure that, you know, the treatment starts. We are open on Saturdays too.

So, you know, it has to be Monday through Thursdays. You know, simple things as that may become very challenging. In patients with the brain metastases, making sure that they see the providers also in a very timely fashion. Sometimes the urgency may not be realized by other providers, because they’re not used to just seeing small cell lung cancer patients. Just making sure that that is communicated with teams. Yeah. I mean, just streamlining the processes as much as possible. Empowering the patients to understand their disease and making sure that they ask the right questions and be, you know, willful, you know, like complete participants, partners in the care, are some of the strategies that I can think of.

Dr. Nicole Rochester:

Thank you, Dr. Seetharamu. And certainly with this being in Empowering Providers to Empower Patients, we love that you included that, having the patients as partners. Do you have anything you’d like to add, Dr. Sandy…do you have anything you’d like to add, Ms. Sandy?

Beth Sandy:

You know, I think looking ahead for clinical trials, new drugs, it’s been really hard in small cell. We don’t have nearly the advances that we’ve seen in non-small cell lung cancer as far as any targeted therapies. Dr. Seetharamu talked about this earlier is that maybe we could figure out some of these different subgroups by looking at their pathology and seeing if some of them may respond differently to certain agents. I’m hopeful about some new drugs that are coming down in the pipeline.

There is an anti-TIGIT agent combined with immunotherapy that looks hopeful, that could produce some good outcomes. Combining immunotherapy drugs, combining them with chemotherapy, you know, potentially down the line we’ll see some of these drugs that will get approvals in small cell lung cancer and improve some of our progression-free survivals and hopefully overall survivals. So just continuing to enroll patients on studies. Have studies designed to fit this patient population, which we’ve significantly lacked in the past 30 years in small cell lung cancer.

Dr. Nicole Rochester:

Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Sandy. And you brought up the clinical trials, and so on that same topic, Dr. Seetharamu, do you have anything to add with regard to really improving access to clinical trials for patients with small cell lung cancer.

Dr. Nagashree Seetharamu:

Yeah. I think bringing clinical trials to the communities is perhaps the biggest way to do it. You know, patients with small cell, many can travel, but there are many that cannot.  So it’s important to understand that making it easier for patients to know what trials are available. Right now the options that we have, the websites that we have, it’s hard even for a provider to kind of navigate through it. Making it easier. Advocacy groups, you know, ensuring that patients are tied to advocacy groups, because they get a lot of information from these groups. It’s important. And I encourage patients to join these groups, because it empowers them and kind of unifies their voice.

There are clinical trials that are looking at doing labs at home or in their local centers, so they don’t have to travel all the way to the main center to get the labs done. That can be a huge help for patients. And again, making sure that clinical trials, when they’re designed, they are adaptable to real world, you know. And Ms. Sandy brought this up before, we don’t want trials that only address the cream of the…you know, like just a small proportion of patients. It should be really viable for the larger community. Yeah. I mean, these are some…I am sure there are many other things that can be done, but I think this would be a good start.

Dr. Nicole Rochester:

As we move to our final topic, I’m going to go to you, Ms. Sandy. We’re going to talk about outdated clinical approaches. How can interdisciplinary care teams and integrated care models be optimized to better address the specific needs and gaps in the management of patients? And what are some successful examples of these models in practice?

Beth Sandy:

So when I think of outdated clinical approaches, I think of things like older chemotherapy regimens or ways that we used to manage toxicity that have changed. So, for example, when I started doing this 20 to 25 years ago, we had two drugs, and that was it. There was nothing else really, and you could throw some other chemotherapies, but, you know, really now we have approved agents that have improved survival, so we need to make sure we’re using the right thing. And then I think the other flip side of that is our ability to manage toxicity. Again, we have much better ways to manage things like nausea, things like neutropenia, even fatigue.  We have better ways of predicting and managing these things now than what we used to have.  So we need to make sure that our supportive care is also maximized so that the patients can stay on treatment, because small cell lung cancer is one of the diseases where treatment is really important, that they’re getting as much of the chemotherapy as possible and on time.

Whereas in non-small cell lung cancer, I may be a little bit more, you know, okay with them taking a trip or being delayed or things. But because this is such a chemo-sensitive disease, it’s really important for us, if they want to be aggressive, to make sure that we are maximizing our toxicity management. Otherwise, they’re not going to be able to get these treatments.  And that’s gonna definitely worsen their outcomes. I think also is discussing goals of care with patients. And I think there’s been a big push in the past 10 years with the early palliative care integration into our lung cancer practices. This is another thing that’s really important here, that we are having real conversations with our patients about the goals of their care. With extensive stage small cell lung cancer, our average survivals are a year or two even with treatment.

So, you know, I don’t need to say to a patient on the first visit, like, you know, this is the exact numbers, because I don’t want patients to perseverate over, you know, exact numbers. But I also think it’s important to say, you know, this is something that we can’t cure, and we’re going to try to manage it as long as possible, but it’s an aggressive disease.  So, you know, what are your…what’s important to you? What are the goals that you would like to see? And that would give an open-ended question for patients to say, well, I’d like to be alive in 10 years for this. And when they say something like that, that might be an opportunity to say, well, I hope that that can happen, but I’m really worried with what we know about this disease, that that might not be, you know, realistic. So what do you think in the short term your goals are?

And that may be an open-ended question too, where they might say, you know, I don’t want to be sick or in the hospital. That’s really important that I’m at home, or that I can do this or that. So this is a disease where we’ve been really well-trained just in the past five to 10 years about how to have these discussions with patients that I would say 20 years ago when I started, we weren’t, I don’t think personally I was as good at having these conversations, and I don’t think we were as well-trained in the profession at this. And we found that this has been extremely helpful for a good patient-provider relationship as well as patient-centered care when they’re making decisions along with us.

Dr. Nicole Rochester:

Thank you, Ms. Sandy. And certainly as we talk about how to empower our patients, that shared decision-making that you talked about and incorporating goals of care is incredibly important. Dr. Seetharamu, do you have anything to add with regard to shared clinical decision-making or any other advances or things that address outdated treatment?

Dr. Nagashree Seetharamu:

Yeah, I can’t emphasize how important it is to have the goals of care discussion, but I think, you know, even though the treatment regimen has not changed for first-line much, there have been some nuances to it, right?  We are routinely including immunotherapy in first line. We now have some supportive care. Trilaciclib (Cosela) is something that we use for patients to help support and prevent admissions. These are things that may not be done, and there are some insurance barriers. Trust me, we are on the phone a lot of times that we shouldn’t be, you know, trying to get something approved despite clear benefit and FDA approvals. So, yeah, that’s a barrier that I should have spoken about, probably number one.

But that aside, I think, you know, that’s one thing that we see that is done a little differently in the community. I spoke about tarlatamab-dlle (Imdelltra). You know, many people just jump to different treatments because they just feel like it’s not…they’re not able to offer these newer treatments because of inpatient monitoring, what have you. So they may just start from a Platinum-etoposide to giving them, again, the same regimen or jumping to, you know, topotecan (Hycamtin), which we know that, you know, can…there can be better regimens than that. There are some newer agents that people may not…I’ve seen that in underutilization of some of the newer. We don’t have a lot of approvals in this space, but even the ones that have been approved, there’s relative underutilization of it. So I think education of providers in the community setting is helpful.

Dr. Nicole Rochester:

Thank you so much. Well, it’s time to wrap up our roundtable. I have learned a lot. I’ve really enjoyed this conversation with the two of you. And so now it’s time for closing thoughts. So I’ll go to you, Ms. Sandy, what would you like to be your takeaway message? What’s one of the most important things for our audience?

Beth Sandy:

I think one of the most important things is don’t write off your patients with small cell lung cancer. You know, it’s an aggressive disease. It can be hard to manage. They have a lot of comorbid conditions, but some of these treatments can work well, especially the newer agents. And so, you know, really working with your patient to keep them on therapy, but while at the same time understanding what their goals of care are and continuing that discussion throughout your patient-provider journey, and continuing to understand what their support systems are, what is important to them, and then that will help you and the patient make these treatment decisions along the way.

Dr. Nicole Rochester:

Thank you, Ms. Sandy. And what about you, Dr. Seetharamu, what are your closing thoughts?

Dr. Nagashree Seetharamu:

Yeah, I agree with Ms. Sandy on everything that she said. I think emphasizing the importance of multifaceted approach to overcome practice barriers, from reducing stigma and improving access to diverse patient populations, improving clinical trial inclusivity, and closing healthcare disparities perhaps are top strategies. And then, you know, for future, it’s just a call to action, you know, for improving funding for clinical trials and to also, you know, try to see if there are programs that can mitigate disparities that we see.

And then we spoke about stratifying patients, you know, making it a more personalized care, just as we do for non-small cell lung cancer these days with all the novel information that we have so far, and making sure that every patient, no matter where they are, who they are, receive optimal care that they should.

Dr. Nicole Rochester:

Well, thank you both again, Dr. Seetharamu, Ms. Sandy, thank you for this incredibly informative conversation. And thank you again for tuning in to this Empowering Providers to Empower Patients, Patient Empowerment Network program. I’m Dr. Nicole Rochester. Thanks for watching.


Share Your Feedback

Follicular Lymphoma Expert Q&A: Coping with Relapse and Managing Treatment Side Effects

Follicular lymphoma expert Dr. Kami Maddocks from The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center empowers patients and families with practical guidance on key aspects of managing follicular lymphoma. Dr. Maddocks covers effective strategies for managing treatment side effects, navigating the challenges of relapsed or refractory disease, and defining what survivorship means for both patients and their care partners.

Download Guide | Descargar Guía

See More from START HERE Follicular Lymphoma

Related Resources:

How Do Outcomes for Relapsed/Refractory Follicular Lymphoma Vary?

How Do Outcomes for Relapsed/Refractory Follicular Lymphoma Vary?

Addressing Vulnerabilities in Follicular Lymphoma

Addressing Vulnerabilities in Follicular Lymphoma

What Are Common Follicular Lymphoma Treatment Side Effects?

What Are Common Follicular Lymphoma Treatment Side Effects?


