INTRAVENOUS INFUSION AND SUBCUTANEOUS INJECTION OF AZACITIDINE IN PATIENTS WITH MYELODYSPLASTIC SYNDROMES WHO ARE ENROLLED IN AVIDA, A LONGITUDINAL PATIENT REGISTRY

2.50
Hdl Handle:
http://hdl.handle.net/10755/164956
Category:
Abstract
Type:
Presentation
Title:
INTRAVENOUS INFUSION AND SUBCUTANEOUS INJECTION OF AZACITIDINE IN PATIENTS WITH MYELODYSPLASTIC SYNDROMES WHO ARE ENROLLED IN AVIDA, A LONGITUDINAL PATIENT REGISTRY
Author(s):
Dsouza Britto, Michele; Grinblatt, David L.; Narang, Mohit; Malone, James M.; Sweet, David A.
Author Details:
Michele Dsouza Britto, RN, MS, OCN, CCRP, Clinical Research Nurse, Kellogg Cancer Care Center - Northshore University Health System, Evanston, Illinois, USA, email: mbritto@northshore.org; David L. Grinblatt, MD; Mohit Narang, MD, Alliance Hematology Oncology, Westminster, Maryland; James M. Malone, III MD, Oncology-Hematology Med. Assoc. of the Central Coast, San Luis Obispo, California; David A. Sweet, MD
Abstract:
Research Study: Azacitidine, initially approved as a subcutaneous (SC) injection that allowed convenient outpatient treatment, is now also approved as an intravenous (IV) infusion for patients who have injection site reactions or poor peripheral blood flow. Compare treatment patterns, transfusion independence, and safety of azacitidine administered via IV infusion or SC injection in patients enrolled in AVIDA. AVIDA is a multicenter patient registry designed to prospectively collect data from community-based hematology clinics on the natural history and management of patients with hematologic disorders who are receiving azacitidine. Treatment patterns, transfusion independence (defined as no transfusions for at least 56 days during AVIDA) in patients with historical (6 months prior to AVIDA) transfusion requirements and at least 56 days treatment duration, and adverse events (AEs) were recorded. As of October 8, 2008, 237 patients (164 males, 73 females) have been enrolled; 923 cycles (median, 3; range, 1-16) have been administered. The most common dose and schedule was 75 mg/ m X m (84%) at 5 days on treatment (51%). IV infusion was the most frequent (>50%) administration route for 126 (53%) patients (IV patients) and SC injection was the most frequent administration route for 110 (46%) patients (SC patients). One patient was not included in the analysis. Baseline demographics, disease characteristics, dose, and schedule were similar between the two administration groups. Twenty-seven of 40 (68%) IV patients achieved RBC transfusion independence; 25/27 (93%) first achieved RBC transfusion independence during the first 2 cycles. Fifteen of 38 (40%) SC patients have achieved RBC transfusion independence; 11/15 (73%) first achieved RBC transfusion independence during the first 2 cycles. IV patients experienced fewer injection site AEs than SC patients (3 vs 17). Incidences of other AEs were similar between both groups (IV vs SC) with the exception of thrombocytopenia (12% vs 16%) and fatigue (8% vs 16%). Conclusion: In the community setting, both IV and SC administration routes provided clinically meaningful RBC and platelet transfusion independence. The IV patients experienced fewer administration site reactions.
Repository Posting Date:
27-Oct-2011
Date of Publication:
27-Oct-2011
Conference Date:
2009
Conference Name:
34th Annual Oncology Nursing Society Congress
Conference Host:
Oncology Nursing Society
Conference Location:
San Antonio, Texas, USA
Sponsors:
Funding Source: Celgene Corporation.
Note:
This is an abstract-only submission. If the author has submitted a full-text item based on this abstract, you may find it by browsing the Virginia Henderson Global Nursing e-Repository by author. If author contact information is available in this abstract, please feel free to contact him or her with your queries regarding this submission. Alternatively, please contact the conference host, journal, or publisher (according to the circumstance) for further details regarding this item. If a citation is listed in this record, the item has been published and is available via open-access avenues or a journal/database subscription. Contact your library for assistance in obtaining the as-published article.

