Targeting TP53 disruption in chronic lymphocytic leukemia: Current strategies and future directions.

In the modern era of Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia (CLL) targeted therapy, the loss of p53 function due to genetic abnormalities remains a significant challenge. This is because even targeted agents, which are currently the mainstay of treatment for CLL, do not directly target p53 or restore its disrupted pathway. Consequently, resistance to therapy and unfavorable clinical outcomes often accompany these p53-related abnormalities. An essential goal of future clinical research should be to address the ostensibly "undruggable" p53 pathway. Currently, multiple therapeutic approaches are being explored to tackle TP53 dysfunction and improve outcomes in high-risk CLL. These approaches include the use of oncoprotein murine double minute 2 inhibitors, small-molecule p53 reactivators, exportin 1 (XPO1) inhibitors, and ataxia-telangiectasia mutated and Rad3-related (ATR) inhibitors. Combinations of these p53-targeting strategies, along with established novel therapies such as B-cell receptor or B-cell lymphoma-2 (BCL-2) inhibitors, may shape the future of therapeutic trials in this challenging-to-treat disease.

Advancements in the Treatment of CLL: The Rise of Zanubrutinib as a Preferred Therapeutic Option.

Ibrutinib, the first-in-class Bruton's tyrosine kinase inhibitor (BTKi), is a commonly deployed therapeutic option for previously untreated and relapsed/refractory (R/R) patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). The use of ibrutinib is, however, partially limited by off-target side effects. Zanubrutinib (zanu) is a second-generation BTKi with enhanced target selectivity and occupancy of the kinase binding site. The SEQUOIA study showed that zanu significantly prolonged progression-free survival (PFS) when compared to bendamustine-rituximab (BR) in treatment-naive CLL patients. More recently, data from the phase III ALPINE trial, which directly compared zanu with ibrutinib, demonstrated that zanu's advantages include an improved safety profile as well as enhanced clinical efficacy. Based on the results of the SEQUOIA and ALPINE pivotal trials, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and European Medicines Agency (EMA) licensed zanu for the treatment of patients with CLL or small lymphocytic lymphoma (SLL) in January 2023. The updated (v2.2023) National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines and the most recent German CLL algorithm suggest that zanu may replace first-generation BTKis as a preferred therapeutic option for patients with CLL/SLL due to its increased selectivity for the kinase binding site, improved therapeutic efficacy, and favorable toxicity profile. Some drug class-related characteristics such as drug resistance, low complete remission (CR) rates, and indefinite treatment duration still remain with zanu, and the results from recently completed and ongoing fixed-duration clinical trials, combining zanu with an anti-BCL2 agent, are eagerly awaited with the possible promise of a reduced treatment duration and lower financial burden.

Consensus opinion from an international group of experts on measurable residual disease in hairy cell leukemia.

A significant body of literature has been generated related to the detection of measurable residual disease (MRD) at the time of achieving complete remission (CR) in patients with hairy cell leukemia (HCL). However, due to the indolent nature of the disease as well as reports suggesting long-term survival in patients treated with a single course of a nucleoside analog albeit without evidence of cure, the merits of detection of MRD and attempts to eradicate it have been debated. Studies utilizing novel strategies in the relapse setting have demonstrated the utility of achieving CR with undetectable MRD (uMRD) in prolonging the duration of remission. Several assays including immunohistochemical analysis of bone marrow specimens, multi-parameter flow cytometry and molecular assays to detect the mutant BRAF V600E gene or the consensus primer for the immunoglobulin heavy chain gene (IGH) rearrangement have been utilized with few comparative studies. Here we provide a consensus report on the available data, the potential merits of MRD assessment in the front-line and relapse settings and recommendations on future role of MRD assessment in HCL.

Current perspectives regarding SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in chronic lymphocytic leukemia.