Transcript:

Lisa Hatfield:

Welcome to this START HERE Patient Empowerment Network program. This program bridges the expert and patient voice, enabling patients and care partners to feel comfortable asking questions of their healthcare team. I’m Lisa Hatfield, a cancer survivor and also an Empowerment Lead at Patient Empowerment Network. Joining me today is hematologist-oncologist

Dr. Kami Maddocks, Professor of Clinical Internal Medicine in the Division of Hematology at The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center. Dr. Maddocks specializes in treating patients with B-cell malignancies, including non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, Hodgkin’s lymphoma, and chronic lymphocytic leukemia. Dr. Maddocks researches new therapies for these hematologic malignancies, largely through evaluating new targeted therapies in clinical trials. Thank you so much for joining us, Dr. Maddocks.

Dr. Kami Maddocks:

Thank you, Lisa. It’s a real pleasure to be here with everyone today and talking about follicular lymphoma, and I just really appreciate you having me.

Lisa Hatfield:

The world is complicated, but understanding your follicular lymphoma diagnosis and treatment options along your journey doesn’t have to be. The goal of START HERE is to create actionable pathways for getting the most out of your follicular lymphoma treatment and survivorship. Joining us are patients and care partners facing a follicular lymphoma diagnosis, some of which are newly diagnosed, in active treatment, watch and wait, and also living for years with their disease.

START HERE is designed to provide easy-to-understand, reliable, and digestible information to help you make informed decisions. I’m thrilled you’ve joined us. Please remember to download the program resource guide via the QR code. There is great information there that will be useful during this program and after. Okay, Dr. Maddocks, let’s start here. What is the latest in follicular lymphoma, and what are the most important highlights for patients and families?

Dr. Kami Maddocks:

When we look at some of the stuff that’s changed in follicular lymphoma, there has actually been some really exciting developments just in the last year in follicular lymphoma. So when you look at patients who have relapsed or refractory follicular lymphoma, we’ve actually seen the approval of three different new therapies just in the last year for relapsed/refractory follicular lymphoma. So one of those therapies, we saw a brand new approval, and that’s a therapy which combines an oral targeted therapy with a monoclonal antibody.

So the combination of the CD20 antibody, obinutuzumab (Gazyva), in combination with the BTK inhibitor zanubrutinib (Brukinsa) was approved in March of 2024 for patients with relapsed/refractory follicular lymphoma. And this was based on a study that compared that to the single agent anti-CD20 antibody. So while we have had CD20 antibodies approved in both original treatment for follicular lymphoma and relapsed disease, it was the first time that we’ve had a BTK inhibitor approved for the treatment of relapsed/refractory follicular lymphoma.

In May of 2024, we saw the approval of actually the third chimeric antigen receptor T cell or CAR T-cell therapy for relapsed/refractory follicular lymphoma. So previously, we’ve had two different CAR Ts that target the same antigen or protein CD19 on the cell. And the third therapy with the same target was approved in May of this year for relapsed/refractory follicular lymphoma. And then in June of 2024, we actually saw the approval of the second bispecific antibody for the treatment of relapsed and refractory follicular lymphoma.

So previously, we had one approved almost two years ago in December, and a second one, epcoritamab-bysp (Epkinly) was approved in June of this year for patients with relapsed/refractory follicular lymphoma. So three different treatments approved in this setting in the last year, which increases the options for patients. It also provides us with thinking about sequencing these agents. And there’s a lot of studies ongoing to decide or to think about what is the best way to sequence therapy, because there’s no right or wrong answer currently in which therapy did you choose and when in patients with relapsed/refractory follicular lymphoma.

And then thinking about managing when we’re choosing these therapies, what are the side effects of these therapies and managing these side effects? Right? Because chemotherapy is often used for patients with initial diagnosis, and there is very specific side effects to chemotherapy and ways to manage those side effects. But when we look at some of these newer therapies, we have to think about the different toxicity profiles that they have and how we manage those toxicities.

So when we’re thinking about the newer therapies, like bispecific antibodies and CAR T-cell therapies, there’s very specific toxicity with those therapies, including cytokine release or CRS. And then something called ICANS, which is immune effector cell-associated neurologic toxicities, which are neuro side effects of these therapies. And so how do we identify and manage those therapies and now even looking at ways to potentially prevent patients from having those specific toxicities.

Lisa Hatfield:

Okay, thank you. So regarding those toxicities, like the ICANS and the CRS, is there a difference in how you treat patients? For example, if a patient might experience those side effects, are they hospitalized for that type of treatment initially, or are all of these new treatments done on an outpatient basis?

Dr. Kami Maddocks:

Yeah, that’s a great question. So the answer can be variable depending on the specific product or the center where the patient’s receiving them, and then even the disease that they’re used in. So let’s just talk about bispecific antibodies to start. So the first bispecific antibody that was approved in follicular lymphoma was mosunetuzumab-axgb (Lunsumio). There’s no required hospitalization to administer that, but there is a recommendation that if patients have signs or symptoms of cytokine release.

So the primary symptom is fever. That’s the number one most common symptom that patients will get and how we define cytokine release. But patients can also have hypoxia or a drop in the oxygen or hypotension and a drop in their blood pressure. So if they have these, it’s generally recommended that they’re admitted for a period of observation to ensure that those toxicities don’t worsen or escalate and that they’re treated if they do.

Which treatment can include ruling out other causes. Some patients may need antibiotics if they have low blood counts and a fever. Some people will need fluids and oxygen. Then sometimes we use steroids like dexamethasone (Decadron) or even cytokine blockers to help manage those side effects, particularly if they’re what we call higher grade or more significant. The second bispecific antibody epcoritamab-bysp. That was previously approved in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma and there was a recommended hospitalization with a step-up dosing for that.

However, in follicular lymphoma, when they studied that, they gave an extra dose. So part of trying to prevent the cytokine release is giving a lower dose and then increasing the dose each week until you reach the maximum dose. So they added an extra kind of intermediate dosing in the follicular dosing and showed that that made a lower risk of…a lower number of patients had cytokine release. And that the majority of them had the lowest grade cytokine release.

So in follicular lymphoma, it’s actually with that increased one dose in there to get to the maximum dose. It’s actually not recommended, or it’s not required that patients are hospitalized for any of the doses. But, of course, if they would, same thing, if they would have side effects, then you would consider that. And then the same thing could be said for the CAR T-cell therapies. Some of them are given inpatient and then patients are monitored for a period of time, and then some are administered as an outpatient. And patients are seen daily for that to check on how they’re doing, monitor for side effects, have labs. And sometimes it just depends on the center administering the therapy, how they have a setup for patients to be monitored.

Lisa Hatfield:

So I have two follow-up questions to that overview. Are these newer approved therapies, are they available at some of the smaller cancer centers, or are they only available right now at the larger cancer centers or academic centers? Then my second question is, are they limited duration therapies or like bispecific antibodies, does that just continue until disease progression?

Dr. Kami Maddocks:

Yeah, those are great questions. So in general, if you look at the combination of the obinutuzumab and zanubrutinib that should be able to be administered anywhere, the therapy for the oral therapy is continued until progression. If you look at the bispecific antibodies, there’s both. There’s a time-limited therapy, and then there’s one continued until progression. I think in general, we’ve seen that initially these have been used at larger treatment centers, but now that they’ve been approved for a while, we have seen a lot of these being used at smaller cancer centers and in the community centers. Sometimes patients may receive their initial dosing at a larger center and then transition to a local center. But I think, like I said, now, especially the one that’s been approved for a while, we’re seeing that it can be started at many places.

Lisa Hatfield:

Thank you so much for that important overview, Dr. Maddocks. All right, it’s that time where we answer questions we’ve received from you. Remember, as patients, we should always feel empowered to ask our healthcare providers any and all questions we might have about our treatment and prognosis. Please remember, however, this program is not a substitute for medical care. Always consult with your own medical team. So before we dive into this Q&A, since this program centers on coping with relapse and managing treatment side effects, how do you approach these first-time conversations with patients and their care partners who are facing relapse and potentially dealing with a new set of side effects due to the changes in their treatment regimen?

Dr. Kami Maddocks:

I think that’s a great question, and I think there are a lot of things to consider. So I think the first thing that we want to think about when we’re talking about patients having relapsed or refractory follicular lymphoma is that just because patients have relapsed or refractory follicular lymphoma doesn’t always mean that they need treatment. So many patients, when they’re initially diagnosed with follicular lymphoma, are going to go through a period of observation or watch and wait where we know that they have follicular lymphoma, but they don’t have symptoms of their disease.

They don’t have a large number of lymph nodes involved, or their lymph nodes are not very large by the scans, and they don’t necessarily need to be treated until they become symptomatic or have certain concerns from their lymphoma that’s causing problems. So the same thing can happen probably more with relapse than necessarily refractory disease, but patients may…you may detect on scans that they have lymph nodes that are growing or that their disease has recurred, but they don’t always necessarily need to receive treatment.

Once you’ve identified that, yes, a patient requires treatment for their relapsed or refractory follicular lymphoma, the next thing to think about is that patient and their disease. So what age is the patient? What were they treated with initially? Because not all patients receive the same initial therapy. So the decision about what they’re going to receive when they relapse is going to be somewhat dependent on what they received for their initial therapy, what side effects they had from that therapy, and how they responded to that therapy.

The next thing is going to be that there is not just one option at relapse so really discussing the different options for those specific patients, and what are the options, what are the side effects of those options, what is the treatment schedule of those options? Because some treatments may have more toxicity, but they’re time-limited, whereas other therapies may be continued to help progression, they may have less toxicity, but over time that’s a toxicity that patients continue to experience on a daily basis.

So really talking to the patient about the options, what does the schedule of that treatment look like? Do they have to come in weekly? Do they have to come in once a month? And then again, the side effects and how that fits into side effects that they had with their initial therapy, how they tolerate that, are any of those side effects still there?  For example, if a patient has neuropathy from their therapy, that might be something that lasts and then considering all those things and making an informed decision with the patient.

Lisa Hatfield:

Okay, thank you. And these questions are in the perfect order, because we have a question from Lauren asking you, what is the difference between relapsed and refractory? 

Dr. Kami Maddocks:

Okay, this is another great question. I’m sure all these questions are great. When we think of relapsed disease, we think of a patient who’s had therapy, got in a response to that therapy, that response has lasted some time, and then their disease recurs. When we think of refractory, we think of that more as patients that have received a therapy, and they haven’t responded. Now, there is no standard definition of refractory. So we all agree that if a patient gets a treatment and their disease does not respond to that treatment, they’re refractory to that treatment.

