<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no" ?>
<rss version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>Sezer, O.</title>
    <link>http://repub.eur.nl/res/aut/31333/</link>
    <description>List of Publications</description>
    <language>en</language>
    
    <item>
      <title>Plasma cell leukemia: Consensus statement on diagnostic requirements, response criteria and treatment recommendations by the International Myeloma Working Group (Article)</title>
      <link>http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/39978/</link>
      <pubDate>2013-04-01T00:00:00Z</pubDate>
      <description>Plasma cell leukemia (PCL) is a rare and aggressive variant of myeloma characterized by the presence of circulating plasma cells. It is classified as either primary PCL occurring at diagnosis or as secondary PCL in patients with relapsed/refractory myeloma. Primary PCL is a distinct clinic-pathological entity with different cytogenetic and molecular findings. The clinical course is aggressive with short remissions and survival duration. The diagnosis is based upon the percentage (≥20%) and absolute number (≥2 × 10 9/l) of plasma cells in the peripheral blood. It is proposed that the thresholds for diagnosis be re-examined and consensus recommendations are made for diagnosis, as well as, response and progression criteria. Induction therapy needs to begin promptly and have high clinical activity leading to rapid disease control in an effort to minimize the risk of early death. Intensive chemotherapy regimens and bortezomib-based regimens are recommended followed by high-dose therapy with autologous stem cell transplantation if feasible. Allogeneic transplantation can be considered in younger patients. Prospective multicenter studies are required to provide revised definitions and better understanding of the pathogenesis of PCL. </description>
    </item> <item>
      <title>How to manage neutropenia in multiple myeloma (Article)</title>
      <link>http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/38269/</link>
      <pubDate>2012-02-01T00:00:00Z</pubDate>
      <description>Neutropenia is a hematologic adverse event characterized by an absolute neutrophil count (ANC) lower than 1500 cells/mL. This reduction may be due to decreased neutrophil production, accelerated use, a shift in compartments of neutrophils, or a combination of these factors. Neutropenia is often associated with infections, which are major causes of morbidity and mortality in patients with cancer. In patients with multiple myeloma, the novel agents thalidomide, lenalidomide, and bortezomib have improved outcome, but chemotherapy-related neutropenia should be carefully considered. Chemotherapy-related high-risk factors for severe neutropenia include regimens with an expected neutropenia rate of &gt; 50%, such as the 3-drug combinations including lenalidomide plus alkylating agents or doxorubicin, whereas low-risk regimens include combinations of the novel agents with dexamethasone alone. Patient characteristics, disease stage, type of current and previous treatment, and ANC &lt; 1000 cells/mL at baseline are additional factors that define the risk of severe neutropenia. Granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) should be used to manage chemotherapy-related neutropenia so that patients may stay on treatment for a longer time and benefit from it. Primary G-CSF prophylaxis should be used when high-risk regimens are administered or when low/intermediate-risk regimens are used and additional risk factors are present. Reactive G-CSF treatment is indicated when patients undergoing low-risk chemotherapy experience grade 3/4 neutropenia. If ANC restores to &gt; 1000 cells/mL, therapy can be resumed with no dose modifications. In case of persistence of severe neutropenia, treatment should be delayed until ANC reaches &gt; 1000 cells/mL, and dose reductions are necessary. </description>
    </item> <item>
      <title>Risk of progression and survival in multiple myeloma relapsing after therapy with IMiDs and bortezomib: A multicenter international myeloma working group study (Article)</title>
      <link>http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/37177/</link>
      <pubDate>2012-01-01T00:00:00Z</pubDate>
      <description>Promising new drugs are being evaluated for treatment of multiple myeloma (MM), but their impact should be measured against the expected outcome in patients failing current therapies. However, the natural history of relapsed disease in the current era remains unclear. We studied 286 patients with relapsed MM, who were refractory to bortezomib and were relapsed following, refractory to or ineligible to receive, an IMiD (immunomodulatory drug), had measurable disease, and ECOG PS of 0, 1 or 2. The date patients satisfied the entry criteria was defined as time zero (T0). The median age at diagnosis was 58 years, and time from diagnosis to T0was 3.3 years. Following T0, 213 (74%) patients had a treatment recorded with one or more regimens (median=1; range 0-8). The first regimen contained bortezomib in 55 (26%) patients and an IMiD in 70 (33%). A minor response or better was seen to at least one therapy after T0in 94 patients (44%) including ≥partial response in 69 (32%). The median overall survival and event-free survival from T0were 9 and 5 months, respectively. This study confirms the poor outcome, once patients become refractory to current treatments. The results provide context for interpreting ongoing trials of new drugs. </description>
