Review of the safety and feasibility of rapid infusion of rituximab

Drug delivery improvements to enable a flexible care setting for monoclonal antibody medications in oncology - Analogue-based decision framework

INTRODUCTION

The substantial acceleration in healthcare spending together with the expenditures to manage the COVID19 pandemic demand drug delivery solutions that enable a flexible care setting for high-dose monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) in oncology.

AREAS COVERED

This expert opinion introduces an analogue-based framework applied to guide decision-making for associated product improvements for mAb medications that are either already authorized or in late-stage clinical development. The four pillars of this framework comprise (1) the drug delivery profile of current and emerging treatments in the market, (2) the needs and preferences of people treated with mAbs, (3) existing healthcare infrastructures, and (4) country-dependent reimbursement and procurement models. The following product optimization examples for mAb-based treatments are evaluated based on original research and review articles in the field: subcutaneous formulations, an established drug delivery modality to reduce parenteral dosing complexity, fixed-dose combinations, an emerging concept to complement combination therapy, and (connected) on-body delivery systems, an identified future opportunity to support dosing outside of a controlled healthcare institutional environment.

EXPERT OPINION

Leveraging existing synergies and learnings from other disease areas is a measure to reduce associated development and commercialization costs and thus to provide sustainable product offerings already at the initial launch of a medication.

Safety and tolerability of a 90-minute rapid infusion of Sandoz biosimilar rituximab in B-cell lymphoproliferative disorders in a real-world setting

Although rituximab is generally well-tolerated, infusion-related reactions (IRRs) are common with the initial dose when administered intravenously according to standard recommendations. To prevent IRRs, premedication and low-speed infusion rates have been recommended. Consequently, intravenous (i.v.) infusion of rituximab can become a labor-intensive process. Rapid i.v. rituximab infusion over 90 min has demonstrated a favorable safety profile for the second and subsequent infusions during the course of therapy. The aim of this study was to investigate the safety and tolerability of 90-min rapid infusion of Sandoz rituximab biosimilar (SDZ-RTX) for patients with CD20+ lymphoma or chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). We retrospectively reviewed all patients with CD20+ lymphoma or CLL who received SDZ-RTX infusions in 90 min from July 2019 to July 2021 at seven Spanish hospitals. The primary end point was the incidence of IRRs. We identified 124 patients and 576 rapid administrations of SDZ-RTX, with an average of five rapid infusions per patient. Most rapid infusions of SDZ-RTX were in combination with CHOP/CHOP-like therapy (48.4%), followed by SDZ-RTX alone (15.1%), in combination with bendamustine (14.5%), or with other regimens (22%). The 90-min SDZ-RTX infusion schedule was well-tolerated with no grade 3/4 IRRs. The incidence of any grade IRR during the first rapid infusion was 1% (5 grade 1 IRRs and 1 grade 2 IRR). In conclusion, rapid 90-min i.v. administration of SDZ-RTX for the second and subsequent infusions during the course of therapy is well-tolerated in patients with CD20+ lymphoma or CLL.

Impact of electronic interventions on guideline concordant ordering of rituximab infusion rate

INTRODUCTION

Rituximab carries a boxed warning for severe or fatal infusion reactions; most occurring with the initial infusion. Prior studies established that if the initial rituximab infusion is tolerated, subsequent infusions can be given safely over 90 min. The University of Chicago Medicine (UCM) did not have a standardized method to document infusion reactions for outpatient chemotherapy patients, making it challenging for providers to know a patients' eligibility for rapid infusion. This quality improvement project focused on a series of interventions to improve documentation and electronic ordering of rituximab.

METHODS

A flowsheet for nurses to record patients' tolerance of chemotherapy infusions was created within the electronic health record (EHR). Following results of flowsheet impact, a second intervention was implemented to modify ordering of rituximab. The primary endpoint was the incidence of guideline concordant rate ordering of rituximab. Secondary endpoints included the incidence of accurate chair time scheduling pre- and post-interventions and nursing compliance with flowsheet documentation.

RESULTS

Prior to flowsheet implementation, 85% of patients were infused at the guideline concordant rate, compared to 79% post-implementation. Prior to modification of rituximab ordering in the EHR, 85% of patients were infused at the guideline concordant rate, compared to 87% after implementation. Complete nursing documentation was done 89% of the time when the flowsheet was utilized, compared to 11% pre-interventions.