But there’s no defined time for which if a patient has a treatment and responds to that treatment but has a short relapse, what’s really considered refractory. In general, a lot of studies that look at a therapy say that if you’ve had it, like if you’ve had rituximab (Rituxan) and you’ve relapsed within a six-month time frame, that that’s refractory. But some studies use three months instead of six months.

Lisa Hatfield:

Okay, thank you. Another patient, Jeff, is asking, Dr. Maddocks, I’m currently in an observation stage of non-Hodgkin lymphoma. I get blood work twice a year and scans once a year. I’m hoping it stays slow-growing. How long on average can a person live in observation mode before treatment must occur?

Dr. Kami Maddocks:

So this is another great question. And I’m going to provide kind of an overview that we’ll kind of set up, because there may be more questions like this. But in general follicular lymphoma is not one disease, which I’m sure since this is a program focused on relapsed/refractory follicular lymphoma, a lot of patients have heard this and know this. But it’s what we call it’s very heterogeneous, or it can behave very differently in patients, meaning that some patients will have very indolent disease, and then there’s a small portion of patients whose disease will be more aggressive.

We know that when we diagnose patients with follicular lymphoma there are some patients that are diagnosed and require treatment pretty quickly, whereas there are other patients that go many years, many, many years without requiring treatment. Some of that is because of the disease, and some of that is because of how we find a patient’s follicular lymphoma. Some patients, we don’t find it until they present with symptoms. Some patients find their own lymph nodes, and some patients are diagnosed because they have a baseline scan that for a totally different reason, maybe get into a car accident, have scans to make sure nothing’s broken, you find an enlarged lymph node, you biopsy it, and you find this diagnosis.

All that said, there are some studies that have looked at patients who are on observation or watch and wait and looked at treating patients who have what we call low tumor burden, or not a lot of lymph nodes, or not very large lymph nodes, but have what’s called advanced stage disease. So lymph nodes on both sides of the diaphragm, not large enough to necessarily require more aggressive treatment, they don’t have symptoms. But we’ve treated, we’ve looked at studies treating those patients with observation or watch and wait or single agent rituximab (Rituxan) therapy. And when you look at the patients in those trials, the median time to needing treatment for patients from observation was three years.

However, there were 30 percent of patients, so one out of three patients who were still being observed at 10 years without requiring any therapy. So there are patients, that’s almost a third of patients at 10 years who’ve been observed, not required therapy in that population of patients. And certainly I have been practicing for a while where I’ve seen patients, I do have some patients who’ve gone longer than that without needing therapy.

Lisa Hatfield:

Okay, thank you. And there you go, Jeff, we hope that you’re in that third. 

Okay, thank you for explaining that. Next question, I’m not sure if it’s Jeff Run or Jeffrey is asking about the most common side effects that are associated with bispecific antibodies, and what precautions can be taken to reduce the risk of infection?

Dr. Kami Maddocks:

Yeah, another great question. There are two different bispecific antibodies that are now approved for relapsed/refractory follicular lymphoma. And I will take this time to also say that some of the exciting ongoing work is looking at those agents in clinical trials, in the frontline setting, in combination with other therapies particularly non chemotherapies.In general, I would say similar side effect profile. The most common side effect between them is the cytokine release or the CRS. So that is the most common side effect. Again, this can be defined in different ways. The most common side effects that you see from that define CRS are fever, hypotension or low blood pressure, hypoxia or low oxygen, shortness of breath, chills, tachycardia or higher heart rate. 

We have talked a lot about CRS and what it entails and how it is defined and presents. But management, it depends on what we call grading. So for patients who just, who have a fever, oftentimes, number one, you want to make sure that it is CRS and that there’s not an underlying cause. So ruling out infection or coexisting infection, if a patient is neutropenic or has a low neutrophil count and is at high risk for infection, you may treat them with antibiotics with a fever while you rule out infection.

But oftentimes, if they have a fever, you can manage symptomatically anti-fever medications like acetaminophen (Tylenol). If a patient has worsening CRS and has other symptoms associated with it, such as the hypoxia, low oxygen, or hypotension, low blood pressure, then that’s when we escalate therapy. So one you direct treatment towards that. So if they need fluid, if they need oxygen, but then that’s when you’re thinking about starting medications such as the steroid medication. So we give intravenous dexamethasone, or there are certain cytokine blockers such as tocilizumab (Actemra) that can be given to help treat the side effects of the cytokine release.

Other common side effects or that we’re seeing in more patients in the clinical trials, fatigue, rash, and then infections including upper respiratory infections, and then COVID-19 infection as well. So part of treatment of these side effects is early recognition of the side effects. So patients are monitored closely and that you’re dealing with the side effects to help them from worsening. I think infection prevention is very important with these. So it’s recommended to consider prophylaxis for certain infections. So antiviral medication to prevent viral, such as shingles reactivation, medication to prevent a specific type of pneumonia, PJP pneumonia, and then consideration I think of just making sure that patients are up to date on vaccination. And if patients do have infection while they’re getting treated, potentially delaying treatment or taking a break in order for them to recover from treatment.

Lisa Hatfield:

Okay, thank you. And this person did not give their name but is asking, Dr. Maddocks, I wanted to know how to travel as safely as possible. Is it advisable to get certain vaccines for travel like yellow fever? I plan to travel to Europe via plane and cruise. They say that there’s stage III non-Hodgkin’s follicular lymphoma getting treatment every eight weeks.

Dr. Kami Maddocks:

So this is a great question, and I’m probably going to answer this a little bit more generically, because I think that it can depend a little bit as far as what specific vaccines. But when thinking about travel, I think that it’s a good idea to look at where you’re traveling because both, where you’re traveling time of year you’re traveling and what you’re going to do when you’re somewhere can depend on what vaccines are recommended. I usually advise patients to consider looking at the CDC guidelines for recommendations for what should be received in that area, travel that time of year, what they’re going to be doing.

And then sometimes there are places that will actually have a travel clinic. Once I know what vaccines are recommended, the patient knows what vaccines are recommended, then I usually work with them and pharmacy to decide what vaccines, if they can receive all those vaccines or if there were certain ones that we may not recommend. In general, it can depend on a patient, what treatments they’ve received or if they’re actively receiving treatments. But in general, we like to avoid live virus vaccines in our patients. So I take into all those factors and then would recommend discussing the specifics with your physician.

Lisa Hatfield:

Luca is asking what are the long-term side effects of bispecific antibody treatment, and how will I be monitored for them after treatment ends?

Dr. Kami Maddocks:

So another great question. I think, when we think about the side effects in general, the bispecific antibodies in the CAR T both have those unique toxicity, cytokine release being the most common. And then you also have worry about the neurological toxicity. The difference is that, depending on the specific, bispecific or CAR T that you use, but we usually, typically see these occur in lower grade or not as severe with a bispecific antibody than you can see with a CAR T-cell therapy.

You can still have cytopenias and infection risk with these therapies. Whereas in chemotherapy, we think of that as more generalized toxicities, with the cytopenias, with the risk of infection with the GI toxicities. When we think about long-term side effects, so I think one of the important things to recognize is that bispecific antibodies have not been around that long in the scheme of things, though we can’t say, the risk of 20 years, what do we see or even 10 years.

But when we think about what we have seen, we’ve seen things like the cytokine release, the infections, the cytopenias, but what we haven’t seen is things like the secondary malignancies that we worry about when we think about chemotherapy or even maybe immunomodulatory therapy or secondary cancers that patients can develop. I think for long-term monitoring, right now, at least the biggest thing you want to think about is that these therapies do deplete the lymphocytes, for a prolonged time. And so the risk of viral infections or reactivation of infections, and making sure that’s being considered.

Lisa Hatfield:

Okay, thank you. That’s an important question. So another may possibly be a care partner, Marilyn. How can I best support my loved one during relapse and what should I do if I notice my husband with new or worsening symptoms?

Dr. Kami Maddocks:

So another great question. I think it’s first of all important to ask the physician about what symptoms to watch for. So you know, are there certain worsening new symptoms or worsening symptoms that seem more likely to be related to follicular lymphoma versus something else. I think it’s always important to encourage your loved one if they are experiencing new symptoms to reach out to the physician so that they can be evaluated. Because follicular lymphoma is a disease that many people live with and many people live with it for many years. We know that patients can experience other things.

Not everything is going to be just because of the follicular lymphoma. So it’s important to be evaluated, and recognize what is going on and what is attributed to the follicular lymphoma. I think being supportive, thinking of questions to ask and making sure that those questions are answered. I think thinking about, are there resources available? I think educating yourself is one of the most important things that people can do. So knowledge is power. So just participating in things like this I think can be very helpful, because learning about what’s out there, knowing that there are many options, I think being supportive and having a positive attitude, are all helpful things.

Lisa Hatfield:

Okay, thank you. So we have another big and important question from Aubrey. How can I live a full life with follicular lymphoma while managing the emotional toll of knowing the disease may relapse? And what lifestyle changes or habits should I focus on to maintain my health during remission?

Dr. Kami Maddocks:

Yeah, so this is another great question, and I think there’s probably lots of different ways to answer this or lots of different things to consider. So I think in general, as we’ve talked about follicular lymphoma is something that people live with for a long time. So thinking about just your general health and general disposition. So, we want to think about incorporating exercise, incorporating a healthy lifestyle, thinking about exercise, and being physically active.

Thinking about particularly diet and not saying that there’s any food that you need to avoid or any specific thing, but I think eating healthy is important. I think sleep hygiene is, can be very critical for patients. I think finding, and then just general health, it’s good to have a PCP so that you’re getting good routine health maintenance. We have to think about making sure that we’re managing other medical things like blood pressure, glucose, looking, doing other routine cancer screenings, depending, if somebody’s male or female, but the screening that’s recommended for that.

Now when we’re thinking about managing this does take an emotional toll because a lot of times, when somebody’s initially diagnosed, if they don’t need treatment, the question is always like, well, how long am I, is it going to be before I’m going to need treatment? How am I going to tolerate that treatment? How long is that treatment going to last? And then that resets once a patient’s had treatment. Well, how long will I stay in remission for this treatment? What’s going to be next?

