Metachromatic leukodystrophy (MLD) is a rare, autosomal recessive lysosomal storage disease caused by deficient activity of arylsulfatase A. Neurological involvement results in severe disability and premature death, but understanding of the natural history of the disease remains limited. In this study, 32 caregivers of patients with MLD in the USA (16 with late-infantile MLD; 16 with juvenile MLD) were interviewed about their experiences of the disease. Qualitative analysis of the interview transcripts was performed to gain insights into symptom onset, the diagnostic process and disease progression, with a focus on the differences between late-infantile and juvenile MLD. The mean ages of patients at interview were 7.6 years and 20.7 years for individuals with late-infantile and juvenile MLD, respectively. Patients with late-infantile MLD had a mean age of 1.5 years at symptom onset and 2.6 years at diagnosis. The most common initial symptoms in this group related to problems with gross motor function (12/16 patients); 11 patients never learned to walk independently. For patients with juvenile MLD, the mean ages at symptom onset and diagnosis were 8.7 years and 11.6 years, respectively. Cognitive or social/behavioural problems were the most common first reported symptoms in this group (9/16 and 7/16 patients, respectively); these were generally followed by deterioration in motor function. The rate of functional decline was more rapid in patients with late-infantile MLD than those with juvenile MLD; the mean time from first symptom to first functional loss was 1 year versus 6.1 years, respectively. Nine patients with juvenile MLD and three with late-infantile MLD had undergone a haematopoietic stem cell transplant; outcomes following transplant were variable. Our data highlight clear overall differences in symptom profiles and disease progression between late-infantile and juvenile MLD, but also indicate some degree of interindividual variability within each subtype. These findings are broadly consistent with previously published descriptions of MLD and enhance our knowledge of the natural history of the disease, which ultimately should help to improve patient care and aid assessments of the effectiveness of disease-related interventions in the future.

Background: Limited data are available on the real‐world effectiveness and safety of systemic therapies for advanced (surgically unresectable and/or metastatic) epithelioid sarcoma (ES).Methods: A retrospective medical records review was conducted in patients with advanced ES who were initiating first‐line or ≥2 lines of systemic therapy (2000‐2017) at 5 US cancer centers. The real‐world overall response rate (rwORR), the duration of response (rwDOR), the disease control rate (rwDCR) (defined as stable disease for ≥32 weeks or any duration of response), and progression‐free survival (rwPFS) were assessed by radiology reports. Overall survival (OS), rwDOR, and rwPFS were estimated from the time therapy was initiated using the Kaplan‐Meier method. Serious adverse events were assessed.Results: Of 74 patients (median age at diagnosis, 33 years; range, 10.6‐76.3 years), 72% were male, and 85% had metastatic disease. The median number of lines of therapy was 2 (range, 1‐7 lines of therapy), and 46 patients (62%) received ≥2 lines of systemic therapy. First‐line regimens were usually anthracycline‐based (54%) or gemcitabine‐based (24%). For patients receiving first‐line systemic therapy, the rwORR was 15%, the rwDCR was 20%, the median rwDOR was 3.3 months (95% CI, 2.1‐5.2 months), the median rwPFS was 2.5 months (95% CI, 1.7, 6.9 months), and the median OS was 15.2 months (95% CI, 11.4‐21.7 months). For those who received ≥2 lines of systemic therapy, the rwORR was 9%, the rwDCR was 20%, the median rwDOR was 4.5 months (95% CI, 0.7‐5.6 months), and the median rwPFS was 6.0 months (95% CI, 3.2‐7.4 months). Over one‐half of patients (51.4%) experienced an adverse event, most frequently febrile neutropenia (14%), pain (10%), anemia, dyspnea, fever, thrombocytopenia, or transaminitis (5% each).Conclusions: Systemic therapies demonstrate limited efficacy in patients with advanced ES and have associated toxicities.