In immunocompetent people, the mRNA vaccines BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 have been shown to be safe and effective against coronavirus disease of 2019 (COVID-19). However, results of cohort studies and meta-analyses have indicated that the degree of humoral response to SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) appears to be lower than that observed in the general population. These inadequate responses are mainly related to the disease itself and to the immunosuppressive effect of therapies administered. In the specific context of CLL, enrolling patients with sub-optimal vaccine-response in pivotal vaccine trials could be considered as an appropriate approach to improve response to the COVID-19 vaccine. These clinical trials should also address the issues of regularity and timing of vaccine booster doses or re-vaccinations, especially in patients undergoing therapy with pathway-targeting agents and anti-CD20 monoclonal antibodies. However, since hypogammaglobulinemia is a serious consequence of CLL, patients who do not have a detectable antibody response should be natural candidates for preventive antibody therapy.

Efficacy of a third BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 vaccine dose in patients with CLL who failed standard 2-dose vaccination.

Patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) have an impaired antibody response to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination. Here, we evaluated the antibody response to a third BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine in patients with CLL/small lymphocytic lymphoma (SLL) who failed to achieve a humoral response after standard 2-dose vaccination regimen. Anti-severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) antibodies were measured 3 weeks after administration of the third dose. In 172 patients with CLL, the antibody response rate was 23.8%. Response rate among actively treated patients (12.0%; n = 12/100) was lower compared with treatment-naïve patients (40.0%; n = 16/40; OR = 4.9, 95% CI 1.9-12.9; P < .001) and patients off-therapy (40.6%; n = 13/32; OR = 5.0, 95% CI 1.8-14.1; P < .001), (P < .001). In patients actively treated with Bruton's tyrosine kinase (BTK) inhibitors or venetoclax ± anti-CD20 antibody, response rates were extremely low (15.3%, n = 9/59, and 7.7%, n = 3/39, respectively). Only 1 of the 28 patients (3.6%) treated with anti-CD20 antibodies <12 months prior to vaccination responded. In a multivariate analysis, the independent variables that were associated with response included lack of active therapy (OR = 5.6, 95% CI 2.3-13.8; P < .001) and serum immunoglobulin A levels ≥80 mg/dL (OR = 5.8, 95% CI 2.1-15.9; P < .001). In patients with CLL/SLL who failed to achieve a humoral response after standard 2-dose BNT162b2 mRNA vaccination regimen, close to a quarter responded to the third dose of vaccine. The antibody response rates were lower during active treatment and in patients with a recent exposure (<12 months prior to vaccination) to anti-CD20 therapy. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT04862806.

Safety and efficacy of the BNT162b mRNA COVID-19 vaccine in patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia.

Patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) have a suboptimal humoral response to vaccination. Recently, BNT162b2, an mRNA COVID-19 vaccine with a high efficacy of 95% in immunocompetent individuals, was introduced. We investigated the safety and efficacy of the BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 vaccine in patients with CLL from nine medical centers in Israel, Overall 400 patients were included, of whom 373 were found to be eligible for the analysis of antibody response. The vaccine appeared to be safe and only grade 1-2 adverse events were seen in 50% of the patients. Following the second dose, an antibody response was detected in 43% of the cohort. Among these CLL patients, 61% of the treatment-na ve patients responded to the vaccine, while responses developed in only 18% of those with ongoing disease, 37% of those previously treated with a BTK inhibitor and 5% of those recently given an anti-CD20 antibody. Among patients treated with BCL2 as monotherapy or in combination with anti-CD20, 62% and 14%, respectively, developed an immune response. There was a high concordance between neutralizing antibodies and positive serological response to spike protein. Based on our findings we developed a simple seven-factor score including timing of any treatment with anti-CD20, age, treatment status, and IgG, IgA, IgM and hemoglobin levels. The sum of all the above parameters can serve as a possible estimate to predict whether a given CLL patient will develop sufficient antibodies. In conclusion, the BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 vaccine was found to be safe in patients with CLL, but its efficacy is limited, particularly in treated patients.

A perspective on prognostic models in chronic lymphocytic leukemia in the era of targeted agents.

