DOCSLIB.ORG

Mylotarg in Combination with DA

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

THE CLATTERBRIDGE CANCER CENTRE NHS FOUNDATION TRUST Systemic Anti-Cancer Treatment Protocol Mylotarg® in combination with DA Acute Myeloid Leukaemia (AML) PROTOCOL REF: MPHAMDAHA (Version No: 1.1) Approved for use in: Gemtuzumab Ozogamicin (Mylotarg®) is indicated, in combination with daunorubicin and cytarabine (DA), for the treatment of previously untreated CD33-positive Acute Myeloid Leukaemia (AML) in patients aged 15 years and over when the following conditions are met: The prescribing consultant is fully aware of the potential for Mylotarg® to induce hepatotoxicity, including veno-occlusive liver disease / sinusoidal obstruction syndrome The patient does NOT have Acute Promyelocytic Leukaemia (APML) The patient has previously untreated AML The patient is aged 15 years or over The patient starts treatment when they have had cytogenetics performed and confirmed as favourable, intermediate or unknown cytogenetics (that is, because the test was unsuccessful), or when their cytogenetic tests are not available yet. The patient is fit for intensive induction chemotherapy Mylotarg® is to be given in combination with daunorubicin and cytarabine Note this protocol should only be used to treat patients off-trial. Refer to relevant trial protocol for enrolled patients. Exempt from NHS England treatment break policy Blueteq registration required for Mylotarg® Issue Date: 13th March 2020 Page 1 of 14 Protocol reference: MPHAMDAHA Review: March 2023 Author: Niamh McLaughlin Authorised by: Drug & Therapeutics Committee Version No: 1.1 THE CLATTERBRIDGE CANCER CENTRE NHS FOUNDATION TRUST Dosage: Treatment Drug Dosage Route Frequency course 2 Mylotarg® 3 mg/m /dose IV Days 1,4 and 7 (max 5mg/dose) First 2 Induction Daunorubicin 60 mg/m /day IV Days 1-3 Cytarabine 200 mg/m2/day IV Days 1-7 Mylotarg® should not be administered during second induction Second 2 induction Daunorubicin 35 mg/m /day IV Days 1-2 (if required)* Every 12 hours on days Cytarabine 1000 mg/m2/dose IV 1-3 2 Mylotarg® 3 mg/m /dose IV On day 1 only (max 5mg/dose) Consolidation Daunorubicin 60 mg/m2/day IV On day 1 only course 1** Every 12 hours on days Cytarabine 1000 mg/m2/dose IV 1-4 2 Mylotarg® 3 mg/m /dose IV On day 1 only (max 5mg/dose) Consolidation Daunorubicin 60 mg/m2/day IV Days 1and 2 course 2 Every 12 hours on days Cytarabine 1000 mg/m2/dose IV 1-4 *If residual disease on D14 bone marrow biopsy **For patients experiencing a complete remission (CR) following induction, defined as fewer than 5% blasts in a normocellular marrow and an absolute neutrophil count (ANC) >1.0 × 109 cells/L with a platelet count of ≥100 × 109/L in the peripheral blood in the absence of transfusion, up to 2 consolidation courses can be given. Schedule modification for hyperleukocytosis: If leukocyte count ≥30x109/L, cyto-reduction is recommended 48 hours prior to commencing Mylotarg ® in order to reduce the peripheral white cell count. See recommended changes to induction schedule below. Options for cyto-reduction include: Issue Date: 13th March 2020 Page 2 of 14 Protocol reference: MPHAMDAHA Review: March 2023 Author: Niamh McLaughlin Authorised by: Drug & Therapeutics Committee Version No: 1.1 THE CLATTERBRIDGE CANCER CENTRE NHS FOUNDATION TRUST Leukapheresis. Oral hydroxycarbamide. Cytarabine +/- hydroxycarbamide If Cytarabine