Chimeric Antigen Receptor T-Cell Therapy for Hematologic Malignancies: A Practical Review.

Chimeric antigen receptor T-cell (CAR-T) therapy has become an established therapeutic approach for the treatment of hematologic malignancies. The field continues to evolve rapidly and newer-generation constructs are being designed to enhance proliferative capacity, and achieve long-term persistence and greater efficacy with an overall lower incidence of toxicity. Initial clinical application of CAR-T therapies has focused on relapsed and/or refractory hematologic malignancies, and Food and Drug Administration-approved CAR-T products targeting CD19 are available for B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia and low- and high-grade B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma, and targeting B-cell maturation antigen are available for multiple myeloma. Cytokine release syndrome and immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome have been recognized as class specific toxicities associated with these novel therapies. In this review, we focus on the clinical application of CAR-T therapies in adult patients with hematologic malignancies, including access issues, outpatient administration, and appropriate timing for referring a patient to a CAR-T treatment center.

Allogeneic haematopoietic cell transplant in patients with relapsed/refractory anaplastic large cell lymphoma.

The prognosis of relapsed/refractory (R/R) anaplastic large cell lymphoma (ALCL) is poor. Large studies evaluating outcomes of allogeneic haematopoietic cell transplantation (allo-HCT) in systemic R/R ALCL are not available. Using the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research (CIBMTR) database, we evaluated outcomes of 182 adults (aged ≥18 years) with R/R ALCL undergoing allo-HCT between 2008 and 2019. Non-relapse mortality (NRM), disease relapse/progression (REL), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) were modelled using Cox proportional hazards models. The median (range) follow-up of survivors was 62 (3-148) months. The 1-year NRM was 18%. The 5-year REL, PFS and OS were 32%, 41% and 56% respectively. On multivariable regression analysis African American race (hazard ratio [HR] 2.7, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.6-4.8; p < 0.001) and refractory disease at allo-HCT (HR 3.2, 95% CI 1.6-6.2; p < 0.001) were predictive of inferior OS. Similarly, African-American race (HR 2.1, 95% CI 1.3-3.4; p = 0.003), other minority race (HR 2.5, 95% CI 1.2-5.3; p = 0.02) and refractory disease (HR 2.2, 95% CI 1.2-4.3; p = 0.01) were predictive of inferior PFS. These data, demonstrate that allo-HCT can result in durable disease control in a sizable proportion of patients with R/R ALCL. Refractory disease and racial minority status predicted inferior allo-HCT outcomes. Whether the inferior outcomes of racial minorities with R/R ALCL after allo-HCT are driven by differences in disease biology or disparities in post allo-HCT care, or both, requires further investigation.

ASTCT Clinical Practice Recommendations for Transplantation and Cellular Therapies in Multiple Myeloma.

Over the past decade, therapeutic options in multiple myeloma (MM) have changed dramatically. Given the unprecedented efficacy of novel agents, the role of hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) in MM remains under scrutiny. Rapid advances in myeloma immunotherapy including the recent approval of chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy will impact the MM therapeutic landscape. The American Society for Transplantation and Cellular Therapy convened an expert panel to formulate clinical practice recommendations for role, timing, and sequencing of autologous (auto-HCT), allogeneic (allo-HCT) and CAR T-cell therapy for patients with newly diagnosed (NDMM) and relapsed/refractory MM (RRMM). The RAND-modified Delphi method was used to generate consensus statements. Twenty consensus statements were generated. The panel endorsed continued use of auto-HCT consolidation for patients with NDMM as a standard-of-care option, whereas in the front line allo-HCT and CAR-T were not recommended outside the setting of clinical trial. For patients not undergoing auto-HCT upfront, the panel recommended its use in first relapse. Lenalidomide as a single agent was recommended for maintenance especially for standard risk patients. In the RRMM setting, the panel recommended the use of CAR-T in patients with 4 or more prior lines of therapy. The panel encouraged allo-HCT in RRMM setting only in the context of clinical trial. The panel found RAND-modified Delphi methodology effective in providing a formal framework for developing consensus recommendations for the timing and sequence of cellular therapies for MM.