Despite the increase in the number of prognostic models currently available for evaluating patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL), their current application and utilization in clinical practice in the era of targeted agents is unclear. A critical reappraisal of recently developed prognostic models is presented in this review. The underlying CLL's genetic instability and changes in the host's health and comorbidities can all contribute to the acquisition of additional risk factors for adverse outcomes during the course of the disease. Therefore, available risk models solely based on pretreatment variables only partially predict patients' clinical outcome. A dynamic prognostic model that takes into account changes in the risk profile over time could indeed be useful in routine clinical practice. The next generation of risk assessment models should incorporate post-treatment and response biomarkers such as minimal residual disease. Finally, recent advances in the field of machine learning present novel opportunities to generate models capable of providing an individualized estimation of clinical outcomes in CLL. However, in the era of improved prognostic models, it is important to remember that these indices should supplement but not replace clinical expertise and medical decision-making.

Hairy cell leukemia and COVID-19 adaptation of treatment guidelines.

Standard treatment options in classic HCL (cHCL) result in high response rates and near normal life expectancy. However, the disease itself and the recommended standard treatment are associated with profound and prolonged immunosuppression, increasing susceptibility to infections and the risk for a severe course of COVID-19. The Hairy Cell Leukemia Foundation (HCLF) has recently convened experts and discussed different clinical strategies for the management of these patients. The new recommendations adapt the 2017 consensus for the diagnosis and management with cHCL to the current COVID-19 pandemic. They underline the option of active surveillance in patients with low but stable blood counts, consider the use of targeted and non-immunosuppressive agents as first-line treatment for cHCL, and give recommendations on preventive measures against COVID-19.

Current and emerging investigational venetoclax-based therapies in chronic lymphocytic leukemia.

Introduction: Venetoclax has emerged as a breakthrough treatment which has revolutionized the therapeutic paradigm of chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). This is primarily attributed to the efficacy of venetoclax as a time-limited, chemo-free, therapy in a field dominated by targeted agents given on a continuous schedule. Furthermore, compelling clinical data support the use of venetoclax in combination with other targeted agents in the hope of preventing drug resistance due to the emergence of acquired mutations.Areas covered: This paper provides an overview of clinical results of newly approved or investigational venetoclax-based therapies for CLL. In view of current and potential roles in CLL care, the strengths and disadvantages of venetoclax-combinations are discussed. The MEDLINE database, ClinicalTrials.gov and conference proceedings were all reviewed to select the relevant literature.Expert opinion: While the advent of venetoclax-based combinations has significantly expanded the therapeutic options for patients with CLL, further research with longer follow-up is required to address remaining open questions such as (I) the role of venetoclax as fixed duration therapy(II) timing and threshold of minimal residual disease (MRD) assessment for therapy discontinuation, (III) the efficacy of novel triplet combinations with venetoclax as backbone therapy, (IV) indications for the re-initiation of therapy with venetoclax.

Comparison of ibrutinib and idelalisib plus rituximab in real-life relapsed/resistant chronic lymphocytic leukemia cases.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the capacity of ibrutinib (IB) and idelalisib-rituximab (IDELA-R) of prolonging overall survival (OS) as in CLL patients, previously treated with chemotherapy only. METHODS: A real-life cohort of 675 cases has been identified and investigated in the database of the groups participating in the study. RESULTS: At an unadjusted univariate analysis, a significant death risk reduction was observed favoring IB (IDELA-R vs IB HR = 0.5, 95% CI = 0.36-0.71) although with some limitations due to the non-randomized and retrospective nature of the study and to the lower number of patients in the IDELA-R group (112 cases) related to the current prescribing practice. To overcome the potential problem of confounding by indication, we adjusted the association between the type of therapy and mortality for all variables significantly associated with OS at Cox univariate analysis. Furthermore, those variables, differently distributed between the two study groups, were introduced into the multivariate Cox model to improve the effectiveness of the analysis. By introducing all these variables into the multiple Cox regression model, we confirmed the protective effect of IB vs IDELA-R (HR = 0.67, 95% CI = 0.45-0.98, P = .04) independent of potential confounders. CONCLUSIONS: Although our analysis presents some constraints, that is, the unavailability of additional potential confounders, and the retrospective nature of the study, this observation may be of help for the daily clinical practice, particularly in the absence of randomized trials comparing the two schedules.