I think things that can help with that are, sometimes I think involving like psychosocial oncology, I think support groups, I think that it’s very beneficial for many patients to talk to people, whether it be through a u look at the median age at diagnosis is in the 60s, and median overall survival is greater than 20 years. So many patients are going to live with this more like a chronic disease. And so learning to kind of knowing basic facts on what it is, what are the treatments that are available, what do those treatments look like, what are the reasons that you need those treatments? And that you are able many times in those periods of not needing treatment to live a very normal lifestyle and do things. I think making sure that, I think it’s important.

One thing that I think can be helpful is you’ll continuously follow up with your physician. So thinking about questions and concerns that you have throughout the period of time, writing them down that gets them out of your mind on paper. And then when you go to see your doctor next, you have that list of questions. Because I think, sometimes we think about things, and then we worry, worry, worry. But putting them down on paper or even sending them through like a secure MyChart email message and then talking them out, because a lot of times if you don’t do that, then when you go to see your physician you think, oh, I don’t really have any questions.

And then you leave and you’re like, oh, I should have asked these 10 different things. So again, I think asking for resources. So there are many different patient friendly resources out there. I think reading material that’s been written or vetted by medical professionals as opposed to just any random material can be very helpful for patients. And then again sometimes seeking out kind of peer support.

Lisa Hatfield:

Okay, great, thank you. Sean is saying that he was diagnosed with follicular lymphoma in 2022 and in an active treatment. What advice do you have for someone transitioning from patient to survivor? I am eager and fearful.

Dr. Kami Maddocks:

Awww. Well, another good question. And I think one thing I want to recognize is that somebody with cancer is defined as a survivor from the time they’re diagnosed moving forward. So you’re already a survivor. But when you, I do think, and I tell patients this, even when we’re talking about starting treatment, I do think that being aware of kind of where patients are at mentally is important.

Because when you go through, when a patient goes through treatment, they’re very focused on next steps and next steps when you’re going through treatment are, when’s my next treatment going to happen? When’s my next scan going to happen? When you get to that point, when you’re done with treatment, you no longer have those small milestones that you’re reaching the next treatment, the next scan. You now are like, oh my gosh, I had this treatment and now, how long is it going to last?

What’s going to happen to me? What else can happen to me? And there can be a lot of fear and anxiety. I would first tell you that’s totally normal. That is a normal feeling to have at this point. So I think one, recognizing that you have them is important. I think considering things like we’ve talked about, is there a survivorship clinic, is there psychosocial oncology? Is there something that might help in talking those things out? I think setting up milestones, what is the next thing? I’m going to have a three-month appointment, I’m going to have labs.

These are the things I need to be thinking about, but if I’m not noticing these also, what things can I do to return to the things I like to do. I think also I would go back to saying, I think this is where just thinking about getting good sleep, getting exercise, eating a healthy, balanced diet, and then socializing and making sure that you’re involving friends and family.

Lisa Hatfield:

Okay. Thank you. And, Sean, you’re already a survivor, Dr. Maddocks said so. So good luck, Sean. All right, Dr. Maddocks, thank you so much for being part of this Patient Empowerment Network START HERE program. It’s these conversations that help patients truly empower themselves along their treatment journey. On behalf of patients like myself and those watching, thank you so much for joining us, Dr. Maddocks.

Dr. Kami Maddocks:

Well, Lisa, thank you so much for having me. It’s been a real pleasure, and I hope everybody has a great day.

Lisa Hatfield:  

Thank you. I’m Lisa Hatfield. Thank you for joining this Patient Empowerment Network program.


Share Your Feedback

Managing CLL Side Effects | Innovative Strategies and Approaches

Managing CLL Side Effects | Innovative Strategies and Approaches from Patient Empowerment Network on Vimeo.

What can chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) HCPs consider for innovative ways to manage CLL side effects? Experts Dr. Jennifer Brown from Dana-Farber Cancer Institute and Dr. Callie Coombs from the University of California, Irvine discuss strategies for drug interactions, neutropenia, headaches, and other side effects.

Download Resource Guide  | Descargar guía de recursos

See More from EPEP CLL

Related Resources:

How Can CLL HCPs Gain More Understanding of Mutation Profiles

How Can CLL HCPs Gain More Understanding of Mutation Profiles?

CLL Expert Updates on Diagnostic Tool and Technology Advances

CLL Expert Updates on Diagnostic Tool and Technology Advances

CLL Clinical Trials for Molecularly Defined Patient Subgroups

CLL Clinical Trials for Molecularly Defined Patient Subgroups

Transcript:

Dr. Nicole Rochester:

Along with therapies, of course, come potential side effects. Are there any strategies that you can share with our healthcare provider audience around innovative approaches or protocols that have been implemented to mitigate and manage the CLL side effects from the treatment?

Dr. Callie Coombs:

I think it comes down to your internal resources, but I would say taking care of CLL patients is clearly a team effort. And so it’s not just me, but also a team of additional practitioners that I work with. So I’d like to emphasize how important pharmacists are because I’ve definitely seen some side effects that come about because a patient is now on a medication that interacts with whatever their CLL therapy is, which drives up the levels of the drug and then brings out certain toxicities so they can help us identify these if, perhaps I missed it or didn’t ask the patient about a supplement, et cetera.

Next is nurse practitioners and oncology nurses. And so number one is it’s a team-based approach, and I think it’s certainly very important to have protocols internally. But also to just realize what the common toxicities are and how can we mitigate these.

One of the most common reasons that I’ve seen for patients stopping a drug prematurely actually is venetoclax (Venclexta). It very commonly causes neutropenia. And I’ve seen the drug given up on very early without any growth factor support, and so I think if you become educated and experienced with using drugs, you can realize there’s very clear strategies in improving patients with neutropenia, by supporting them with growth factor and getting them through whatever their defined plan course of venetoclax may be.

And then BTK inhibitors have a whole smattering of side effects as well where perhaps working with cardio oncologists can help in addition to other strategies depending on exactly what side effect the patient may encounter. So in summary, definitely a team-based effort and growing experience with the common side effects helps I think all comers with strategies to help prevent or mitigate such side effects.

Dr. Nicole Rochester:

Thank you so much, Dr. Coombs. Dr. Brown, do you have some additional best practices you’d like to share with regard to the management of treatment side effects?

Dr. Jennifer Brown:

Well, I agree completely with Dr. Coombs. I would just add that I think it helps a lot when you warn the patients ahead of time about things that may happen but that often go away or that you can manage. So, for example, headaches often happen early on when you initiate acalabrutinib (Calquence) but they go away typically very quickly. And so if patients know that, then they’re much less worried, and then you can talk to them about the strategies, because caffeine or acetaminophen (Tylenol) will often help with that. If you warn them that they may have some joint aches or pains, that can also help, since those are often transient.

With venetoclax, warning them about some nausea or diarrhea, and then we often manage that by subsequently moving the drug to the evening after they’re done with their ramp up, or initiating an antiemetic, things like this. And then oftentimes many patients who have that in the beginning, it doesn’t persist throughout the whole time that they’re on the drug. Sometimes the diarrhea may, but many times it doesn’t. So getting the patients through that early phase with the close management, which again, it helps, have your team help with that, the nurse practitioners, et cetera, and then hopefully things settle out and everyone’s happy.

Dr. Nicole Rochester:

Wonderful. I just want to emphasize two things. One that each of you said. One is this idea of a team-based approach, which is important in the treatment of all diseases, but of course very important in the treatment of the cancer. And also this idea of educating our patients so that they know ahead of time what to expect and really involving them as part of the team. So I really appreciate those, both of those points. 


Share Your Feedback

HCP Roundtable: Exploring CLL Mutations and Best Practices for Side Effect Management

HCP Roundtable: Exploring CLL Mutations and Best Practices for Side Effect Management from Patient Empowerment Network on Vimeo.

As the chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) treatment landscape evolves, how can healthcare professionals deepen their understanding of mutation profiles, including the emergence of novel CLL mutations over time? What innovative approaches are transforming the management of CLL side effects? Additionally, how can barriers in CLL practice be removed to enhance physician-patient communication and promote shared decision-making? 

Dr. Jennifer Brown from the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute and Dr. Callie Coombs from the University of California, Irvine, share their expertise and best practices for CLL healthcare providers.

Download Resource Guide  | Descargar guía de recursos

See More from EPEP CLL

Related Resources:

Aicha Diallo

Peer Insights: Understanding Cultural Competence vs. Cultural Humility

Collaborate | Understanding Your Role in Your CLL Care

Collaborate | Understanding Your Role in Your CLL Care

Aicha Diallo

Peer Insights: Practicing Cultural Humility to Empower Your Patients

Transcript:

Dr. Nicole Rochester:

Welcome to this Empowering Providers to Empower Patients or EPEP Program. I’m Dr. Nicole Rochester, founder and CEO of Your GPS Doc. EPEP is a patient empowerment network program that serves as a secure space for healthcare providers to learn techniques for improving physician-patient communication and overcome practice barriers.

In this CLL roundtable, we are tackling exploring CLL mutations and best practices for side effect management. As the chronic lymphocytic leukemia treatment landscape evolves, how do CLL healthcare providers better understand mutation profiles, including the emergence of novel CLL mutations over time? What groundbreaking CLL therapeutic targets are emerging, tailored specifically to molecularly defined patient subgroups? And what innovative approaches are transforming CLL side effect management? These are just some of the things that we’re going to discuss today. We’re going to talk about the complexities of CLL mutations and the clonal evolution and resistance mechanisms in CLL.

We’ll discuss clinical trials and novel targets focused on molecularly defined patient subgroups. And lastly, we’ll talk about strategies for healthcare provider to healthcare provider communication regarding the management of side effects.It’s my privilege to be joined by Dr. Jennifer Brown, Director of the CLL Center of the Division of Hematologic Malignancies at Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, and the Worthington and Margaret Collette Professor of Medicine in the field of Hematologic Oncology at Harvard Medical School. Thank you so much for joining us, Dr. Brown.

Dr. Jennifer Brown:

My pleasure. Thank you for having me.

Dr. Nicole Rochester: 

It’s also my privilege to be joined by Dr. Callie Coombs, an Associate Clinical Professor at the University of California, Irvine. Dr. Coombs primary clinical focus is in the care of patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia and small lymphocytic lymphoma. She has participated in multicenter studies examining the real world implications of novel therapeutic agents on the lives of patients, and has served as an investigator on a number of clinical trials. Thank you so much for joining us, Dr. Coombs.

