Sequential or Combination Treatments as Rescue Therapies in Immunocompromised Patients with Persistent SARS-CoV-2 Infection in the Omicron Era: A Case Series.

Prolonged SARS-CoV-2 infections are widely described in immunosuppressed patients, but safe and effective treatment strategies are lacking. We aimed to outline our approach to treating persistent COVID-19 in patients with immunosuppression from different causes. In this case series, we retrospectively enrolled all immunosuppressed patients with persistent SARS-CoV-2 infections treated at our centers between March 2022 and February 2023. Patients received different sequential or combination regimens, including antivirals (remdesivir, nirmatrelvir/ritonavir, or molnupiravir) and/or monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) (tixagevimab/cilgavimab or sotrovimab). The main outcome was a complete virological response (negative SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR on nasopharyngeal swabs) at the end of treatment. Fifteen patients were included as follows: eleven (11/15; 73%) with hematological disease and four (4/15; 27%) with recently diagnosed HIV/AIDS infection. Six patients (6/15; 40%) received a single antiviral course, four patients (4/15; 27%) received an antiviral and mAbs sequentially, and two patients (13%) received three lines of treatment (a sequence of three antivirals or two antivirals and mAbs). A combination of two antivirals or one antiviral plus mAbs was administered in three cases (3/15, 20%). One patient died while still positive for SARS-CoV-2, while fourteen (14/15; 93%) tested negative within 16 days after the end of treatment. The median time to negativization since the last treatment was 2.5 days. Both sequential and combination regimens used in this study demonstrated high efficacy and safety in the high-risk group of immunosuppressed patients.

Treatment strategies for patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma.

Diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) is nowadays a curable disease with the frontline treatment R-CHOP, but 30-40% of patients are still unresponsive or relapse thereafter. In the recent era several upcoming new options are improving the therapeutic landscape for relapsed/refractory (R/R) DLBCL setting, first of all anti-CD19 chimeric antigen receptor T-cells (CAR-T) that already represent a standard of care as third-line therapy and are rapidly moving as second-line treatment for those who are refractory or early relapse after R-CHOP. Among these new therapies, the combinations polatuzumab plus rituximab and bendamustine, tafasitamab plus lenalidomide for transplant ineligible patients, and CD3xCD20 bispecific antibodies are the most relevant, but several other agents and strategies are on the way. On the other hand, in the last 20 years, several efforts have been spent in the attempt to ameliorate the outcome over R-CHOP for the frontline treatment of DLBCL shortening the interval between the cycles or intensifying treatment or adding novel drugs to R-CHOP without success, so far. Recent studies combining the anti-CD79b antibody-drug conjugate polatuzumab vedotin plus R-CHP and the anti-BCL2 agent venetoclax plus R-CHOP showed promising results. Preliminary data of new upcoming strategies characterized by a tailored therapy based on different molecular subtypes of DLBCL are encouraging, showing a benefit over the standard R-CHOP. In this manuscript, the literature data on the landscape of new therapies available and upcoming for both frontline and R/R settings of DLBCL will be critically reviewed.

Antibody Therapies for Large B-Cell Lymphoma.

Large B-cell lymphomas (LBCLs) constitute a subgroup of aggressive but highly curable lymphoproliferative diseases. Treatment of relapsed/refractory (R/R) patients still represents an unmet clinical need, and novel drugs and combinations are in continuous development. The pan-B cell panel of surface antigens that characterizes LBCL leads to a large umbrella of druggable targets. Monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) express their activity against lymphoma by targeting multiple tumor-specific antigens. This category consists of a number of molecules with different mechanisms of action, including naked mAbs, radioimmunoconjugates, antibody-drug conjugates, checkpoint inhibitors, and bispecific antibodies. In the last decade, apart from the well-known role of the anti-CD20 mAb rituximab, novel mAbs have led to remarkable steps forward in the treatment of R/R LBCL in monotherapy and combined with chemotherapy. Multiple studies are in development trying to bring these novel compounds into the frontline setting to empower the RCHOP effect or as alternative chemotherapy-free options for elderly/unfit patients. This review provides insight into antilymphoma mAbs, focused on the efficacy and safety of the main molecules approved or in development for LBCL andperspectives on the treatment of this disease.

Post-Transplant Cyclophosphamide and Tacrolimus-Mycophenolate Mofetil Combination Governs GVHD and Immunosuppression Need, Reducing Late Toxicities in Allogeneic Peripheral Blood Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation from HLA-Matched Donors.

Combined direct antineoplastic activity and the long-lasting immunological effects of allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplant (HCT) can cure many hematological malignancies, but broad adoption requires non-relapse mortality (NRM) rates and graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) control. Recently, posttransplant cyclophosphamide (PTCy) given after a bone marrow transplant significantly reduced GVHD-incidence, while PTCy given with tacrolimus/mofetil mycophenolate (T/MMF) showed activity following allogeneic peripheral blood stem cell transplantation (alloPBSCT). Here, we report the experience of a larger cohort (85 consecutive patients) and expanded follow-up period (03/2011-12/2019) with high-risk hematological malignancies who received alloPBSCT from Human-Leukocyte-Antigens HLA-matched unrelated/related donors. GVHD-prophylaxis was PTCy 50 mg/kg (days+3 and +4) combined with T/MMF (day+5 forward). All patients stopped MMF on day+28 with day+110 = median tacrolimus discontinuation. Cumulative incidences were 12% for acute and 7% for chronic GVHD- and no GVHD-attributed deaths. For surviving patients, the 12, 24, and 36-month probabilities of being off immunosuppression were 92, 96, and 96%, respectively. After a 36-month median follow-up, NRM was 4%; median event-free survival (EFS) and overall survival (OS) had yet to occur. One- and two-year chronic GVHD-EFS results were 57% (95% CI, 46-68%) and 53% (95% CI, 45-61%), respectively, with limited late infections and long-term organ toxicities. Disease relapse caused the most treatment failures (38% at 2 years), but low transplant toxicity allowed many patients (14/37, 38%) to receive donor lymphocyte infusions as a post-relapse strategy. We confirmed that PTCy+T/MMF treatment effectively prevented acute and chronic GVHD and limited NRM to unprecedented low rates without loss of disease control efficacy in an expanded patient cohort. This trial is registered at U.S. National Library of Medicine as #NCT02300571.