is used for leukoreduction, (with or without hydroxycarbamide); in patients with previously untreated de novo hyperleukocytic AML, receiving Mylotarg® in combination therapy, apply the following modified schedule for the first induction cycle: Treatment Drug Dosage Route Frequency course 2 Mylotarg® 3 mg/m /dose IV Days 3,6 and 9 (max 5mg/dose) Daunorubicin 60 mg/m2/day IV Days 3-5 Induction Cytarabine 200 mg/m2/day IV Days 1-7 Hydroxyurea 40-60mg/kg/day PO Day 1 Supportive treatments: 1. Premedication with a corticosteroid, antihistamine, and paracetamol is necessary 1 hour prior to Mylotarg® to help ameliorate infusion-related symptoms 2. Anti-hyperuricaemic treatment as per trust tumour lysis policy 3. Anti-emetics as per Trust chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting policy 4. Anti-microbials as per Trust Antimicrobial prophylaxis policy 5. Corticosteroid eye drops QDS for duration of treatment and for five days after (second induction and consolidation cycles only) Consider avoiding posaconazole and other azoles while on Mylotarg® and for five days after Mylotarg® treatment has finished. AML 19 clinical trial protocol recommends this owing to potential risk of hepatotoxicity, but Mylotarg® SPC makes no reference to this risk, so clinical judgement should be used. Use Caspofungin as an alternative to azole prophylaxis if required. Issue Date: 13th March 2020 Page 3 of 14 Protocol reference: MPHAMDAHA Review: March 2023 Author: Niamh McLaughlin Authorised by: Drug & Therapeutics Committee Version No: 1.1 THE CLATTERBRIDGE CANCER CENTRE NHS FOUNDATION TRUST Cautions Hypotension may occur, therefore it is advisable to withhold anti-hypertensive medications 12hours before and 12 hours after treatment with Mylotarg® Adverse risk cytogenetics Moderate/severe hepatic impairment: increased risk of veno-occlusive disease Concomitant use of cardiotoxic agents Pregnant/breastfeeding Extravasation Risk: 1. Daunorubicin- vesicant 2. Cytarabine- non-vesicant 3. Mylotarg®- unknown Refer to the CCC policy for the ‘Prevention and Management of Extravasation Injuries’ Administration: Do not give other drugs through the same infusion line as Mylotarg® Day Drug Dosage Route Diluent and Rate Induction Cycle 1 Diluted in 100ml NaCl 0.9% Hydrocortisone 100mg IV over 30 minutes Chlorphenamine 10mg IV IV Stat Paracetamol 1000mg PO Oral Stat Day 1 In 50ml 0.9% sodium 2 IV chloride over 2 hours, via Mylotarg®* 3mg/m (max 5mg) infusion low-protein binding 0.2 micron filter. Monitor vital signs during Mylotarg® infusion and for 4 hours after Issue Date: 13th March 2020 Page 4 of 14 Protocol reference: MPHAMDAHA Review: March 2023 Author: Niamh McLaughlin Authorised by: Drug & Therapeutics Committee Version No: 1.1 THE CLATTERBRIDGE CANCER CENTRE NHS FOUNDATION TRUST In 100ml 0.9% sodium Daunorubicin 60mg/m2 IV chloride given over 30mins In 1000ml 0.9% sodium Cytarabine 200mg/m2 IV chloride given over 22hours In 100ml 0.9% sodium Daunorubicin 60mg/m2 IV chloride given over 30mins Day 2 In 1000ml 0.9% sodium Cytarabine 200mg/m2 IV chloride given over 22hours In 100ml 0.9% sodium Daunorubicin 60mg/m2 IV chloride given over 30mins Day 3 In 1000ml 0.9% sodium Cytarabine 200mg/m2 IV chloride given over 22hours Diluted in 100ml NaCl 0.9% Hydrocortisone 100mg IV over 30 minutes Chlorphenamine 10mg IV IV Stat Paracetamol 1000mg PO Oral Stat In 50ml 0.9% sodium Day 4 2 IV chloride over 2 