A phase I/II study of the combination of panobinostat and carfilzomib in patients with relapsed or relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma: Final analysis of second dose-expansion cohort.

The maximum tolerated dose of the panobinostat and carfilzomib combination in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) was not reached in our previous dose-escalation study. We report additional dose levels in the phase I/II, single-arm, multicenter, standard 3 + 3 dose-escalation expansion-cohort study (NCT01496118). Patients with RRMM were treated with panobinostat 30 mg, carfilzomib 20/56 mg/m2 (N = 3), or panobinostat 20 mg, carfilzomib 20/56 mg/m2 (N = 33). Treatment cycles lasted 28 days; panobinostat: days 1, 3, 5, 15, 17, 19; carfilzomib: days 1, 2, 8, 9, 15, 16. For dose level 6 (DL 6), median age was 63 years (range, 49-91 years), 60.6% were male, 42.4% were high risk. Patients received a median of two prior therapies (range 1-7); proteasome inhibitors (PI; 100%), immunomodulatory imide drugs (IMiD; 78.8%), and stem cell transplant (36.4%); 48.5%, 51.1%, and 24.2% were refractory to prior PI or prior IMiD treatment or both, respectively. Patients completed a median of seven (range 1-40) treatment cycles. Overall response rate (primary endpoint) of evaluable patients in the expansion cohort (N = 32): 84.4%; clinical benefit rate: 90.6%. With a median follow-up of 26.1 months (range, 0-72.5 months), median (95% CI) progression-free survival, time-to-progression and overall survival of patients was 10.3 (6.1, 13.9), 11.7 (5.6, 14.5), and 44.6 (20.8, N/A) months, respectively. Common adverse events (AEs) included thrombocytopenia (78.8%), nausea (63.6%), fatigue (63.6%), diarrhea (51.5%), and vomiting (51.5%). Seven patients had serious treatment-related AEs. There was one treatment-related death. In conclusion, panobinostat plus carfilzomib is an effective steroid-sparing regimen for RRMM.

Anti-Platelet-Derived Growth Factor Receptor Alpha Chain Antibodies Predict for Response to Nilotinib in Steroid-Refractory or -Dependent Chronic Graft-Versus-Host Disease.

Imatinib has clinical activity in chronic graft-versus-host disease (cGVHD), a significant complication of allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplant. Nilotinib is a tyrosine kinase inhibitor that targets the same receptors as imatinib but with different affinities. We tested the hypothesis that nilotinib is safe and has clinical activity in cGVHD. Thirty-three participants were enrolled in a phase I/II dose escalation and dose extension clinical trial of nilotinib for the treatment of steroid-refractory or- dependent cGVHD (ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01155817). We assessed safety, clinical response, and pretreatment anti-platelet-derived growth factor receptor alpha chain (anti-PDGFRA) antibody levels. The 200-mg dose was identified as the maximum tolerated dose and used for the phase II dose extension study. At 6 months the incidence of failure-free survival (FFS), cGVHD progression, and nilotinib intolerance resulting in its discontinuation was 50%, 23%, and 23%, respectively. cGVHD responses in skin, joints, and mouth were observed at 3 and 6 months based on improvement in respective National Institutes of Health organ severity scores. Pretreatment anti-PDGFRA antibody levels ≥ .150 optical density as measured by ELISA correlated with longer FFS time (P < .0005) and trended with time until cGVHD progression (P < .06) but not drug intolerance. Nilotinib may be effective for corticosteroid-resistant or -refractory cGVHD in some patients, but its use is limited by intolerable side effects. Selection of patients with high pretreatment anti-PDGFRA antibody levels might improve the risk-to-benefit ratio of nilotinib and better justify its side effects.

Managing Tumor Lysis Syndrome in the Era of Novel Cancer Therapies.