Dr. Callie Coombs:

Thank you for having me as well.

Dr. Nicole Rochester:

So let’s jump in as we have a lot to discuss as it relates to understanding CLL mutations and best practices for side effect management in CLL. So we’re going to start with the complexities of CLL mutations. And the first question, I’ll start with you, Dr. Brown, how do CLL healthcare providers better understand mutation profiles including the emergence of novel CLL mutations over time?

Dr. Jennifer Brown:

Well, the first thing that’s important to recognize is that CLL is not defined by any particular mutation. The landscape is quite varied and we see a large number of different mutations at low percentages. Well, the second key point to remember is that there are different mutations at baseline and then there can be acquired mutations that include some of what we see at baseline, but also novel resistance mutations that we don’t ever see at base.

So at baseline, the most common mutations, which are somewhere in the 10 to 20 percent range of patients, although less than that if you have very early stage patients, affect the p53 gene, NOTCH1, SF3B1, and ATM. P53 is the most important because that one does influence our thinking about the patients and our choice of therapy in some cases. P53 can be altered in CLL in two different ways. Actually, the most common way is as a deletion, deletion of the short arm of chromosome 17 or 17P deletion. About 75 to 80 percent of patients that have that deletion will have a point mutation usually in the other p53 allele. So they have double knockout of p53.

A small percentage of people with the deletion will not have the mutation. And then a certain number of patients will have just the mutation without the deletion. And one of the things that I’ve been very interested in for a while that we’re still trying to understand better is the implications of these different combinations of the way p53 can be affected in people with CLL, and that it may, in fact, be more adverse to have both alleles knocked out than single, although we don’t have great data for that as yet because most of the data that we have has combined all of it together.

But it’s very important to test for the p53 mutation alone because even if patients have only that one, at present, we consider the treatment implications of it all similarly regardless of how the p53 gene is affected. And then NOTCH1 is a fairly common mutation that always worries us a lot, because it’s associated with Richter’s transformation, which is a very high-risk event, but we don’t know anything to do about that to try and prevent it or to alter our therapy based on it.

So at the moment it’s mostly something that we are aware of that we keep an eye on but not that changes therapy. And SF3B1, ATM, and this long list of other genes that can be mutated in just a few percent of CLL, and mostly what we know about them is some biology that’s been studied, and then the fact that the more of these mutations are mutated in a patient that is associated with a worse prognosis, just a total number.

But that’s not something also that really alters our therapy. And then when patients go through lines of therapy, they can sometimes acquire mutations in these genes. So a patient can acquire a mutation in p53 or in NOTCH after their second or third line of therapy. But the mutations that are hottest right now, or that people are most interested in are some of the mutations that occur as resistance to therapy. So in particular, that means BTK mutations.

Covalent BTK inhibitors have transformed the therapy of CLL, and they bind to the cysteine 481 residue of BTK. So that means, as you might imagine, that if you mutate that cysteine so that the inhibitor can’t bind, that will be associated with resistance. And that, in fact, is what has been found that the cysteine to serine mutation at 481 is the most common resistance mutation in patients on covalent BTK inhibitors.

And in the case of ibrutinib (Imbruvica), it makes the inhibitor into a much weaker and non-covalent inhibitor. In the case of acalabrutinib (Calquence) and zanubrutinib (Brukinsa), it probably abrogates all activity. And so that’s a mutation that we will sometimes look for in patients with clinical progression on those drugs. There’s also a mutation in BCL2 that can occur in patients in venetoclax (Venclexta).

So another example of an on target resistance mutation. The role of that one is a little bit less clear, and testing for it is not as widely available, but we’re still working on that. Resistance to venetoclax is probably more complicated than resistance to BTK inhibitors, although there’s also a subset of patients who will get BTK inhibitors who have novel mechanisms of resistance not related to BTK that we don’t really know anything about as yet.

And then finally, the non-covalent BTK inhibitors are becoming available, pirtobrutinib (Jaypirca) was approved for CLL in the United States in December for patients who’ve had covalent BTK inhibitors and venetoclax. And we’re starting to see different mutations in BTK at different sites, even though pirtobrutinib has activity against the 481 mutation. So there’s going to be a lot of activity in this area in the next few years probably.

Dr. Nicole Rochester:

Thank you so much, Dr. Brown, that was a very comprehensive overview of the mutations. Dr. Coombs, do you have anything that you want to add to what Dr. Brown said perhaps specifically around mutations associated with the progression of CLL?

Dr. Callie Coombs:

Sure. So, that’s a hard act to follow. She really took us through a whirlwind of everything mutation-related. I think what I would like to focus on in my answer is, well, what should we be testing for on a day-to-day basis in our CLL practices and what are some common misconceptions? So specific to TP53, I would say this is the most important test as far as all of the genetic tests that influences what we do day to day in the care of patients with CLL.

I test for this for my newly diagnosed patients who I think may be interested in enrolling in a clinical trial, first of all, so the standard of care in CLL is watch and wait, however, patients with higher risk disease may be eligible for trials looking at early intervention specifically the SWOG EVOLVE trial looking at early treatment. And so that’s one of the risk markers that can get a patient into the higher risk category of CLL where they could be eligible for a trial.

A common misconception I see is that 17p is the same thing as a TP53 mutation, it’s definitely not. So these are two different tests that have to be sent. 17p can be picked up on karyotype testing and on FISH testing where it looks for 17p deletion. However, mutations are a different test. And so I usually send a next gen sequencing assay that includes other genes.

However, you can test purely just for mutations in the TP53 gene, but again, that’s a sequencing test, so I’d like to convey that, somewhat a misunderstanding, but it’s such an important gene in CLL because when patients have TP53 aberrations, whether that’s 17p or a TP53 mutation or both, given that they can occur in isolation or together, these patients should never get chemotherapy, because they have extremely terrible responses to chemo, and that should not be part of the therapies offered to these patients.

The other interesting, I’d say controversy at least in 2024, is what is the role for mutation testing in the clinic in the setting of acquired resistance to inhibitors? So I think it’s very clearly important in the research setting where I think learning about the C481 mutation among others in the setting of covalent BTK inhibitors has shown us a lot about mechanism of resistance. But in the clinic, I don’t necessarily think that’s something that needs to be universally applied, given that it most of the time doesn’t affect what we would do clinically.

And so one example is a patient comes in progressing on ibrutinib, maybe about two-thirds of them may have a mutation in the C481S. However, if they’re clinically progressing, they need to switch therapy. And so I think an argument could be made in practice whether or not sending these mutation tests is beneficial, but research, clearly important, and I think it’s going to give us key insights into our therapeutic sequencing strategies going forward. So I’m certainly a proponent of doing the testing in a well-monitored setting, but I don’t think it’s ready for prime time to be applied completely broadly to our patients.

Dr. Nicole Rochester:

Thank you, Dr. Coombs, and I appreciate you adding that additional practical tips and information specifically for our healthcare providers. And you kind of moved into the next topic, which was really around new diagnostic tools and technologies that are available to detect and monitor mutations. So I’m going to go back to you, Dr. Brown, to see if you have any additional information that you’d like to share about new diagnostic tools, technologies with regard to these mutations and any other tips perhaps for our healthcare provider audience.

Dr. Jennifer Brown:

Well,  really the only issue is what Dr. Coombs mentioned that it’s very important to get a next generation sequencing test to evaluate the p53 mutation, that it really is not well-evaluated by any other test, and is often missed because it’s thought that checking for the deletion is sufficient. So I would just reemphasize that point that she made very clearly. Other than that, we don’t really need any additional tools to monitor for mutations.

In the research setting we’re trying to do more and more sensitive assays to try and see when the earliest time that these mutations may emerge is and is there a way we could prevent that or, and just to better understand some of the biology, but it’s not really anything that’s needed in clinical practice. And we’re also not using the mutations to monitor residual disease. It turns out that the best way to do that is probably looking at the B-cell receptor itself, which is again, something that we’re studying in the research setting, but is not really something that needs to be done in clinical practices yet.

Dr. Nicole Rochester:

Wonderful. Thank you, Dr. Brown. We definitely want to leverage you all’s expertise in this area. And so my next question has to do with practices. And you’ve really kind of addressed this to some extent already. Are there any unforeseen or perhaps outdated practice-related barriers that may either hinder your work or that of your colleagues specifically related to better understanding CLL mutations?

Dr. Callie Coombs:

Yeah, I mean, I think in addition to what I mentioned about 17p and TP53, one type of mutation we haven’t talked about is assessing for the mutation status of IGHV.  So that’s actually something else that I’ve seen frequently missed as far as the routine testing of a CLL patient. But I do think it’s very important to send. Is it as important as when we were in the chemoimmunotherapy era where it would be hugely predictive for who had a long remission and who wouldn’t? Maybe not as important, but I do think if someone’s unmutated that still can really help inform certain aspects of their journey. One is the time that between diagnosis and when he or she’ll need their first treatment.

But two, also the expected length of remission should this patient embark upon a time-limited regimen such as venetoclax and obinutuzumab (Gazyva). But the separate question is, again, coming down to the practical aspect of how IGVH is tested. So another misunderstanding that I’ve seen is FISH tests look for the IGH locus. And so I’ve seen on recurrent occasions if that’s deleted, they say, “Oh, that’s a mutation.” Well that’s definitely not the same thing, and so it’s just to realize the IGHV test is a very specific test.

Some large facilities do it as an in-house test, I myself have been sending mine out to the Mayo Clinic, there’s other vendors where you can do it, but what they do is they specifically sequence IGHV and then compare the patient sequence to a consensus germline sequence to determine the percent of mutation, and it’s actually a good thing to be mutated with this gene, these are the patients that often have a longer time until they need their first treatment, if they need treatment at all, and then they generally have better responses to therapy. Though with BTK inhibitors, that difference is often becoming quite slim given that they work in both groups of patients.

Dr. Nicole Rochester:

Wonderful. Thank you so much, Dr. Coombs. So now we’re going to shift to talking about clinical trials and novel targets focused on molecularly defined patient subgroups. So, Dr. Brown, can you talk about any emerging CLL trials targeting specific molecular subgroups, and also how can CLL experts stay updated on these advancements in clinical trials?