hours, via Mylotarg®* 3mg/m (max 5mg) infusion low-protein binding 0.2 micron filter. Monitor vital signs during Mylotarg® infusion and for 4 hours after In 1000ml 0.9% sodium Cytarabine 200mg/m2 IV chloride given over 22hours In 1000ml 0.9% sodium Day 5 Cytarabine 200mg/m2 IV chloride given over 22hours In 1000ml 0.9% sodium Day 6 Cytarabine 200mg/m2 IV chloride given over 22hours Diluted in 100ml NaCl 0.9% Hydrocortisone 100mg IV over 30 minutes Chlorphenamine 10mg IV IV Stat Paracetamol 1000mg PO Oral Stat In 50ml 0.9% sodium Day 7 Mylotarg®* 3mg/m2 IV chloride over 2 hours, via (Only for Induction 1) (max 5mg) infusion low-protein binding 0.2 micron filter. Monitor vital signs during Mylotarg® infusion and for 4 hours after In 1000ml 0.9% sodium Cytarabine 200mg/m2 IV chloride given over 22hours Induction cycle 2 (If required. No Mylotarg®) In 100ml 0.9% sodium Day 1 Daunorubicin 35mg/m2 IV chloride given over 30mins Issue Date: 13th March 2020 Page 5 of 14 Protocol reference: MPHAMDAHA Review: March 2023 Author: Niamh McLaughlin Authorised by: Drug & Therapeutics Committee Version No: 1.1 THE CLATTERBRIDGE CANCER CENTRE NHS FOUNDATION TRUST In 500ml 0.9% sodium 1100 Cytarabine 1000mg/m2 IV chloride given over 2 hours In 500ml 0.9% sodium 2300 Cytarabine 1000mg/m2 IV chloride given over 2 hours In 100ml 0.9% sodium Daunorubicin 35mg/m2 IV chloride given over 30mins In 500ml 0.9% sodium Day 2 1100 Cytarabine 1000mg/m2 IV chloride given over 2 hours In 500ml 0.9% sodium 2300 Cytarabine 1000mg/m2 IV chloride given over 2 hours In 500ml 0.9% sodium 1100 Cytarabine 1000mg/m2 IV chloride given over 2 hours Day 3 In 500ml 0.9% sodium 2300 Cytarabine 1000mg/m2 IV chloride given over 2 hours Consolidation Cycle 1 Diluted in 100ml NaCl Hydrocortisone 100mg IV 0.9% over 30 minutes Chlorphenamine 10mg IV IV Stat Paracetamol 1000mg PO Oral Stat In 50ml 0.9% sodium 3mg/m2 IV chloride over 2 hours, via Mylotarg®* (max 5mg) infusion low-protein binding 0.2 Day 1 micron filter. Monitor vital signs during Mylotarg® infusion and for 4 hours after In 100ml 0.9% sodium Daunorubicin 60mg/m2 IV chloride given over 30mins In 500ml 0.9% sodium 1100 Cytarabine 1000mg/m2 IV chloride given over 2 hours In 500ml 0.9% sodium 2300 Cytarabine 1000mg/m2 IV chloride given over 2 hours In 500ml 0.9% sodium 1100 Cytarabine 1000mg/m2 IV chloride given over 2 hours Day 2 In 500ml 0.9% sodium 2300 Cytarabine 1000mg/m2 IV chloride given over 2 hours In 500ml 0.9% sodium 1100 Cytarabine 1000mg/m2 IV chloride given over 2 hours Day 3 In 500ml 0.9% sodium 2300 Cytarabine 1000mg/m2 IV chloride given over 2 hours In 500ml 0.9% sodium Day 4 1100 Cytarabine 1000mg/m2 IV chloride given over 2 hours Issue Date: 13th March 2020 Page 6 of 14 Protocol reference: MPHAMDAHA Review: March 2023 Author: Niamh McLaughlin Authorised by: Drug & Therapeutics Committee Version No: 1.1 THE CLATTERBRIDGE CANCER CENTRE NHS FOUNDATION TRUST In 500ml 0.9% sodium 2300 Cytarabine 1000mg/m2 IV chloride given over 2 hours Consolidation Cycle 2 Diluted in 100ml NaCl Hydrocortisone 100mg IV 0.9% over 30 minutes Chlorphenamine 10mg IV IV Stat Paracetamol 1000mg PO Oral Stat In 50ml 0.9% sodium 3mg/m2 IV chloride over 2 hours, via Mylotarg®* (max 5mg) infusion low-protein binding 0.2 Day 1 micron filter.
Recommended publications
  • Targeting Fibrosis in the Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy Mice Model: an Uphill Battle

