322P - Prognostic impact of synchronous multiple primary malignant tumors on newly diagnosed hematological malignancies (322P)

Date 18 November 2017
Event ESMO Asia 2017 Congress
Session Poster lunch
Topics Cancer Aetiology, Epidemiology, Prevention
Haematologic Malignancies
Presenter Satoshi Nishiwaki
Citation Annals of Oncology (2017) 28 (suppl_10): x94-x99. 10.1093/annonc/mdx664
Authors S. Nishiwaki1, S. Okuno2, K. Suzuki2, S. Kurahashi2, I. Sugiura2
  • 1Center For Advanced Medicine And Clinical Research, Nagoya University Hospital, 466-8560 - Nagoya/JP
  • 2Division Of Hematology And Oncology, Toyohashi Municipal Hospital, Toyohashi/JP

Abstract

Background

Hematological malignancies with synchronous solid tumors [synchronous multiple primary malignant tumors (sMPMTs)] at diagnosis are occasionally observed. Since multiple cycles of combination chemotherapy are standard treatment, it takes at least several months for treatment of newly diagnosed hematological malignancies such as acute leukemia, malignant lymphoma, multiple myeloma. Therefore, it is sometimes difficult to decide when to treat the sMPMTs. We aimed to clarify the impact of sMPMTs on newly diagnosed hematological malignancies and consider optimal treatment strategies.

Methods

We analyzed the outcome of a total of 649 hematological malignancy patients in which 19 patients with sMPMTs were included (2.9%), and compared the outcome between patients with and without sMPMTs. The definition of sMPMTs was patients who were also diagnosed as a solid tumor within 6 months of the diagnosis of hematological disease.

Results

Overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) of patients with sMPMTs was 77% and 70% at 2 years, which were not statistically different with those without sMPMTs (P =.17 and P =.64). The cumulative incidence of relapse was 24% at 2 years, and there was statistically no significant difference between patients with and without sMPMTs (P =.84). Results of multivariate analysis showed that presence of sMPMTs was not a significant prognostic factor for OS, DFS, and relapse [Hazard ratio (HR) 1.48 95%CI (0.65-3.38), P=.35; HR 0.97 95%CI (0.46-2.10), P=.97; HR 0.79 95%CI (0.29-2.14), P=.65]. In patients with sMPMTs, the order of treatment was not a significant prognostic factor. On the other hand, discontinuation of treatment was a marginal favorable factor, which might reflect a selection bias.

Conclusions

Existence of sMPMTs was not a significant risk factor for patients with newly diagnosed hematological malignancies. It is important to provide adequate treatment for both hematological malignancy and solid tumor at physician’s discretion.

Clinical trial identification

NA

Legal entity responsible for the study

Satoshi Nishiwaki

Funding

None

Disclosure

All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.