    </item> <item>
      <title>Mobilization in myeloma revisited: IMWG consensus perspectives on stem cell collection following initial therapy with thalidomide-, lenalidomide-, or bortezomib-containing regimens (Article)</title>
      <link>http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/27241/</link>
      <pubDate>2009-11-20T00:00:00Z</pubDate>
      <description>The past decade has witnessed a paradigm shift in the initial treatment of multiple myeloma with the introduction of novel agents such as thalidomide, lenalidomide, and bortezomib, leading to improved outcomes. High-dose therapy and autologous stem cell transplantation remains an important therapeutic option for patients with multiple myeloma eligible for the procedure. Before the advent of the novel agents, patients underwent stem cell collection prior to significant alkylating agent exposure, given its potential deleterious effect on stem cell collection. With increasing use of the novel agents in the upfront setting, several reports have emerged raising concerns about their impact on the ability to collect stem cells.An expert panel of the International Myeloma Working Group (IMWG) was convened to examine the implications of these therapies on stem collection in patients with myeloma and to develop recommendations for addressing these issues. Here we summarize the currently available data and present our perspective on the problem and potential options to overcome this problem. Specifically, we recommend early mobilization of stem cells, preferably within the first 4 cycles of initial therapy, in patients treated with novel agents and encourage participation in clinical trials evaluating novel approaches to stem cell mobilization. </description>
    </item> <item>
      <title>The use of bisphosphonates in multiple myeloma: Recommendations of an expert panel on behalf of the European Myeloma Network (Article)</title>
      <link>http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/27081/</link>
      <pubDate>2009-10-01T00:00:00Z</pubDate>
      <description>Background: Bisphosphonates (BPs) prevent, reduce, and delay multiple myeloma (MM)-related skeletal complications. Intravenous pamidronate and zoledronic acid, and oral clodronate are used for the management of MM bone disease. The purpose of this paper is to review the current evidence for the use of BPs in MM and provide European Union-specific recommendations to support the clinical practice of treating myeloma bone disease. Design and methods: An interdisciplinary, expert panel of specialists on MM and myeloma-related bone disease convened for a face-to-face meeting to review and assess the evidence and develop the recommendations. The panel reviewed and graded the evidence available from randomized clinical trials, clinical practice guidelines, and the body of published literature. Where published data were weak or unavailable, the panel used their own clinical experience to put forward recommendations based solely on their expert opinions. Results: The panel recommends the use of BPs in MM patients suffering from lytic bone disease or severe osteoporosis. Intravenous administration may be preferable; however, oral administration can be considered for patients unable to make hospital visits. Dosing should follow approved indications with adjustments if necessary. In general, BPs are well tolerated, but preventive steps should be taken to avoid renal impairment and osteonecrosis of the jaw (ONJ). The panel agrees that BPs should be given for 2 years, but this may be extended if there is evidence of active myeloma bone disease. Initial therapy of ONJ should include discontinuation of BPs until healing occurs. BPs should be restarted if there is disease progression. Conclusions: BPs are an essential component of MM therapy for minimizing skeletal morbidity. Recent retrospective data indicate that a modified dosing regimen and preventive measures can greatly reduce the incidence of ONJ. </description>
    </item> <item>
      <title>International myeloma working group (IMWG) consensus statement and guidelines regarding the current status of stem cell collection and high-dose therapy for multiple myeloma and the role of plerixafor (AMD 3100) (Article)</title>
      <link>http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/24564/</link>
      <pubDate>2009-06-26T00:00:00Z</pubDate>
      <description>Multiple myeloma is the most common indication for high-dose chemotherapy with autologous stem cell support (ASCT) in North America today. Stem cell procurement for ASCT has most commonly been performed with stem cell mobilization using colony-stimulating factors with or without prior chemotherapy. The target CD34+ cell dose to be collected as well as the number of apheresis performed varies throughout the country, but a minimum of 2 million CD34+ cells/kg has been traditionally used for the support of one cycle of high-dose therapy. With the advent of plerixafor (AMD3100) (a novel stem cell mobilization agent), it is pertinent to review the current status of stem cell mobilization for myeloma as well as the role of autologous stem cell transplantation in this disease. On June 1, 2008, a panel of experts was convened by the International Myeloma Foundation to address issues regarding stem cell mobilization and autologous transplantation in myeloma in the context of new therapies. The panel was asked to discuss a variety of issues regarding stem cell collection and transplantation in myeloma especially with the arrival of plerixafor. Herein, is a summary of their deliberations and conclusions.</description>