    Targeting Fibrosis in the Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy Mice Model: an Uphill Battle

    bioRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.01.20.427485; this version posted January 21, 2021. The copyright holder for this preprint (which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder. All rights reserved. No reuse allowed without permission. 1 Title: Targeting fibrosis in the Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy mice model: an uphill battle 2 Marine Theret1#, Marcela Low1#, Lucas Rempel1, Fang Fang Li1, Lin Wei Tung1, Osvaldo 3 Contreras3,4, Chih-Kai Chang1, Andrew Wu1, Hesham Soliman1,2, Fabio M.V. Rossi1 4 1School of Biomedical Engineering and the Biomedical Research Centre, Department of Medical 5 Genetics, 2222 Health Sciences Mall, Vancouver, BC, V6T 1Z3, Canada 6 2Department of Pharmacology and Toxicology, Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Minia 7 University, Minia, Egypt 8 3Developmental and Stem Cell Biology Division, Victor Chang Cardiac Research Institute, 9 Darlinghurst, NSW, 2010, Australia 10 4Departamento de Biología Celular y Molecular and Center for Aging and Regeneration (CARE- 11 ChileUC), Facultad de Ciencias Biológicas, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, 8331150 12 Santiago, Chile 13 # Denotes Co-first authorship 14 15 Keywords: drug screening, fibro/adipogenic progenitors, fibrosis, repair, skeletal muscle. 16 Correspondence to: 17 Marine Theret 18 School of Biomedical Engineering and the Biomedical Research Centre 19 University of British Columbia 20 2222 Health Sciences Mall, Vancouver, British Columbia 21 Tel: +1(604) 822 0441 fax: +1(604) 822 7815 22 Email: [email protected] 1 bioRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.01.20.427485; this version posted January 21, 2021. The copyright holder for this preprint (which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder.
  • Novartis R&D and Investor Update

    Novartis R&D and Investor Update

    Novartis AG Investor Relations Novartis R&D and investor update November 5, 2018 Disclaimer This presentation contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of the United States Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, that can generally be identified by words such as “potential,” “expected,” “will,” “planned,” “pipeline,” “outlook,” “agreement to acquire,” or similar expressions, or by express or implied discussions regarding potential marketing approvals, new indications or labeling for the investigational or approved products described in this presentation, or regarding potential future revenues from such products, or regarding the proposed acquisition of Endocyte, Inc. (Endocyte) by Novartis including the potential outcome and expected timing for completion of the proposed acquisition, and the potential impact on Novartis of the proposed acquisition, including express or implied discussions regarding potential future sales or earnings of Novartis, and any potential strategic benefits, synergies or opportunities expected as a result of the proposed acquisition. You should not place undue reliance on these statements. Such forward-looking statements are based on our current beliefs and expectations regarding future events, and are subject to significant known and unknown risks and uncertainties. Should one or more of these risks or uncertainties materialize, or should underlying assumptions prove incorrect, actual results may vary materially from those set forth in the forward-looking statements. There can be no guarantee that the investigational or approved products described in this presentation will be submitted or approved for sale or for any additional indications or labeling in any market, or at any particular time. Nor can there be any guarantee that such products will be commercially successful in the future.
  • A Comparison of Early Intensive Methotrexate/Mercaptopurine With

