@article{GernertTonyFroehlichetal.2022, author = {Gernert, Michael and Tony, Hans-Peter and Fr{\"o}hlich, Matthias and Schwaneck, Eva Christina and Schmalzing, Marc}, title = {Immunosuppressive therapy after autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation in systemic sclerosis patients — high efficacy of Rituximab}, series = {Frontiers in Immunology}, volume = {12}, journal = {Frontiers in Immunology}, issn = {1664-3224}, doi = {10.3389/fimmu.2021.817893}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-254345}, year = {2022}, abstract = {Background Systemic sclerosis (SSc) patients often need immunosuppressive medication (IS) for disease control. If SSc is progressive despite IS, autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (aHSCT) is a treatment option for selected SSc patients. aHSCT is effective with good available evidence, but not all patients achieve a treatment-free remission after aHSCT. Thus far, data about the need of IS after aHSCT in SSc is not published. The aim of this study was to investigate the use of IS after aHSCT, its efficacy, and the occurrence of severe adverse events (SAEs). Methods Twenty-seven patients with SSc who had undergone aHSCT were included in this single-center retrospective cohort study. Clinical data, including IS, SAEs, and lung function data, were collected. Results Sixteen of 27 (59.3\%) patients received IS after aHSCT. Methotrexate, rituximab, mycophenolate, cyclophosphamide, and hydroxychloroquine were most commonly used. The main reason for starting IS was SSc progress. Nine patients received rituximab after aHSCT and showed an improvement in modified Rodnan skin score and a stabilization of lung function 2 years after rituximab. SAEs in patients with IS after aHSCT (50.0\%) were not more common than in patients without IS (54.6\%). SAEs were mostly due to SSc progress, secondary autoimmune diseases, or infections. Two deaths after aHSCT were transplantation related and three during long-term follow-up due to pulmonary arterial hypertension. Conclusion Disease progression and secondary autoimmune diseases may necessitate IS after aHSCT in SSc. Rituximab seems to be an efficacious treatment option in this setting. Long-term data on the safety of aHSCT is reassuring.}, language = {en} } @article{MerzDechowScheytetal.2020, author = {Merz, Maximilian and Dechow, Tobias and Scheyt, Mithun and Schmidt, Christian and Knop, Stefan}, title = {The clinical management of lenalidomide-based therapy in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma}, series = {Annals of Hematology}, volume = {99}, journal = {Annals of Hematology}, issn = {0939-5555}, doi = {10.1007/s00277-020-04023-4}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-231862}, pages = {1709-1725}, year = {2020}, abstract = {Lenalidomide is an integral, yet evolving, part of current treatment pathways for both transplant-eligible and transplant-ineligible patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM). It is approved in combination with dexamethasone as first-line therapy for transplant-ineligible patients with NDMM, and as maintenance treatment following autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT). Although strong clinical trial evidence has supported the integration of lenalidomide into current treatment paradigms for NDMM, applying those paradigms to individual patients and determining which patients are most likely to benefit from lenalidomide treatment are more complex. In this paper, we utilize the available clinical trial evidence to provide recommendations for patient selection and lenalidomide dosing in both the first-line setting in patients ineligible for ASCT and the maintenance setting in patients who have undergone ASCT. In addition, we provide guidance on management of those adverse events that are most commonly associated with lenalidomide treatment, and consider the optimal selection and sequencing of next-line agents following long-term frontline or maintenance treatment with lenalidomide.}, language = {en} }