    </item> <item>
      <title>International Myeloma Working Group guidelines for the management of multiple myeloma patients ineligible for standard high-dose chemotherapy with autologous stem cell transplantation (Article)</title>
      <link>http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/27059/</link>
      <pubDate>2009-06-08T00:00:00Z</pubDate>
      <description>In 2005, the first guidelines were published on the management of patients with multiple myeloma (MM). An expert panel reviewed the currently available literature as the basis for a set of revised and updated consensus guidelines for the diagnosis and management of patients with MM who are not eligible for autologous stem cell transplantation. Here we present recommendations on the diagnosis, treatment of newly diagnosed non-transplant-eligible patients and the management of complications occurring during induction therapy among these patients. These guidelines will aid the physician in daily clinical practice and will ensure optimal care for patients with MM.</description>
    </item> <item>
      <title>International Myeloma Working Group guidelines for serum-free light chain analysis in multiple myeloma and related disorders (Article)</title>
      <link>http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/27058/</link>
      <pubDate>2009-01-01T00:00:00Z</pubDate>
      <description>The serum immunoglobulin-free light chain (FLC) assay measures levels of free κ and λ immunoglobulin light chains. There are three major indications for the FLC assay in the evaluation and management of multiple myeloma and related plasma cell disorders (PCD). In the context of screening, the serum FLC assay in combination with serum protein electrophoresis (PEL) and immunofixation yields high sensitivity, and negates the need for 24-h urine studies for diagnoses other than light chain amyloidosis (AL). Second, the baseline FLC measurement is of major prognostic value in virtually every PCD. Third, the FLC assay allows for quantitative monitoring of patients with oligosecretory PCD, including AL, oligosecretory myeloma and nearly two-thirds of patients who had previously been deemed to have non-secretory myeloma. In AL patients, serial FLC measurements outperform PEL and immunofixation. In oligosecretory myeloma patients, although not formally validated, serial FLC measurements reduce the need for frequent bone marrow biopsies. In contrast, there are no data to support using FLC assay in place of 24-h urine PEL for monitoring or for serial measurements in PCD with measurable disease by serum or urine PEL. This paper provides consensus guidelines for the use of this important assay, in the diagnosis and management of clonal PCD.</description>
    </item> <item>
      <title>Prevention of thalidomide- and lenalidomide-associated thrombosis in myeloma (Article)</title>
      <link>http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/32403/</link>
      <pubDate>2008-02-01T00:00:00Z</pubDate>
      <description>The incidence of venous thromboembolism (VTE) is more than 1‰ annually in the general population and increases further in cancer patients. The risk of VTE is higher in multiple myeloma (MM) patients who receive thalidomide or lenalidomide, especially in combination with dexamethasone or chemotherapy. Various VTE prophylaxis strategies, such as low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH), warfarin or aspirin, have been investigated in small, uncontrolled clinical studies. This manuscript summarizes the available evidence and recommends a prophylaxis strategy according to a risk-assessment model. Individual risk factors for thrombosis associated with thalidomide/lenalidomide-based therapy include age, history of VTE, central venous catheter, comorbidities (infections, diabetes, cardiac disease), immobilization, surgery and inherited thrombophilia. Myeloma-related risk factors include diagnosis and hyperviscosity. VTE is very high in patients who receive high-dose dexamethasone, doxorubicin or multiagent chemotherapy in combination with thalidomide or lenalidomide, but not with bortezomib. The panel recommends aspirin for patients with ≤1 risk factor for VTE. LMWH (equivalent to enoxaparin 40mg per day) is recommended for those with two or more individual/myeloma-related risk factors. LMWH is also recommended for all patients receiving concurrent high-dose dexamethasone or doxorubicin. Full-dose warfarin targeting a therapeutic INR of 2-3 is an alternative to LMWH, although there are limited data in the literature with this strategy. In the absence of clear data from randomized studies as a foundation for recommendations, many of the following proposed strategies are the results of common sense or derive from the extrapolation of data from many studies not specifically designed to answer these questions. Further investigation is needed to define the best VTE prophylaxis.</description>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>