    A Comparison of Early Intensive Methotrexate/Mercaptopurine With

    Leukemia (2001) 15, 1038–1045 2001 Nature Publishing Group All rights reserved 0887-6924/01 $15.00 www.nature.com/leu A comparison of early intensive methotrexate/mercaptopurine with early intensive alternating combination chemotherapy for high-risk B-precursor acute lymphoblastic leukemia: a Pediatric Oncology Group phase III randomized trial SJ Lauer1, JJ Shuster2, DH Mahoney Jr3, N Winick4, S Toledano5, L Munoz5, G Kiefer6, JD Pullen7, CP Steuber3 and BM Camitta6 1Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA; 2Pediatric Oncology Group Statistical Office and Department of Statistics, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL; 3Texas Children’s Cancer Center, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX; 4University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX; 5University Miami School of Medicine, Miami, FL; 6Midwest Children’s Cancer Center, Milwaukee, WI; and 7University of Mississippi Medical Center Children’s Hospital, Jackson, MS, USA A prospective, randomized multicenter study was performed to to their risk for relapse and treatment strategies designed to evaluate the relative efficacy of two different concepts for early improve event-free survival (EFS). intensive therapy in a randomized trial of children with B-pre- cursor acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) at high risk (HR) for It is believed that the leading causes of relapse in children relapse. Four hundred and ninety eligible children with HR-ALL with higher risk ALL (HR-ALL) are inadequate cell kill and were randomized on the Pediatric Oncology Group (POG) 9006 emergence of drug-resistant clones. Clinical trials using early phase III trial between 7 January 1991 and 12 January 1994. intensive myelosuppressive combination chemotherapy as After prednisone (PDN), vincristine (VCR), asparaginase (ASP) post-induction consolidation were designed to maximize cell and daunorubicin (DNR) induction, 470 patients received either 2 kill and address drug resistance.
  • Incidence of Differentiation Syndrome Associated with Treatment

    Incidence of Differentiation Syndrome Associated with Treatment

    Journal of Clinical Medicine Review Incidence of Differentiation Syndrome Associated with Treatment Regimens in Acute Myeloid Leukemia: A Systematic Review of the Literature Lucia Gasparovic 1, Stefan Weiler 1,2, Lukas Higi 1 and Andrea M. Burden 1,* 1 Institute of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Department of Chemistry and Applied Biosciences, ETH Zurich, 8093 Zurich, Switzerland; [email protected] (L.G.); [email protected] (S.W.); [email protected] (L.H.) 2 National Poisons Information Centre, Tox Info Suisse, Associated Institute of the University of Zurich, 8032 Zurich, Switzerland * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +41-76-685-22-56 Received: 30 August 2020; Accepted: 14 October 2020; Published: 18 October 2020 Abstract: Differentiation syndrome (DS) is a potentially fatal adverse drug reaction caused by the so-called differentiating agents such as all-trans retinoic acid (ATRA) and arsenic trioxide (ATO), used for remission induction in the treatment of the M3 subtype of acute myeloid leukemia (AML), acute promyelocytic leukemia (APL). However, recent DS reports in trials of isocitrate dehydrogenase (IDH)-inhibitor drugs in patients with IDH-mutated AML have raised concerns. Given the limited knowledge of the incidence of DS with differentiating agents, we conducted a systematic literature review of clinical trials with reports of DS to provide a comprehensive overview of the medications associated with DS. In particular, we focused on the incidence of DS reported among the IDH-inhibitors, compared to existing ATRA and ATO therapies. We identified 44 published articles, encompassing 39 clinical trials, including 6949 patients. Overall, the cumulative incidence of DS across all treatment regimens was 17.7%.
  • Nurse-Led Drug Monitoring Clinic Protocol for the Use of Systemic Therapies in Dermatology for Patients

    Nurse-Led Drug Monitoring Clinic Protocol for the Use of Systemic Therapies in Dermatology for Patients

    Group arrangements: Salford Royal NHS Foundation Trust (SRFT) Pennine Acute Hospitals NHS Trust (PAT) Nurse-led drug monitoring clinic protocol for the use of systemic therapies in dermatology for patients with inflammatory dermatoses Lead Author: Dawn Lavery Dermatology Advanced Nurse Practitioner Additional author(s) N/A Division/ Department:: Dermatology, Clinical Support and Tertiary Medicine Applies to: (Please delete) Salford Royal Care Organisation Approving Committee Dermatology clinical governance committee Salford Royal Date approved: 13 February 2019 Expiry date: February 2022 Contents Contents Section Page Document summary sheet 1 Overview 2 2 Scope & Associated Documents 2 3 Background 3 4 What is new in this version? 3 5 Policy 4 Drugs monitored by nurses 4 Acitretin 7 Alitretinoin Toctino 11 Apremilast 22 Azathioprine 26 Ciclosporin 29 Dapsone 34 Fumaric Acid Esters – Fumaderm and Skilarence 36 Hydroxycarbamide 39 Hydroxychloroquine 43 Methotrexate 50 Mycophenolate moefetil 57 Nurse-led drug monitoring clinic protocol for the use of systemic therapies in dermatology for patients with inflammatory dermatoses Reference Number GSCDerm01(13) Version 3 Issue Date: 11/06/2019 Page 1 of 77 It is your responsibility to check on the intranet that this printed copy is the latest version Standards 67 6 Roles and responsibilities 67 7 Monitoring document effectiveness 67 8 Abbreviations and definitions 68 9 References 68 10 Appendices N/A 11 Document Control Information 71 12 Equality Impact Assessment (EqIA) screening tool 73 Group arrangements: Salford Royal NHS Foundation Trust (SRFT) Pennine Acute Hospitals NHS Trust (PAT) 1. Overview (What is this policy about?) The dermatology directorate specialist nurses are responsible for ensuring prescribing and monitoring for patients under their care, is in accordance with this protocol.
  • Cytostatics As Hazardous Chemicals in Healthcare

