The Netherlands journal of medicine · 2013
A survey on diagnostic methods and treatment strategies used in patients with Waldenström's macroglobulinaemia in The Netherlands.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Klodzinska S, Vos J M I, Kersten M J, Wijermans P, Minnema M C
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Waldenström's macroglobulinaemia (WM) is defined as a lymphoplasmacytic lymphoma primarily located in the bone marrow, accompanied by an immunoglobulin M (IgM) monoclonal protein in the serum. The symptoms are highly variable, which can sometimes lead to a diagnostic delay. Currently, there is a wide range of therapeutic options used for the management of WM but no approved therapeutic agents are available specifically for this disease.
METHODS: An online survey was prepared and sent out to haematologists and haemato-oncologists in The Netherlands, together with an invitational letter to participate. Information was gathered about the preferred methods of diagnosing and treating patients with WM in general, and about the last WM patient diagnosed in their department.
RESULTS: 83 (31.8%) responses were obtained, out of which 68 (81.9%) contained responses to all three parts of the survey. The respondents most commonly used either rituximab-CVP or chlorambucil as first-line treatment, whereas rituximab in combination with purine analogues was the most frequently applied second-line treatment. The prevention of an IgM 'flare' was managed by the respondents in various ways, and rituximab maintenance treatment was not commonly used.
CONCLUSION: This survey indicates that in general the diagnostic methods and treatment options for WM are well known to a representative number of Dutch haematologists. The areas of uncertainty are knowledge about asymptomatic vs symptomatic disease, risk of hyperviscosity in relation to IgM level, and the occurrence and prevention of an IgM 'flare'. These issues should be addressed in clinical research and guidelines to improve care for WM patients in The Netherlands.
METHODS: An online survey was prepared and sent out to haematologists and haemato-oncologists in The Netherlands, together with an invitational letter to participate. Information was gathered about the preferred methods of diagnosing and treating patients with WM in general, and about the last WM patient diagnosed in their department.
RESULTS: 83 (31.8%) responses were obtained, out of which 68 (81.9%) contained responses to all three parts of the survey. The respondents most commonly used either rituximab-CVP or chlorambucil as first-line treatment, whereas rituximab in combination with purine analogues was the most frequently applied second-line treatment. The prevention of an IgM 'flare' was managed by the respondents in various ways, and rituximab maintenance treatment was not commonly used.
CONCLUSION: This survey indicates that in general the diagnostic methods and treatment options for WM are well known to a representative number of Dutch haematologists. The areas of uncertainty are knowledge about asymptomatic vs symptomatic disease, risk of hyperviscosity in relation to IgM level, and the occurrence and prevention of an IgM 'flare'. These issues should be addressed in clinical research and guidelines to improve care for WM patients in The Netherlands.