Dr. Jennifer Brown:

So, as you heard from Dr. Coombs, there’s increasing interest in looking at high-risk patients in particular, and I think looking specifically at patients with p53 aberration in dedicated clinical trials, it’s become increasingly clear that the behavior of the disease when it’s higher risk based on p53 mutation, NOTCH mutation, IGHV status is quite different, particularly with time limited therapy compared to lower risk disease.

And so having dedicated trials that evaluate outcomes specifically in certain of these subgroups is increasingly important. We do have more trials than we used to focusing specifically on p53 aberration. My personal belief is that we would be well served to have trials separately in the IGHV groups that Dr. Coombs mentioned, although that has not gained as much traction.

And then what we are seeing is now that there are resistance mutations, it actually has turned out that some of the drugs that we use in that setting, venetoclax and pirtobrutinib, seem to have pretty similar activity in patients with and without the mutations. But as drugs are being studied in this context, there’s been an increasing tendency to study them in specific subgroups.

So patients who have the mutation and had clinical progression on a covalent inhibitor, patients who don’t have the mutation and had clinical progression, patients who may have come off their covalent inhibitor for adverse events who may not actually be resistant, what is their response to the next line of therapy? And so all of that is just helping us understand in a more nuanced way what the best benefit for patients will be as we look at these different subgroups of patients.

Dr. Nicole Rochester:

Thank you, Dr. Brown. Appreciate that. Dr. Coombs, do you have anything to add?

Dr. Callie Coombs:

Yeah, so I echo all of Dr. Brown’s comments, and I think I’m the person that is bringing all the practical aspects of CLL care because it’s, she’s so thorough. I just always like to contribute a few little pearls. So, pirtobrutinib has been an exciting drug, to see it become available for our double refractory patients. So the current FDA indication is for patients failed by not only a covalent BTKi but also venetoclax. But it’s the first BTK inhibitor that we can effectively use in the setting of a prior BTK inhibitor.

And that’s because of this unique aspect where instead of forming a covalent bond at the C481 residue, it binds reversibly, and we can still see activity. But the practical aspect is that that’s not an effective strategy when you have a patient progressing on, say, ibrutinib, you can’t switch them to acalabrutinib (Calquence) or zanubrutinib (Brukinsa) because of their shared mechanism of resistance. They’re all covalent inhibitors. They all share the same mechanism of resistance.

And so that’s one thing I’d like to bring up. However, there’s a very different and very common clinical situation that I encounter really a lot in my clinic, which is intolerance. And so that’s where it would be a very effective strategy to switch a patient from one covalent drug to another. And so literally in the past couple weeks of clinic, I’ve had patients with chronic long-standing toxicities to ibrutinib that perhaps went underrecognized where I say, “Hey, you’ve had…noticed your blood pressure has gone up a lot. Let’s switch you over to acalabrutinib,” or other patients, “Oh, you’ve had issues with atrial fibrillation…let’s try switching you to zanubrutinib.” Because the rates are a lot lower and a lot of patients can have improvement or just complete resolution of the prior side effect.

And so I hope that that emphasizes this is something that we think about every day, and switching is appropriate in the setting of intolerance. It’s not appropriate when you’re staying in the covalent class to switch in the setting of progression. But pirtobrutinib being a non-covalent inhibitor is certainly very effective after a covalent. And I think once we see readout of some of the ongoing Phase III trials, we may be able to use it in that setting under an approved FDA label, though that is to be seen in the future.

Dr. Nicole Rochester:

Awesome. Thank you. Thank you to both of you. And that leads us very nicely into our next topic. And so we’ve been talking about improving CLL treatment efficacy, we’ve talked about mutations, we’ve talked about really providing better outcomes for our patients by using therapies that are very specifically designed for the molecular characteristics of their disease. But along with all those therapies, of course, come potential side effects. And so, Dr. Coombs, I’m going to start with you and then we’ll go to Dr. Brown. Are there any strategies that you can share with our healthcare provider audience around innovative approaches or protocols that have been implemented to mitigate and manage the CLL side effects from the treatment?

Dr. Callie Coombs:

Well, I think it comes down to your internal resources, but I would say taking care of CLL patients is clearly a team effort. And so it’s not just me, but also a team of additional practitioners that I work with. So I’d like to emphasize how important pharmacists are because I’ve definitely seen some side effects that come about because a patient is now on a medication that interacts with whatever their CLL therapy is, which drives up the levels of the drug and then brings out certain toxicities so they can help us identify these.

If, perhaps I missed it or didn’t ask the patient about a supplement, et cetera. Next is nurse practitioners and oncology nurses. And so number one is it’s a team-based approach, and I think it’s certainly very important to have protocols internally. But also to just realize what the common toxicities are and how can we mitigate these.

One of the most common reasons that I’ve seen for patients stopping a drug prematurely actually is venetoclax. It very commonly causes neutropenia. And I’ve seen the drug given up on very early without any growth factor support, and so I think if you become educated and experienced with using drugs, you can realize there’s very clear strategies in improving patients with neutropenia, by supporting them with growth factor and getting them through whatever their defined plan course of venetoclax may be.

And then BTK inhibitors have a whole smattering of side effects as well where perhaps working with cardio oncologists can help in addition to other strategies depending on exactly what side effect the patient may encounter. So in summary, definitely a team-based effort and growing experience with the common side effects helps I think all comers with strategies to help prevent or mitigate such side effects.

Dr. Nicole Rochester:

Thank you so much, Dr. Coombs. Dr. Brown, do you have some additional best practices you’d like to share with regard to the management of treatment side effects?

Dr. Jennifer Brown:

Well, I agree completely with Dr. Coombs. I would just add that I think it helps a lot when you warn the patients ahead of time about things that may happen but that often go away or that you can manage. So, for example, headaches often happen early on when you initiate acalabrutinib but they go away typically very quickly. And so if patients know that, then they’re much less worried, and then you can talk to them about the strategies, because caffeine or acetaminophen (Tylenol) will often help with that. If you warn them that they may have some joint aches or pains, that can also help, since those are often transient.

With venetoclax, warning them about some nausea or diarrhea, and then we often manage that by subsequently moving the drug to the evening after they’re done with their ramp up, or initiating an antiemetic, things like this. And then oftentimes many patients who have that in the beginning, it doesn’t persist throughout the whole time that they’re on the drug. Sometimes the diarrhea may, but many times it doesn’t. So getting the patients through that early phase with the close management. Which again, it helps, have your team help with that, the nurse practitioners, et cetera, and then hopefully things settle out and everyone’s happy.

Dr. Nicole Rochester:

Wonderful. I just want to emphasize two things. One that each of you said. One is this idea of a team-based approach, which is important in the treatment of all diseases, but of course very important in the treatment of the cancer. And also this idea of educating our patients so that they know ahead of time what to expect and really involving them as part of the team. So I really appreciate those, both of those points.

Well, it’s time to wrap up our roundtable. I have really enjoyed this conversation and I’d like to get closing thoughts from each of you. So I’ll start with you, Dr. Coombs. What is the most important takeaway message you’d like to leave with healthcare professionals who may be listening as they watch this program and understand better about CLL mutations, clinical trials, and managing side effects?

Dr. Callie Coombs:

So what is the most important thing, there’s so many, I would just say CLL is a chronic disease that affects our primarily elderly patients, and so it’s a marathon, not a sprint. However, with all of the advances that we’ve had in excellent drug therapies, despite these resistance mutations, patients can attain many, many, many years of high quality of life. But it’s incumbent upon us as their providers to help ensure that quality of life through effective management of side effects that may be encountered over the course of their time on therapy for the patients that do need therapy.


Share Your Feedback

Fact or Fiction? AML Causes & Symptoms


Dr. Daniel Pollyea, an AML specialist, dispels common myths around the causes and symptoms of AML and shares advice so that you can identify credible resources for information. Download the Program Guide here.

Dr. Daniel A. Pollyea is Clinical Director of Leukemia Services in the Division of Medical Oncology, Hematologic Malignancies and Blood and Marrow Transplant at University of Colorado Cancer Center. 

See More From the Fact or Fiction? AML Series

Related Resources

 

How is an AML Treatment Approach Determined?

 

Addressing Common Myths About AML Treatment

 

Fact or Fiction? AML Research and Internet Claims


Transcript:

Ross:

I’m Ross Reynolds. Today we’re gonna be debunking some common misconceptions about the causes and symptoms of AML.

And joining me is Dr. Daniel Pollyea. Dr. Pollyea, could you introduce yourself?

 

Dr. Pollyea:

Yeah. Hi. Good morning, everyone. I’m Dan Pollyea. I’m an Associate Professor of Medicine here at the University of Colorado, where I am the Clinical Director of Leukemia Service.

 

Ross:

I wanna emphasize to you that this program is not a substitute for medical advice, so be sure to consult your healthcare team when it comes to solid information about it. But you will get some background that I think you’re gonna find useful. And you might have some questions as we go along.

 Dr. Pollyea, let’s start out with the basics. What are the causes of AML?

 

Dr. Pollyea:

Yeah. So, Acute Myeloid Leukemia, it’s a disease, a cancer of the bone marrow.

And it’s the result of an accumulation of mutation and chromosomal abnormalities that affect the DNA of a precursor cell in the bone marrow, otherwise known as a stem cell.

And those abnormalities accumulate until that cell can no longer properly mature, and it also can’t properly die. And so, a cell like that just makes copy after copy after copy of a cell until it crowds out the whole bone marrow with these sorta useless, immature cells.

And the end result of that is the failure of the bone marrow, which causes all of the problems associated with this disease. So, biologically, that’s sort of what happens to make this disease occur.

 

Ross:

What are some of the myths that you hear from patients that come in and they say, “Oh, this must’ve caused my AML,” but you have to tell them that’s not so?

 

Dr. Pollyea:

Right. So, I mean, this is one of the most frustrating issues for patients and their families after diagnosis. I mean, it’s a rare disease, only about 30,000 cases a year in the United States. And so, trying to associate a rare disease with external or environmental factors is difficult to impossible. So, although there are a variety of exposures that probably contribute to this disease, we have very little understanding of what those exposures typically are or how that all works.

So, there’s a few things that we know pretty well; large doses of radiation, either associated with like industrial accidents like the Chernobyl disaster, or some of the radiation therapies that patients receive for other types of cancer. Other types of chemotherapy that are used to cure other cancers can contribute to this disease in later years.