    Cytostatics As Hazardous Chemicals in Healthcare

    REVIEW PAPER International Journal of Occupational Medicine and Environmental Health 2019;32(2):141 – 159 https://doi.org/10.13075/ijomeh.1896.01248 CYTOSTATICS AS HAZARDOUS CHEMICALS IN HEALTHCARE WORKERS’ ENVIRONMENT ANNA PAŁASZEWSKA-TKACZ, SŁAWOMIR CZERCZAK, KATARZYNA KONIECZKO, and MAŁGORZATA KUPCZEWSKA-DOBECKA Nofer Institute of Occupational Medicine, Łódź, Poland Department of Chemical Safety Abstract Cytostatics not only induce significant side-effects in patients treated oncologically but also pose a threat to the health of occupationally exposed healthcare workers: pharmacists, physicians, nurses and other personnel. Since the 1970s numerous reports from various countries have documented the contamination of working areas with cytostatics and the presence of drugs/metabolites in the urine or blood of healthcare employees, which di- rectly indicates the occurrence of occupational exposure to these drugs. In Poland the significant scale of occupational exposure to cytostatics is also confirmed by the data collected in the central register of occupational carcinogens/mutagens kept by the Nofer Institute of Occupational Medicine. The assessment of occupational exposure to cytostatics and health risks constitutes employers’ obligation. Unfortunately, the assessment of occu- pational risk resulting from exposure to cytostatics raises a number of concerns. Provisions governing the problem of workers’ health protection are not unequivocal because they derive from a variety of law areas, especially in a matter of hazard classification and safety data sheets for cytostatics. Moreover, no legally binding occupational exposure limits have been set for cytostatics or their active compounds, and analytical methods for these substances airborne and biological concentrations are lacking. Consequently, the correct assessment of occupational exposure to cytostatics, the eval- uation of health hazards and the development of the proper preventive strategy appear difficult.
  • Daunorubicin Hydrochloride Injection Hikma Pharmaceuticals USA Inc

    Daunorubicin Hydrochloride Injection Hikma Pharmaceuticals USA Inc

    DAUNORUBICIN HYDROCHLORIDE- daunorubicin hydrochloride injection Hikma Pharmaceuticals USA Inc. ---------- DAUNORUBICIN HYDROCHLORIDE INJECTION Rx ONLY WARNINGS 1.Daunorubicin Hydrochloride Injection must be given into a rapidly flowing intravenous infusion. It must never be given by the intramuscular or subcutaneous route. Severe local tissue necrosis will occur if there is extravasation during administration. 2.Myocardial toxicity manifested in its most severe form by potentially fatal congestive heart failure may occur either during therapy or months to years after termination of therapy. The incidence of myocardial toxicity increases after a total cumulative dose exceeding 400 to 550 mg/m2 in adults, 300 mg/m2 in children more than 2 years of age, or 10 mg/kg in children less than 2 years of age. 3.Severe myelosuppression occurs when used in therapeutic doses; this may lead to infection or hemorrhage. 4.It is recommended that daunorubicin hydrochloride be administered only by physicians who are experienced in leukemia chemotherapy and in facilities with laboratory and supportive resources adequate to monitor drug tolerance and protect and maintain a patient compromised by drug toxicity. The physician and institution must be capable of responding rapidly and completely to severe hemorrhagic conditions and/or overwhelming infection. 5.Dosage should be reduced in patients with impaired hepatic or renal function. DESCRIPTION Daunorubicin hydrochloride is the hydrochloride salt of an anthracycline cytotoxic antibiotic produced by a strain of Streptomyces coeruleorubidus. It is provided as a deep red sterile liquid in vials for intravenous administration only. Each mL contains 5 mg daunorubicin (equivalent to 5.34 mg of daunorubicin hydrochloride), 9 mg sodium chloride; sodium hydroxide and/or hydrochloric acid (to adjust pH), and water for injection, q.s.
  • Investor Presentation