CONCLUSION

No difference in primary or secondary endpoints was found following our interventions. However, the infusion documentation flowsheet, when used, provided more complete reaction data compared to when it was not used.

The safety and clinical effectiveness of rapid infusion with CT-P10 in patients with non-Hodgkin's lymphoma or chronic lymphocytic leukemia: A retrospective non-interventional post-authorization safety study in Europe

Rapid infusion (RI) of the rituximab biosimilar CT-P10 is currently only an approved treatment regimen for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis. Although both CT-P10 and reference rituximab are known to be frequently administered using a RI regimen (≤90 min) in clinical practice, published data on the safety of RI of CT-P10 in patients with NHL and CLL are limited. Hence, this study collected real-world safety and effectiveness data on RI-CT-P10 from the medical records of 196 patients with NHL or CLL in 10 European centers, 6 months after the date of the first RI (index date); the infusion-related reaction (IRR) rate was compared to previously published data. Ten percent (95% confidence interval 6%-15%; n = 20/196) of patients experienced an infusion-related reaction (IRR) on day 1-2 post-index, which was not significantly different (p = 0.45) to the IRR rate for rituximab described in a previous meta-analysis (8.8%). During the observation period, 2% of patients experienced grade 3-5 IRRs and 85% (n = 166) experienced an adverse event (non-IRR). The most common reason for discontinuation of first-line CT-P10 was planned treatment completion (81%; n = 158). Complete response and partial response to CT-P10 was observed in 74% (n = 142/192) and 22% (n = 42/192) of patients, respectively. The results of this real-world study demonstrate that the safety and effectiveness profile of RI-CT-P10 is similar to RI of reference rituximab and therefore support the current use of RI-CT-P10 in patients with NHL and CLL.

A novel rituximab administration protocol to minimize infusion-related adverse reactions in patients with B-cell lymphoma

Background Infusion-related reactions (IRRs) during rituximab administration are occasionally severe and remain problematic in oncology practice. Aim To establish a safer, risk-stratified rituximab protocol for patients with B-cell lymphoma. Method We stratified patients into low-, moderate-, and high-risk groups according to the number of risk factors for IRRs, specifically, low-grade histology and bulky tumors (> 10 cm): Then, the administrating schedule of rituximab (375 mg/m², diluted in 1 mg/mL concentration) was individualized. For the first rituximab cycle, the low- and moderate-risk groups underwent conventional infusion #1 (25-200 mg/h, ~4.3 h), and the high-risk group underwent long infusion (25-100 mg/h, 6.8 h). Patients in the low-, moderate-, and high-risk groups without IRRs in the first cycle underwent short infusion (100-400 mg/h, 2.3 h), conventional infusion #2 (100-200 mg/h, 3.5 h), and conventional infusion #1, respectively. Patients with IRRs in the first cycle received a second rituximab cycle with the same schedule as the first cycle. The procedure for the third cycle was at the attending physician's discretion. Results Among 81 patients, the overall incidence of IRRs was 28%. IRR incidences in the low- (n = 39), moderate- (n = 35), and high-risk groups (n = 7) were 31%, 20%, and 57%, respectively. All IRRs were grade ≤ 2. The overall conversion rate to short infusion in the third cycle was 54%, without any IRRs. Conclusions Our step-by-step rituximab protocol demonstrated a fewer incidence of severe IRRs among B-cell lymphoma patients receiving rituximab.

Rapid rituximab infusion is safe and well tolerated in malignant and benign disease

INTRODUCTION

Although the safety and feasibility of rapid rituximab administration has been demonstrated for B-cell malignancies, there is scant data in the literature to support its use in patients with benign diseases.

OBJECTIVE

To identify the incidence of infusion-related reaction with rapid rituximab administration in malignant and benign disease. Secondary objective was to determine the infusion time saved between standard administration and rapid rituximab administration.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was conducted by reviewing electronic medical records from December 2018 to April 2020. Adult patients who received at least one dose of rapid rituximab were included.

RESULTS

A total of 63 patents were included. The incidence of an infusion-related reaction with rapid rituximab was 1.6%. The one patient who reacted had a diagnosis of neuromyelitis optica. The mean infusion time saved was 2.9 hours (95% CI: 2.7-3.1; P-value <0.001).