Abstract Tumor lysis syndrome (TLS) is a potentially life-threatening emergency that can develop rapidly after the release of intracellular contents from lysed malignant cells. The advent of novel and targeted therapies that have improved tumor-killing efficacy has the potential to increase the risk of TLS when used as part of front-line therapy. A recent review of TLS risk in patients with hematologic malignancies treated with newer targeted agents highlighted the need to revisit TLS risk stratification and to describe the practical challenges of TLS prevention, treatment, and monitoring. Although this era of rapid development of novel cancer therapies provides new hope for patients with hematologic malignancies, it is essential to be prepared for TLS because monitoring and prophylaxis can almost always prevent severe and life-threatening consequences. Heightened awareness of the development of TLS with novel and targeted agents, accompanied by aggressive hydration and rational, risk-appropriate management, are the keys to successful outcomes.

Tumor lysis syndrome in the era of novel and targeted agents in patients with hematologic malignancies: a systematic review.

Effective new treatments are now available for patients with hematologic malignancies. However, their propensity to cause tumor lysis syndrome (TLS) has not been systematically examined. A literature search identified published Phase I-III clinical trials of monoclonal antibodies (otlertuzumab, brentuximab, obinutuzumab, ibritumomab, ofatumumab); tyrosine kinase inhibitors (alvocidib [flavopiridol], dinaciclib, ibrutinib, nilotinib, dasatinib, idelalisib, venetoclax [ABT-199]); proteasome inhibitors (oprozomib, carfilzomib); chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cells; and the proapoptotic agent lenalidomide. Abstracts from major congresses were also reviewed. Idelalisib and ofatumumab had no reported TLS. TLS incidence was ≤5 % with brentuximab vedotin (for anaplastic large-cell lymphoma), carfilzomib and lenalidomide (for multiple myeloma), dasatinib (for acute lymphoblastic leukemia), and oprozomib (for various hematologic malignancies). TLS incidences were 8.3 and 8.9 % in two trials of venetoclax (for chronic lymphocytic leukemia [CLL]) and 10 % in trials of CAR T cells (for B-cell malignancies) and obinutuzumab (for non-Hodgkin lymphoma). TLS rates of 15 % with dinaciclib and 42 and 53 % with alvocidib (with sequential cytarabine and mitoxantrone) were seen in trials of acute leukemias. TLS mitigation was employed routinely in clinical trials of alvocidib and lenalidomide. However, TLS mitigation strategies were not mentioned or stated only in general terms for many studies of other agents. The risk of TLS persists in the current era of novel and targeted therapy for hematologic malignancies and was seen to some extent with most agents. Our findings underscore the importance of continued awareness, risk assessment, and prevention to reduce this serious potential complication of effective anticancer therapy.

Molecular prognostic markers for adult acute myeloid leukemia with normal cytogenetics.

Acute myeloid leukemia (AML) is a heterogenous disorder that results from a block in the differentiation of hematopoietic progenitor cells along with uncontrolled proliferation. In approximately 60% of cases, specific recurrent chromosomal aberrations can be identified by modern cytogenetic techniques. This cytogenetic information is the single most important tool to classify patients at their initial diagnosis into three prognostic categories: favorable, intermediate, and poor risk. Currently, favorable risk AML patients are usually treated with contemporary chemotherapy while poor risk AML patients receive allogeneic stem cell transplantation if suitable stem cell donors exist. The largest subgroup of AML patients (aproximately 40%) have no identifiable cytogenetic abnormalities and are classified as intermediate risk. The optimal therapeutic strategies for these patients are still largely unclear. Recently, it is becoming increasingly evident that it is possible to identify a subgroup of poorer risk patients among those with normal cytogenic AML (NC-AML). Molecular risk stratification for NC-AML patients may be possible due to mutations of NPM1, FLT3, MLL, and CEBPalpha as well as alterations in expression levels of BAALC, MN1, ERG, and AF1q. Further prospective studies are needed to confirm if poorer risk NC-AML patients have improved clinical outcomes after more aggressive therapy.