    Investor Presentation

    Participants Company overview Pharmaceuticals Oncology Financial review Conclusion Appendix References Q1 2021 Results Investor presentation 1 Investor Relations │ Q1 2021 Results Participants Company overview Pharmaceuticals Oncology Financial review Conclusion Appendix References Disclaimer This presentation contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of the United States Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, that can generally be identified by words such as “potential,” “expected,” “will,” “planned,” “pipeline,” “outlook,” or similar expressions, or by express or implied discussions regarding potential new products, potential new indications for existing products, potential product launches, or regarding potential future revenues from any such products; or regarding the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on certain therapeutic areas including dermatology, ophthalmology, our breast cancer portfolio, some newly launched brands and the Sandoz retail and anti-infectives business, and on drug development operations; or regarding potential future, pending or announced transactions; regarding potential future sales or earnings of the Group or any of its divisions; or by discussions of strategy, plans, expectations or intentions; or regarding the Group’s liquidity or cash flow positions and its ability to meet its ongoing financial obligations and operational needs; or regarding our collaboration with Molecular Partners to develop, manufacture and commercialize potential medicines for the prevention and treatment of COVID- 19 and our joining of the industry-wide efforts to meet global demand for COVID-19 vaccines and therapeutics by leveraging our manufacturing capacity and capabilities to support the production of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine and to manufacture the mRNA and bulk drug product for the vaccine candidate CVnCoV from CureVac.
  • Benefit of Intermediate-Dose Cytarabine-Containing Induction In

    Benefit of Intermediate-Dose Cytarabine-Containing Induction In

    Letters to the Editor ter RFS and EFS rates and showed a marked tendency to Benefit of intermediate-dose cytarabine-containing improve the OS of patients with CEBPAdm in both uni- induction in molecular subgroups of acute myeloid variate and multivariable analyses, as shown in Online leukemia Supplementary Table S2. Five-year RFS, EFS, and OS rates were 85%, 81%, and 88% in the intermediate-dose com- The outcome of acute myeloid leukemia (AML) is pared with 56%, 56%, and 68% in the conventional- affected by disease characteristics as well as treatment dose group, respectively (Figure 1). In total, 13 of 75 1-3 regimens. In the CALGB8525 trial, patients with core (17%) patients with CEBPAdm AML underwent allo- binding factor (CBF)-positive leukemia benefited from geneic transplantation in CR1, including five of 32 (16%) 4 consolidation with a high dose of cytarabine. More in the conventional-dose group and eight of 43 (19%) in 2 recently, high-dose daunorubicin (60-90 mg/m ) has the intermediate-dose group. To analyze results in the 5,6 become widely used. High-dose daunorubicin confers a absence of any possible contributory effect of transplan- favorable prognosis for patients with NPM1 muta- tation, patients were censored at the time of transplanta- 1,7,8 tions. tion in CR1. Patients with CEBPAdm AML exposed to Higher-dose cytarabine was also introduced into AML intermediate-dose cytarabine achieved an increase in 5- 3,9 induction therapy. Recently, we investigated the role of year RFS, censored at the date of transplantation, from intermediate-dose cytarabine in induction therapy of 56% to 83% (hazard ratio [HR], 0.313; 95% confidence AML and found that the introduction of intermediate- interval [95% CI]: 0.119-0.824; Wald P=0.019) (Online dose cytarabine, combined with daunorubicin and omac- Supplementary Figure S3).
  • Cytostatics in Dutch Surface Water: Use, Presence and Risks To