There is limited information on changes over time in carcinoid syndrome (CS) symptoms and quality of life (QoL). This study assessed change in CS symptoms and QoL in patients treated with somatostatin analogs (SSAs) using the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General (FACT-G) and Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS)-29 instruments. Patients ≥18 years old with CS symptoms and treated with SSA or non-SSA agents in the United States were recruited through a patient advocacy group to complete a two-part, anonymous online survey. Time point (T) 1 survey was fielded from July–October 2016, and T2 survey followed 6 months later. Clinical characteristics and SSA treatment duration were assessed at T1. FACT-G and PROMIS-29 QoL surveys were administered and CS symptoms were assessed at T1 and T2; proportions of patients not experiencing symptoms were compared by McNemar’s test. Healthcare resource utilization (HRU) was assessed for the T1-T2 interval, and mean difference in QoL score from T1 to T2 by SSA duration was calculated. Of 117 participants at T1, 89 (76%) completed the T2 survey and served as the study sample; 11 (13%) were treated with SSAs for > 0–2 years, 37 (42%) for > 2–5 years, and 39 (45%) for > 5 years. A higher proportion of patients at T2 vs. T1 reported the following symptoms as not applicable: diarrhea (16% vs. 7%, p < 0.05), flushing (28% vs. 18%, p < 0.05), wheezing (78% vs 66%, p = 0.008). Most patients (89%) had a physical exam and a mean of 7.2 healthcare provider visits between T1 and T2. Patients treated with SSAs for ≤2 years had a mean positive change of 3.7 in their FACT-G total score between surveys, and 6.0 in an additional set of CS-specific questions. Patients receiving SSAs for > 2 years did not appear to associate with a clinically meaningful improvement in QoL score as assessed by FACT-G between T1 and T2; patients also had no clinically meaningful improvement as assessed by PROMIS-29. There may be clinically important improvement in QoL as measured by FACT-G in patients in earlier years of receiving SSA, which may not appear in later years of SSA treatment.

Achievement of MR4.5 (BCR-ABL1 ≤ 0.0032% on international scale) is an important goal of tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) treatment for patients with chronic myeloid leukemia (CML). This study describes treatment patterns by region and assesses time to achieve MR4.5 in patients with CML – chronic phase (CP) treated with second-line nilotinib or dasatinib in 10 countries. A multivariate Cox proportional hazards model was used to assess time to MR4.5 for nilotinib versus dasatinib. The model accounted for the competing-risk event of TKI resistance, included random effects for country clustering, and was adjusted for baseline covariates. The study included 280 patients treated with either nilotinib (N = 135 [48%]) or dasatinib (N = 145 [52%]) as second-line TKI with median treatment durations of 19.1 and 18.7 months, respectively. Nilotinib was observed to be better in achieving MR4.5 than dasatinib (adjusted hazard ratio = 1.37, 95% CI [1.11, 1.69]) suggesting second-line nilotinib may perform better in achieving MR4.5 than dasatinib.

Background: With many options available for treating inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) in Europe, this study sought to characterize physician treatment preferences and real-world treatment patterns in patients with moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis (UC) and Crohn’s disease (CD). Methods: This was a retrospective, noninterventional, physician-administered study. Gastroenterologists and general practitioners (n = 348) in France, Germany, and the United Kingdom provided information on treatment preferences and extracted information from records of patients with moderate-to-severe UC (n = 587) or CD (n = 417) who had received biologic, biosimilar or Janus kinase inhibitor therapies (2014–2019) and had IBD-related medical history available 6 months before and after treatment initiation. Results: Physicians largely preferred infliximab and adalimumab or their biosimilars as first-line therapy for UC (originators, 65.8%; biosimilars, 26.1%) and CD (originators, 61.8%; biosimilars, 30.5%). Effectiveness was the most cited reason for treatment preference (92%–93% of physicians). Three-quarters of patients (UC, 75.8%; CD, 73.6%) received infliximab or adalimumab originators in the first line, with more patients receiving infliximab biosimilars than adalimumab biosimilars (12.4%–12.5% and 0.5%–4.1%, respectively, across UC and CD). Persistence was longer for first-line infliximab than adalimumab (UC, 26.6 vs 21.2 months; CD, 31.2 vs 26.7 months) and was generally shorter for their respective biosimilars. Nonbiologic treatments were used in combination with biologics in 14.1% (UC) and 11.5% (CD) of patients. Most patients received 1 biologic therapy (UC, 90.6%; CD, 83.2%); only 9.4% (UC) and 16.8% (CD) received a second biologic. Conclusions: Infliximab and adalimumab originators dominated first-line biologic therapy for moderate-to-severe UC and CD. Understanding real-world treatment patterns can help assess new treatment uptake and suggest opportunities for improving treatment.