CONCLUSION

The use of the rapid rituximab administration is safe and well tolerated in both benign and malignant disease.

Clinical strategies for optimizing infusion center care through a pandemic

The national pandemic resulting from the novel coronavirus, COVID-19, has made the delivery of care for patients with cancer a challenge. There are competing risks of mortality from cancer versus serious complications and higher risk of death from COVID-19 in immunocompromised hosts. Furthermore, compounding these concerns is the inadequate supply of personal protective equipment, decreased hospital capacity, and paucity of effective treatments or vaccines to date for COVID-19. Guidance measures and recommendations have been published by national organizations aiming to facilitate the delivery of care in a safe and effective manner, many of which, are permanently adoptable interventions. Given the critical importance to continue chemotherapy, there remains additional interventions to further enhance patient safety while conserving healthcare resources such as adjustments in medication administration, reduction in laboratory or drug monitoring, and home delivery of specialty infusions. In this manuscript, we outline how to implement these actionable interventions of chemotherapy and supportive care delivery to further enhance the current precautionary measures while maintaining safe and effective patient care. Coupled with current published standards, these strategies can help alleviate the numerous challenges associated with this pandemic.

Adaptable antibody Nanoworms designed for non-Hodgkin lymphoma

Despite advancements in antibody-based therapies for non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL), at least two major therapeutic needs remain unmet: i) heterogenous activation of host immunity towards B cell NHL; and ii) lack of antibody-based therapeutics for T cell NHL. This study explores the molecular characteristics of an adaptable modality called antibody Nanoworms and demonstrates their receptor clustering activity as a means to overcome and address abovementioned needs. To test this, four selected therapeutic receptors of B cell (CD19, CD20, HLA-DR10) and T cell (CD3) NHL were targeted by Nanoworms. Regardless of the target or the cell type, Nanoworms inherently clustered bound receptors on the cell-surface through their multivalency and activated intracellular signaling without any secondary crosslinker. As a sole agent, Nanoworms induced apoptosis by clustering CD20 or HLA-DR10, and arrested the cell cycle upon CD19 clustering. Interestingly, CD3 clustering was particularly advantageous in inducing activation-induced cell death (AICD) in an aggressive form of T cell NHL named Sézary syndrome that is fatal, limited in antibody-based therapeutics, and has poor outcomes to traditional chemotherapy. As Nanoworms can be easily designed to target any receptor for which a scFv is available, they may provide solutions and add therapeutic novelty to underserved diseases.

Rapid-Infusion Rituximab in a Pediatric Population

OBJECTIVES The use of rapid rituximab infusion in certain pediatric populations has generally been regarded as safe. The safety of our institution's rapid rituximab protocol was evaluated.

METHODS The primary end point was the number of and severity of adverse drug reactions. Secondary end points included a description of the patient population defined by the indication, dose, and number of rituximab infusions administered. Additionally, the difference in infusion times in hours of those receiving rapid rituximab infusions versus the theoretical infusion time of subsequent administration rate schedules was defined.

RESULTS A total of 88 infusions for 22 patients were reviewed. No dose-limiting adverse reactions were observed. Three patients experienced grade 1 isolated infusion-related adverse events during a single infusion encounter. Two of the three patients received additional doses of rapid rituximab infusions without incident, whereas the other patient no longer required rituximab therapy.

CONCLUSIONS The use of a 90-minute rituximab infusion protocol in pediatric patients with non-rheumatic diseases was well tolerated.

Tolerance and safety of rapid 2-hour infusion of rituximab in patients with kidney-affecting autoimmune diseases and glomerulonephritides: a single-centre experience

Objective

According to the manufacturer's documentation, rituximab (RTX) should be administered with slow infusion rates to prevent infusion-related adverse events (AEs). Nevertheless, slow infusions are time-consuming and uncomfortable for patients and medical staff. Therefore, faster infusion rates have been studied and proven safe and well tolerated in lymphomas and rheumatoid arthritis (RA). A small amount of data is available for rapid RTX infusions in non-RA autoimmune diseases.