    Cytostatics in Dutch Surface Water: Use, Presence and Risks To

    Cytostatics in Dutch surface water Use, presence and risks to the aquatic environment RIVM Letter report 2018-0067 C. Moermond et al. Cytostatics in Dutch surface water Use, presence and risks to the aquatic environment RIVM Letter report 2018-0067 C. Moermond et al. RIVM Letter report 2018-0067 Colophon © RIVM 2018 Parts of this publication may be reproduced, provided acknowledgement is given to: National Institute for Public Health and the Environment, along with the title and year of publication. DOI 10.21945/RIVM-2018-0067 C. Moermond (auteur/coördinator), RIVM B. Venhuis (auteur/coördinator),RIVM M. van Elk (auteur), RIVM A. Oostlander (auteur), RIVM P. van Vlaardingen (auteur), RIVM M. Marinković (auteur), RIVM J. van Dijk (stagiair; auteur) RIVM Contact: Caroline Moermond VSP-MSP [email protected] This investigation has been performed by order and for the account of the Ministry of Infrastructure and Water management (IenW), within the framework of Green Deal Zorg en Ketenaanpak medicijnresten uit water. This is a publication of: National Institute for Public Health and the Environment P.O. Box 1 | 3720 BA Bilthoven The Netherlands www.rivm.nl/en Page 2 of 140 RIVM Letter report 2018-0067 Synopsis Cytostatics in Dutch surface water Cytostatics are important medicines to treat cancer patients. Via urine, cytostatic residues end up in waste water that is treated in waste water treatment plants and subsequently discharged into surface waters. Research from RIVM shows that for most cytostatics, their residues do not pose a risk to the environment. They are sufficiently metabolised in the human body and removed in waste water treatment plants.

  • Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia (ALL) (Part 1 Of

    LEUKEMIA TREATMENT REGIMENS: Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia (ALL) (Part 1 of 12) Note: The National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) Guidelines® for Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia (ALL) should be consulted for the management of patients with lymphoblastic lymphoma. Clinical Trials: The NCCN recommends cancer patient participation in clinical trials as the gold standard for treatment. Cancer therapy selection, dosing, administration, and the management of related adverse events can be a complex process that should be handled by an experienced healthcare team. Clinicians must choose and verify treatment options based on the individual patient; drug dose modifications and supportive care interventions should be administered accordingly. The cancer treatment regimens below may include both U.S. Food and Drug Administration-approved and unapproved indications/regimens. These regimens are only provided to supplement the latest treatment strategies. The NCCN Guidelines are a work in progress that may be refined as often as new significant data becomes available. They are a consensus statement of its authors regarding their views of currently accepted approaches to treatment. Any clinician seeking to apply or consult any NCCN Guidelines is expected to use independent medical judgment in the context of individual clinical circumstances to determine any patient’s care or treatment. The NCCN makes no warranties of any kind whatsoever regarding their content, use, or application and disclaims any responsibility for their application or use in any
  • World Health Organization Model List of Essential Medicines, 21St List, 2019

    World Health Organization Model List of Essential Medicines, 21St List, 2019

    World Health Organizatio n Model List of Essential Medicines 21st List 2019 World Health Organizatio n Model List of Essential Medicines 21st List 2019 WHO/MVP/EMP/IAU/2019.06 © World Health Organization 2019 Some rights reserved. This work is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 IGO licence (CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 IGO; https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/igo). Under the terms of this licence, you may copy, redistribute and adapt the work for non-commercial purposes, provided the work is appropriately cited, as indicated below. In any use of this work, there should be no suggestion that WHO endorses any specific organization, products or services. The use of the WHO logo is not permitted. If you adapt the work, then you must license your work under the same or equivalent Creative Commons licence. If you create a translation of this work, you should add the following disclaimer along with the suggested citation: “This translation was not created by the World Health Organization (WHO). WHO is not responsible for the content or accuracy of this translation. The original English edition shall be the binding and authentic edition”. Any mediation relating to disputes arising under the licence shall be conducted in accordance with the mediation rules of the World Intellectual Property Organization. Suggested citation. World Health Organization Model List of Essential Medicines, 21st List, 2019. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2019. Licence: CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 IGO. Cataloguing-in-Publication (CIP) data. CIP data are available at http://apps.who.int/iris.