We know that there are certain precursor conditions that can evolve to AML, so a person with myelodysplastic syndrome, for instance, has a fairly high chance of someday evolving to develop Acute Myeloid Leukemia. But beyond these sort of a few associations, there isn’t a whole lot that’s known or proven.

 

Ross:

Now there is radiation associated with X-rays, and some people think that X-rays can cause AML. Is that true?

 

Dr. Pollyea:

Yeah.

So, I mean, I think a priori no because millions of people get X-rays every day, and only 30,000 people a year get AML. So, clearly it’s not a simple association between getting an X-ray and developing AML. But I think that there is an unknown interaction between environmental exposures and a person’s individual genetic makeup that makes a person more or less susceptible to developing something like AML with respect to exposure to the environment or X-rays and things.

So, while you cannot say that getting an X-ray will lead to AML, certainly there are some people who are more sensitive to the damage that’s done by something like an X-ray. And so, the best course of action is to be cautious and judicious about your exposure to these things, but not to not get these things when they are medically necessary.

So, that’s the challenging balance.

 

Ross:

Here’s something else we’ve heard, that weed killers can be a risk factor for AML. Is that true?

 

Dr. Pollyea:

I mean, I think there’s a lot coming out now about weed killers and their association with other types of cancers. Again, I go back to the limitation we have in that in only 30,000 people a year in the United States get AML. Millions of people are exposed to weed killers.

We’re statistically never going to be able to make a clear association. I think that there are certainly some risks for some people. Whether you’re that person who’s more susceptible to developing leukemia or any other cancer because of exposure to a weed killer is impossible to know.

So, like all of these things, I think the advice we have is you have to live your life. You have to do your best to sort of avoid things that you can avoid that you think would be… Or that may cause problems. But not to let those things prevent you from living a normal life.

I know that’s not a satisfying answer, but at the moment that’s the best answer we have.

 

Ross:

Is formaldehyde exposure another risk factor for AML?

 

Dr. Pollyea:

Yeah. We think that it is, and kind of along the lines of benzene. But, again, we think that those studies that have shown those types of association show it in very high amounts, amounts that most people in this country would not be exposed to. But I do think, or we do think that there is something to that, to formaldehyde somehow contributing to this.

 

Ross:

What’s the difference between a risk factor for AML and a cause of AML?

 

Dr. Pollyea:

Yeah. So, I think risk factors by definition are things that may contribute to AML. And a risk factor for AML by that definition could be walking down the street and having some exposure to radiation from the sun. A cause of AML is something that is a much more solid sort of well-understood factor.

Like I said before, having myelodysplastic syndrome, there is a high chance that that can evolve to Acute Myeloid Leukemia. And if that happens then the MDS, the myelodysplastic syndrome, could be considered or would be considered the cause of your AML. So, very, very different in terms of the amount of evidence that goes into making those determinations

 

Ross:

Is there a genetic component to this? Can this run in a family?

 

Dr. Pollyea:

Yeah. So, this is a disease of the genome.

So, I mean, in a lot of respects it is a genetic disease. But the question is very different when you ask is this an inherited genetic disease? Is this disease due to a gene that I inherited from a parent or could pass along to a child?

For many, many years, the answer from the medical community was, “No.” This was not considered to be a disease that clustered in families or that could be inherited. We now know that that’s not necessarily the case. There are some very rare cases where this does seem to travel in families or cluster in families. And we’re now beginning to understand who those people are and what those genes are.

But the vast majority of people with this disease did not inherit a gene to contribute to it and cannot pass this along to a child. This is a random, spontaneous event that occurred within one person’s own body and is not traveling within family. So, we’re learning more and more about this, but really, the vast majority of this is not an inherited genetic condition.

 

Ross:

You’ve mentioned gene mutations. What mutates a gene? What causes that to happen that could lead down the line to AML?

 

Dr. Pollyea:

Yeah. Yeah. That’s a great question. Most of the time we do not know the answer to that. These gene mutations occur spontaneously, randomly, and we don’t understand why they happen when they do happen.

And I know that’s, again, not a satisfying answer. It’s very frustrating, particularly patients come in, and, “I’ve lived a healthy lifestyle. I’ve done everything right. I exercise. I eat right. How could this have happened?”

These are things that for the most part are out of the control of a person. These aren’t impacted by your diet or your activity levels, what you eat or don’t eat, what you do or don’t do. That’s a real frustration. In the end, in almost all cases we don’t know or understand why these gene mutations or these, I call them mistakes in the body, occur when they occur. We don’t understand them.

And, Dr. Pollyea, someone asked if benzene can be a risk factor for AML.

 

Dr. Pollyea:

Yeah. So, benzene is one of the sort of rare environmental exposure associations that we do have clear associations with AML.

But the level of benzene that a person would need to be exposed to is really something that hasn’t been seen in this country in a very long time.

We’d be talking about like an industrial accident type exposure in almost all cases, so being exposed to a cleaning solution or some other fairly minor exposure to benzene, we don’t think is enough, in most cases, to prompt this disease. But benzene in very high doses, like an industrial accident, yes, that is something that we understand can certainly contribute or cause AML.

 

Ross:                          

Autoimmune diseases, such as arthritis, can they increase the risk of AML?

 

Dr. Pollyea:

Oh, boy. That is a really interesting one. So, there are papers in the literature that do support those associations. And I know in my own practice I certainly see that trend. So, I do think that there is something there. There is a proven association between autoimmune conditions and myelodysplastic syndrome, which I said before can be a clear precursor condition to AML. So, certainly, that is an association that is a possibility.

It can be a little difficult to tease out whether it’s those diseases that are associated with ultimately developing AML, or the treatments that people get for some of those autoimmune diseases. Those treatments can modulate the immune system in certain ways that may, in fact, contribute or drive the disease. So, that’s a difficult thing to tease out.

But in general terms, yes, I think there are some associations. Now not by a long shot everyone with an autoimmune disease gets AML. It’s a teeny, tiny fraction. But I think there is an association there.

 

Ross:

How easy is it to diagnose AML?

 

Dr. Pollyea:

Well, I mean, I think there’s very clear diagnostic criteria for AML. But I guess that doesn’t really answer the question. And we certainly have patients who come to us after many months of frustration without a clear diagnosis.

So, those scenarios can play out. Many times AML’s a very dramatic presentation, so people get very, very sick very, very quickly with extraordinarily high white blood cell counts and suppression of all the other blood counts that come from the bone marrow like red blood cells and platelets.

In those cases it’s pretty clear that there is a type of acute leukemia going on. There can be some difficulty distinguishing Acute Myeloid from Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia; those are sort of like cousins, but very different and treated differently. So, it kinda runs the gamut. I mean, it can be pretty clear, but it’s sometimes missed, so yeah.

 

Ross:

This is a great lead-in to my next question, which is about the symptoms of AML. What should be the warning signs that this might be something you need to get looked at?

 

Dr. Pollyea:

Right. So, at presentation, the main symptoms are reflective of the fact that the bone marrow, the organ that makes all the cells of the blood, has failed.

So, that can cause severe anemia. Signs of anemia: a white sort of appearance, feeling dizzy or lightheaded when standing, short of breath, weak, tired, fatigue. Those are all pretty clear presenting symptoms for AML. Because the bone marrow also is responsible for making platelets that clot the blood, some people will present with a bleeding complication, or a very subtle rash made up of these particular red dots. We call that a petechial rash. And that rash can come on when the platelet count gets very low.

Sometimes a person will present with an infection or infections that don’t go away or don’t clear because of decrease in white blood cells, the infection-fighting cells of the bone marrow. Those are made in the bone marrow and can fail in the setting of this disease. So, those are the most common symptoms at presentation, symptoms that are reflective of bone marrow failure.

 

Ross:

You mentioned that sometimes the presentation could be very dramatic, and it sounds like the symptoms are very severe, very quickly. Is that always the case? Is that often the case?

 

Dr. Pollyea:

That is the case in, I would say, a minority of times. That’s usually the case. It’s more often seen in younger patients with AML. Typically, older patients with AML have a more smoldering course and a much less dramatic presentation, although this sort of very dramatic and dangerous presentation can happen in older patients, but it’s probably something like a third of the time that those very dramatic and medical emergency presentations occur.

 

Ross:

How important is early diagnosis?

 

Dr. Pollyea:

Well, I mean, it’s crucial. I mean, in particular in those cases where it’s a very dramatic and proliferative diagnosis, or presentation. A quick diagnosis and recognition of this condition is very important because the sooner a person starts effective treatment the better the ultimate outcome is.

I would say in general terms that applies to all AML patients, but certainly there’s some degrees of variation. So, there’s some AML patients that when I hear about their case on the phone from a referring doctor, it’s appropriate to see them next week in the clinic.

So, it’s not always a medical emergency, but we would never, even in those next-week-in-the-clinic patients, this isn’t something that can wait for weeks or certainly months. This is something that needs to be addressed fairly quickly.

 

Ross:

What are the best ways to manage those symptoms?

 

Dr. Pollyea:

Right. So, I mean, at presentation, all those symptoms, the best way to manage those are to start treatment as quickly as possible. So, impacting the underlying cause of this disease is the most important and critical factor to getting a person feeling better because all of these problems stem from the disease in the bone marrow, and so everything else that you do to sort of help a person’s symptoms are Band-Aids when you’re not talking about getting to the root cause.

So, that’s at presentation. Now once we start treatment, there are many potential side effects to any number of treatments. And it all is dependent on what treatment you’re getting and other things about you that will make this a significant problem in some cases. And in that setting, we do have ways that we can aggressively manage a person’s side effects.

 

Ross:

Can you manage all of the symptoms? Or can people still be experiencing symptoms even after they’re in treatment?

 

Dr. Pollyea:

Absolutely. So, a person with this disease, depending on how long they’ve had it and some of the features, may not be feeling back to their baseline self for potentially weeks or months after treatment starts in the best-case scenario. So, that can be very frustrating, but a person needs to sort of be able to continue to have a good outlook and stay positive.

Because we are able in many cases to make a big impact on this disease and return a person to their pre-disease quality of life.

 

Ross:

What are some of the myths that you hear, Dr. Pollyea, about the treatment? Some things that people come in to you saying they think that it helps, but there’s no science to back that up?