Methods

Beginning in September 2015, all RTX-reated patients in our centre and willing to participate, were switched from slow RTX infusions (4.25 hours, given at least once to all patients) to fast infusions (2 hours). A total of 85 RTX 2-hour infusions was administered to 53 patients with autoimmune diseases with renal involvement and selected primary glomerulonephritides (26 ANCA-associated vasculitis, nine systemic lupus erythematodes, seven membranous nephropathy, five IgM nephropathy and six other autoimmune disease). Most of the patients received chronic corticosteroid therapy. The prednisone equivalent dose median (IQR) was 0.1 (0.0-0.2) mg/kg/day.

Results

Rapid RTX infusions were generally well tolerated. Only two infusion-related AEs were recorded: one Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, grade 3, (lower back pain and hypotension followed by chills necessitating methylprednisolone and dipyrone administration) and one grade 1 (subjective intolerance). The AEs frequency does not differ from other studies with rapid RTX infusions in patients with lymphomas and RA.

Conclusions

Our experience supported other published data and provides evidence concerning the safety of non-initial RTX 2-hour infusion which can be administered without raising the infusion-related AEs rate in patients with kidney-affecting autoimmune diseases and glomerulonephritides.

Rapid infusion of rituximab is well tolerated in children with hematologic, oncologic, and rheumatologic disorders

Traditional administration of rituximab requires careful titration and may involve many hours to minimize the risk of reactions. The objective of this study was to evaluate the safety of rapid infusions of rituximab in a pilot group of children with hematologic, oncologic, and rheumatologic disorders, and to determine the incidence of rate-related infusion reactions. Twenty patients enrolled in the study. All patients tolerated the rapid infusion of rituximab and no patient had an infusion-related reaction. We conclude that rapid infusions of rituximab are well tolerated and safe in our pilot group of patients.

A Retrospective Study on Infusion-Related Reactions to Rituximab in a Heterogeneous Pediatric Population

OBJECTIVES

To assess risks and outcomes of infusion-related reactions to rituximab in a heterogeneous pediatric population.

METHODS

All patients who received rituximab between July 2010 and July 2012 were retrieved from the pharmacy software and included for analysis. Data were collected according to 4 categories: demographic data, infusion data, infusion-related reactions, and biological data considered as risk factors (i.e., absolute lymphocyte count, lactate dehydrogenase levels).

RESULTS

Sixty-seven patients treated for a total of 17 different indications were included. A total of 282 rituximab infusions were administered. Forty-three, mostly grade 1 or 2, infusion-related reactions occurred in 30 patients. Reactions occurred in 39.2% "first-dose" infusions, but this rate dropped drastically to 2.7% in subsequent doses. In multivariate analysis, high absolute lymphocyte count was the only risk factor for infusion-related reaction (OR = 1.03; 95% CI: 1.01-1.06; p = 0.014).

CONCLUSIONS

Rituximab infusion-related reactions in a heterogeneous pediatric population were frequent on first infusion, but rare in subsequent ones. Overall, these reactions were mild and manageable through pharmacological treatment. Patients with an elevated absolute lymphocyte count before infusion were at greater risk for an infusion-related reaction.

Safety of infusing rituximab at a more rapid rate in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: results from the RATE-RA study

BACKGROUND

As recommended in the current prescribing information, rituximab infusions in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) take 4.25 hours for the first infusion and 3.25 hours for subsequent infusions, which is a burden on patients and the health care system. We therefore evaluated the safety of infusing rituximab at a faster rate for an infusion period of 2 hours in patients with RA.

METHODS

Patients with an inadequate response to anti-TNF who were rituximab-naive or -experienced received 2 courses of rituximab: Infusion 1 (Day 1) was administered over the standard 4.25 hours, and Infusions 2 (Day 15), 3 (Day 168) and 4 (Day 182) were administered over a faster 2-hour period. The primary endpoint was incidence of infusion-related reactions (IRRs) associated with Infusion 2.