Full metadata record

DC FieldValue Language
dc.type.categoryAbstracten_US
dc.typePresentationen_GB
dc.titleINTRAVENOUS INFUSION AND SUBCUTANEOUS INJECTION OF AZACITIDINE IN PATIENTS WITH MYELODYSPLASTIC SYNDROMES WHO ARE ENROLLED IN AVIDA, A LONGITUDINAL PATIENT REGISTRYen_GB
dc.contributor.authorDsouza Britto, Micheleen_US
dc.contributor.authorGrinblatt, David L.en_US
dc.contributor.authorNarang, Mohiten_US
dc.contributor.authorMalone, James M.en_US
dc.contributor.authorSweet, David A.en_US
dc.author.detailsMichele Dsouza Britto, RN, MS, OCN, CCRP, Clinical Research Nurse, Kellogg Cancer Care Center - Northshore University Health System, Evanston, Illinois, USA, email: mbritto@northshore.org; David L. Grinblatt, MD; Mohit Narang, MD, Alliance Hematology Oncology, Westminster, Maryland; James M. Malone, III MD, Oncology-Hematology Med. Assoc. of the Central Coast, San Luis Obispo, California; David A. Sweet, MDen_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10755/164956-
dc.description.abstractResearch Study: Azacitidine, initially approved as a subcutaneous (SC) injection that allowed convenient outpatient treatment, is now also approved as an intravenous (IV) infusion for patients who have injection site reactions or poor peripheral blood flow. Compare treatment patterns, transfusion independence, and safety of azacitidine administered via IV infusion or SC injection in patients enrolled in AVIDA. AVIDA is a multicenter patient registry designed to prospectively collect data from community-based hematology clinics on the natural history and management of patients with hematologic disorders who are receiving azacitidine. Treatment patterns, transfusion independence (defined as no transfusions for at least 56 days during AVIDA) in patients with historical (6 months prior to AVIDA) transfusion requirements and at least 56 days treatment duration, and adverse events (AEs) were recorded. As of October 8, 2008, 237 patients (164 males, 73 females) have been enrolled; 923 cycles (median, 3; range, 1-16) have been administered. The most common dose and schedule was 75 mg/ m X m (84%) at 5 days on treatment (51%). IV infusion was the most frequent (>50%) administration route for 126 (53%) patients (IV patients) and SC injection was the most frequent administration route for 110 (46%) patients (SC patients). One patient was not included in the analysis. Baseline demographics, disease characteristics, dose, and schedule were similar between the two administration groups. Twenty-seven of 40 (68%) IV patients achieved RBC transfusion independence; 25/27 (93%) first achieved RBC transfusion independence during the first 2 cycles. Fifteen of 38 (40%) SC patients have achieved RBC transfusion independence; 11/15 (73%) first achieved RBC transfusion independence during the first 2 cycles. IV patients experienced fewer injection site AEs than SC patients (3 vs 17). Incidences of other AEs were similar between both groups (IV vs SC) with the exception of thrombocytopenia (12% vs 16%) and fatigue (8% vs 16%). Conclusion: In the community setting, both IV and SC administration routes provided clinically meaningful RBC and platelet transfusion independence. The IV patients experienced fewer administration site reactions.en_GB
dc.date.available2011-10-27T12:09:59Z-
dc.date.issued2011-10-27en_GB
dc.date.accessioned2011-10-27T12:09:59Z-
dc.conference.date2009en_US
dc.conference.name34th Annual Oncology Nursing Society Congressen_US
dc.conference.hostOncology Nursing Societyen_US
dc.conference.locationSan Antonio, Texas, USAen_US
dc.description.sponsorshipFunding Source: Celgene Corporation.-
dc.description.noteThis is an abstract-only submission. If the author has submitted a full-text item based on this abstract, you may find it by browsing the Virginia Henderson Global Nursing e-Repository by author. If author contact information is available in this abstract, please feel free to contact him or her with your queries regarding this submission. Alternatively, please contact the conference host, journal, or publisher (according to the circumstance) for further details regarding this item. If a citation is listed in this record, the item has been published and is available via open-access avenues or a journal/database subscription. Contact your library for assistance in obtaining the as-published article.-
All Items in this repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.