 

Dr. Pollyea:

So, myths about treatment, so many people have a lot of preconceived notions about the intensity of a therapy that they’re going to be asked to withstand. And although sometimes we do treat this disease very intensively, that’s not always the case, and now we have some very effective lower-intensity regimens that can be used in a variety of different scenarios.

There are a lot of people who have a lot of preconceived notions about a stem-cell transplant or a bone-marrow transplant and whether or not they would be eligible for this based on maybe what they’ve heard from friends or family, or what they’ve seen in the internet.

And those are often incorrect. And so, keeping an open mind about treatment options, and discussing those in detail with your doctor are really, really important.

 

Ross:

You mentioned sometimes it presents in young people, sometimes in older people. What’s sort of typical?

 

Dr. Pollyea:

This is a disease of predominantly older patients, so the median age of presentation is 68. So, that means that over half of the patients are over 68 years old at diagnosis. So, while this does happen, can happen in younger patients, that’s really an unusual situation. This disease is, like I said, it is predominantly a disease of older patients.

 

Ross:

There are some patients who I understand think that supplements can deal with the symptoms of AML. Is that accurate?

 

Dr. Pollyea:

You know, I mean, I think the supplement question is always a challenge. A lot of these supplements, or most of these supplements have never been tested with the rigor of treatments that we’re accustomed to in the medical establishment.

That being said, I won’t deny that some of the supplements can help patients based on what patients’ experiences are and what they tell me. I think what’s really important is just be very open and honest with your doctor about the supplements that you’re taking or want to take to ensure that there are no sort of unanticipated interactions with treatments.

Because I think most doctors are very open to having their patients care for themselves in the ways that they’ve become accustomed to, and they know their bodies very well, and we’re very open to that. But there are sometimes that a drug or a supplement might have a bad interaction with the treatment.

And so, a good example in my practice is antioxidants. So, there’s a lot of literature, a lot of interest in antioxidants as cancer-prevention treatment.

And a lot of that is not well-established, but still I don’t see much harm. But when it comes time to treating a cancer, that’s a very different situation. When we give a patient treatment to try to kill the cancer cells, many times we’re trying to provoke oxidation. That’s part of how these drugs and these treatments work.

So, if you’re taking those treatments, but also at the same time taking antioxidants, there’s the potential you could sort of be cutting your therapy off at the knees, fighting it with one hand behind your back. So, for the period of time when my patients are getting an active treatment, I ask that they don’t take it antioxidant.

And they can resume that in the future in the hopes of preventing another cancer. But the time to prevent with an antioxidant isn’t appropriate when you’re dealing with an active cancer. So, that’s just one example.

 

Ross:

Fatigue could be a symptom of AML, but there are a lot of causes of fatigue.

How do you differentiate between something that really could be AML and something that isn’t?

 

Dr. Pollyea:

Yeah. That’s a challenge because I think these are, as I said, older patients. And older patients have a lot of other medical problems. And older people get fatigued, just that’s unfortunately part of the normal aging process. So, we would usually make an assumption that a person’s fatigue and diagnosis is due to the leukemia, the anemia as a result of the leukemia.

But as we successfully treat a patient if they are responding based on their numbers and other objective criteria, but the fatigue is not improving then I think that’s where we would start to look at other contributing factors, and there can be many, so having an open mind at that point is important.

But at the beginning, this is such a monster of a disease, it’s so overwhelming, I think the focus is usually on assumption that the fatigue is due to the disease or to a treatment associated with this disease.

 

Ross:

This question: is loss of appetite a symptom of AML?

 

Dr. Pollyea:

Yeah. I definitely see that, hear that, so sometimes people come in and they say that. Sometimes it may not be a loss of appetite, but an extreme weight loss, so a lot of different types of cancer, including AML, can cause that, just basically unintentional weight loss.

A person’s not trying to lose weight. They’re eating what they think is their normal amount and they’re losing tremendous amounts of weight. So, those are both potential presenting symptoms with AML. And loss of appetite, unfortunately, can be associated with some of the treatments for this disease. And taste changes, things not tasting good, can all contribute to that as well, so those are all challenges that our patients face.

 

Ross:

How important is to get a second opinion? I mean, are all doctors like you pretty much on the same page when it comes to symptoms and treatment?

 

Dr. Pollyea:

So, this is a challenge. So, the answer to the second question first is unfortunately, no. A lot of this hasn’t quite been standardized. And some doctors, oncologists, cancer doctors, they’ll predominantly be treating the things that are common: colon cancer, breast cancer, prostate cancer. And they will probably only have a few cases of acute leukemia a year.

And so, their approach to this is going to be different than somebody who spends all day seeing patients with AML and thinking about AML.

So, a second opinion is a very nice thing to be able to do. The problem with this disease is that most times it doesn’t afford that opportunity. So, with other conditions you have some time to go out, read about it, talk to some different doctors, get a good plan together.

With AML, often that’s not a possibility. A person is so urgently sick that you have to sorta deal with the resources where you are. The best recommendation I have there, if you do find yourself in a situation where there’s not a lot of expertise is to ask your doctor to just call somebody in the region or email somebody in the region who may have that expertise.

And most doctors all over the country have that sort of resource or partner that they will go to and talk the case through with them, and maybe a transfer to one of those high-volume centers is appropriate.

And maybe that’s not a possibility or appropriate, but maybe you would benefit from just talking… Maybe your doctor would benefit from talking this through. But in cases where it’s not such a dramatic presentation, then yeah, for sure, I think a second opinion can be appropriate. But this isn’t something that can be sort of drawn out for long period of time.

 

Ross:

You know, when you find out something like this, your tendency might be to jump on the web and start searching for AML. How do you vet those sources that you look at? How do you figure out that their – what would be a sign that they’re bogus sources?

 

Dr. Pollyea:

Yeah. I mean, I think this field is so rapidly changing and the treatment that we have, that I would, for the most part, assume that what you’re finding on the web is not relevant and is not an up-to-date resource. So, the resources that I listed, the NCCN, UpToDate, the Leukemia & Lymphoma Society, I should mention.

A very important resource that has up-to-date information, and they have even phone numbers for patients and their families to call to get connected with the proper people in a particular city, so that is a really important resource. But I’d be really, really cautious about what you find on the internet because things are changing so fast in this field. There’s a lot of outdated and misinformation on the internet.

 

Ross:

Well, then there’s outright scams. One of the things you mentioned before we went on is be cautious if someone’s asking you to put money upfront, or if it’s a nonmedical facility. What are some things that people should watch out for?

 

Dr. Pollyea:

Yeah. So, one of the things that is so important in our area is clinical trials and participating in clinical trials. Patients who opt to do this and receive experimental therapies can sometimes get the treatment of the future, get a drug that’s not currently available through the FDA, but may have a lot of promise.

And this is the way that we fight this disease. We’ve recently had an onslaught of approvals for AML and that’s because the patients being willing to participate in sanctioned clinical trials. So, participating in a sanctioned clinical trial is crucial, and it’s always a recommendation of all leukemia doctors.

When you participate in a conventional clinical trial, you’re asked to sign a consent form that explains what you’re doing and why. There is a confirmation that this has been vetted by an institution’s regulatory board that is prioritizing the safety and well-being of you, the patient. This has been approved by the FDA as a clinical trial. Nobody would ever ask you to pay money. That’s not ethical to participate in a clinical trial. Insurance covers whatever standard of care. And the clinical trial covers anything that isn’t.

So, if you find yourself in a situation where you’re not being asked to sign a consent form, where a clinical trial has not been reviewed by a regulatory board, where your doctor is not a leukemia specialist, where the FDA has not sanctioned the treatment, all of those are alarm signs.

Because there are people out there that are preying on patients in a desperate situation, a very difficult time in their life, and giving them sort of false hope and leading them down paths that are not legitimate.

One easy thing to do to sorta check to see if a clinical trial is legitimate is to go onto clinicaltrials.gov.

This is a resource set up by our national healthcare system that now feeds in every legitimate clinical trial from all over the world, needs to be registered on clinicaltrials.gov. So, if you can’t find your clinical trial on clinicaltrials.gov, I would have a lot skepticism and caution about that.

 

Ross:

Like what advice do you have for people when they’re first diagnosed? What are the first things they should try to do?

 

Dr. Pollyea:

Yeah. I mean, that reaction is totally normal and natural. I mean, many times these people are perfectly healthy or have been perfectly healthy, and this news is a complete shock.

And so, it is normal and appropriate to have some period of grieving for the healthy life that you are losing. But I would also, while giving yourself that time to grieve, first, draw on your support system, your family, your friends. Allow them to help you. Accept that assistance that they have. And to be optimistic because we are getting so much better at treating this disease.

I had mentioned before, there has been an onslaught of approvals for drugs in this area the likes of which hasn’t been seen in decades. We have new tools and weapons in our arsenal that we couldn’t have dreamed of even a few years ago.

We in our community are very excited and hopeful about the future and we hope that that will translate ultimately to patients, but being depressed or being down, being scared, all of that is normal.

All of that is expected. Anyone would feel like that. Allowing yourself to have those feelings and emotions is important, as long as it doesn’t get in the way of doing what you need to do to fight this disease.

 

Ross:

It sounds like you’re hopeful about new treatments for the disease. How about a cure? What’s the science? What’s the medical science say about that? Are we getting any closer to that?

 

Dr. Pollyea:

We are getting closer to curing this in more cases. So, like I mentioned before, as bad as this is, we can already cure some subsets of patients. There’s one type of Acute Myeloid Leukemia called Acute Promyelocytic Leukemia, APL. It’s an uncommon form of AML, less than 10 percent.

But we can cure close to 99 percent of people with APL. And APL, 15 years ago, was universally the worst form of acute leukemia to get. So, that dramatic 180 that we’ve seen in APL, we are hoping to translate into other forms of AML.

Some other forms of AML have cure rates as high as 50 percent, 60 percent, 70 percent in the right setting. Sometimes we can cure patients with a stem cell transplant fairly reliably. So, we are very, very hopeful about our ability to continue to make progress and cure more and more and more of these patients. That’s the future that we see.

 

Ross:

Dr. Pollyea, thank you so much. And thank you so much for ending on such a positive note. We really appreciate it. And thank you for joining us for this program today.

To learn more about AML and to access tools to help you become a proactive patient, visit powerfulpatients.org. I’m Ross Reynolds. Thanks for joining us.