RESULTS

Of the 351 patients enrolled, 87% and 13% were rituximab-naive and -experienced, respectively. The incidence (95% CI) of IRRs associated with Infusion 1 was 16.2% (12.5%, 20.5%) and consistent with weighted historical incidence of 20.7% (19.4%, 22.1%). The incidence (95% CI) of IRRs associated with Infusions 2, 3, and 4 compared with respective weighted historical incidences at the standard infusion rate was 6.5% (4.1%, 9.7%) vs 8.1% (7.2%, 9.1%); 5.9% (3.5%, 9.3%) vs 11.5% (10.3%, 12.8%); and 0.7 (0.1%, 2.6%) vs 5.0% (4.2%, 6.0%), respectively. All IRRs were grade 1 or 2, except for 3 grade 3 IRRs associated with Infusion 1 and 2 grade 3 IRRs associated with Infusion 2. Four patients experienced a total of 5 grade 3 IRRs; 3 of these patients continued on to received subsequent infusions at the faster rate. There were no serious IRRs.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrated that rituximab can be administered at the faster infusion rate at the second and subsequent infusions without increasing the rate or severity of IRRs.

Rapid infusion rituximab for maintenance therapy: is it feasible?

Rituximab is an anti-CD-20 monoclonal antibody used in the management of lymphoproliferative disorders. The use of maintenance rituximab has improved progression free survival and overall survival in follicular lymphomas. Although rapid rituximab infusions have been studied extensively, there is little data on the use of rapid infusions during maintenance therapy for low grade lymphomas. The primary objective of this retrospective analysis was to evaluate the incidence of Grade 3 and 4 toxicities with maintenance rapid infusion rituximab according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4 (CTC v. 4). Secondary objectives included evaluating all grade infusion related adverse events and correlation of adverse events with varying schedules of rituximab maintenance therapy. All patients who received rapid infusion rituximab as maintenance therapy for low grade lymphoma between December 2007 and November 2011 were included. Rapid rituximab infusions were administered over 90 minutes. Demographic, laboratory and clinical data were collected. A total of 109 patients received 647 rapid rituximab infusions. Three patients experienced an adverse reaction which resulted in one grade 1 infusion reaction and three grade 3 infusion reactions. No patients required hospitalization. All 3 patients received pharmacological and/or supportive care to relieve symptoms associated with the reaction.

Peri-infusional adverse reactions to rituximab in patients with non-Hodgkin's lymphoma

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Rituximab is effective in the treatment of B-cell lymphoid malignances and some autoimmune diseases. Most patients receiving the first infusion of rituximab experience symptoms that decrease with subsequent infusions. It is assumed that the first dose of rituximab should be infused slowly during a 6-h period and during 4-h periods subsequently. The aim of the study was to evaluate the frequency and severity of adverse reactions to rituximab in patients with non-Hodgkin's lymphoma.

METHODS

This was an intensive pharmacovigilance prospective, observational, open labeled, multicenter cohort study conducted in 12 hospitals. Adults requiring treatment with rituximab (375 mg/m(2) body surface area) alone or with chemotherapy were included. Adverse reactions were graded according to the National Cancer Institute scale, whereas causality was established using the Naranjo algorithm. Infusions were classified as fast (0-90 min) and slow (>91 min). Fast infusions were used to analyze the associated adverse reactions.

RESULTS

We included 550 adult patients. Total infusion episodes were 1,749 and 52 adverse reactions were reported in 22 patients (4%). Thirty-one of 52 adverse reactions occurred during the first infusion. The risk of adverse reactions was lower with the fast infusions (10/52 adverse reactions [19.23%]). All adverse effects were mild. Twenty-three adverse effects were possibly related to rituximab.

CONCLUSIONS

Rituximab can be infused at a fast rate without an increase in adverse reactions. Peri-infusional adverse reactions are similar to those described for other populations but the incidence rate is lower. Rituximab has a favorable safety profile in patients with non-Hodgkin's lymphoma.

Rituximab faster infusion for patients with non-Hodgkin's lymphoma in the United States: implications for nursing practice

The majority of follicular non-Hodgkin's lymphoma patients in the United States receive an initial treatment strategy that includes the infusion of rituximab. Data from a phase III multicenter clinical trial led to the 2012 US Food and Drug Administration approval of a 90-minute infusion of rituximab (Rituxan) starting at Cycle 2 for patients with non-Hodgkin's lymphoma who did not experience a Grade 3 or 4 infusion-related adverse event during Cycle 1. A review of literature was undertaken to identify existing evidence regarding both the safety of rituximab faster infusion and its impact on nursing practice. The aim of this article is to stimulate discussion and lead to implementation of evidence-based nursing practices to improve the delivery of patient care.

Rituximab therapy in nephrotic syndrome: implications for patients' management

Rituximab offers an alternative to current immunosuppressive therapies for difficult-to-treat nephrotic syndrome. The best outcomes are seen in patients with steroid-dependent nephrotic syndrome who have failed to respond to multiple therapies. By contrast, the benefits of rituximab therapy are limited in patients with steroid-resistant nephrotic syndrome, particularly those with focal segmental glomerulosclerosis (FSGS). Therapy with plasma exchange and one or two doses of rituximab has shown success in patients with recurrent FSGS. Young patients and those with normal serum albumin at recurrence of nephrotic syndrome are most likely to respond to rituximab therapy. A substantial proportion of rituximab-treated patients with idiopathic membranous nephropathy show complete or partial remission of proteinuria, and reduced levels of phospholipase A(2) receptor autoantibodies, which are implicated in the pathogenesis of this disorder. Successful rituximab therapy induces prolonged remission and enables discontinuation of other medications without substantially increasing the risk of infections and other serious adverse events. However, the available evidence of efficacy of rituximab therapy is derived chiefly from small case series and requires confirmation in prospective, randomized, controlled studies that define the indications for use and predictors of response to this therapy.

Accelerated infusion rates of rituximab are well tolerated and safe in rheumatology practice: a single-centre experience

Due to the possible risk of infusion reactions of rituximab (RTX), a slow infusion rate (total infusion time, 255 min) is suggested for rheumatological use. However, especially in oncology field, accelerated infusion of RTX is reported to be well tolerated and safe. The aim of our study was to evaluate whether accelerated infusion rates of RTX would similarly be safe and tolerable in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients and other off-label rheumatological indications. All patients treated with RTX for RA and other autoimmune diseases between May 2011 and January 2012 were recruited to the study. Each treatment course consisted of two RTX 1,000 mg infusions, 2 weeks apart. Total time of the infusion for the first cycle was 255 min. Second and subsequent infusions were administered over 120 min as follows: 0-30 min, 100 mg; 30-60 min, 200 mg; 60-90 min, 300 mg; and 90-120 min, 400 mg. The Clinical Trials Classification of Adverse Events (CTCAE) version 4.3 was used to categorise side effects. The study population comprised 68 patients [F/M, 59:9; mean age, 52.4 (10.6) years]: 60 with RA, 4 with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), 1 with non-Hodgkin's lymphoma with SLE and 3 with vasculitis. A total of 77 fast infusions were administered. Eleven patients (16.2 %) had taken a fast infusion at the first course. A total of nine patients experienced at least one AE. Seven patients had a reaction on the first infusion (infusion-related reaction (IRR)), two patients on the second infusion and one patient on both infusions. When graded from 1 to 5 according to CTCAE v. 4.3, grade 1 IRRs were observed in a total of seven patients and grade 2 IRR in three patients. In this study of fast infusions, adverse events after RTX were mostly mild and seem to be well tolerated. Faster rituximab infusion times seem to be safe and might be incorporated into routine practice.

Clinical applications of aptamers and nucleic acid therapeutics in haematological malignancies

Haematological malignancies result from a heterogeneous mix of genetic mutations and chromosome aberrations and translocations. Targeted therapies, such as the anti-CD20 antibody rituximab, or the BCR-ABL1 inhibitor imatinib, have proven to be effective treatments in the management of some of these malignancies, though relapsing or refractory disease is still common. Nucleic acid-based therapies have also entered the clinical arena, providing an alternative, complementary approach. The forerunner of these therapies were the antisense oligonucleotides, but their scope has expanded to include short-interfering RNA (siRNA), microRNA, decoy oligonucleotides and aptamers. These can be used either as mono-therapeutics, in conjunction with current chemotherapy regimens, or in combination with each other to improve therapeutic efficacy. Not only can these nucleic acid-based therapies silence target genes, they also have the potential of restoring gene function. While challenges remain in delivering effective doses of nucleic acid in vivo, these are steadily being met, suggesting an optimistic future in the treatment of haematological malignancies. This review summarizes the application of nucleic acid-based therapeutics, particularly aptamers, in the diagnosis and treatment of haematological malignancies.