Molecular assessment of intratumoral immune cell subsets and potential mechanisms of resistance to odronextamab, a CD20×CD3 bispecific antibody, in patients with relapsed/refractory B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma.

BACKGROUND: Patients with relapsed/refractory B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma (R/R B-NHL) have a significant need for effective treatment options. Odronextamab is an Fc-silenced, human, CD20×CD3 bispecific antibody that targets CD20-expressing cells via T-cell-mediated cytotoxicity independent of T-cell/major histocompatibility complex interaction. Phase I results in patients with R/R B-NHL demonstrated that odronextamab monotherapy could achieve deep and durable responses with a generally manageable safety profile (ELM-1; NCT02290951). As part of a biomarker analysis of the same study, we investigated potential biomarkers and mechanisms of resistance to odronextamab. METHODS: Patients with R/R B-NHL enrolled in ELM-1 received one time per week doses of intravenous odronextamab for 4×21 day cycles, then doses every 2 weeks thereafter. Patient tumor biopsies were obtained at baseline, on-treatment, and at progression. Immune cell markers were analyzed by immunohistochemistry, flow cytometry, single-cell RNA sequencing, and whole genome sequencing. RESULTS: Baseline tumor biopsies showed that almost all patients had high proportions of B cells that expressed the CD20 target antigen, whereas expression of other B-cell surface antigens (CD19, CD22, CD79b) was more variable. Responses to odronextamab in patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma were not related to the relative level of baseline CD20 expression, cell of origin, or high-risk molecular subtype. A potential link was observed between greater tumor programmed cell death-ligand 1 expression and increased likelihood of response to odronextamab. Similarly, a trend was observed between clinical response and increased levels of CD8 T cells and regulatory T cells at baseline. We also identified an on-treatment pharmacodynamic shift in intratumoral immune cell subsets. Finally, loss of CD20 expression through inactivating gene mutations was identified as a potential mechanism of resistance in patients who were treated with odronextamab until progression, as highlighted in two detailed patient cases reported here. CONCLUSIONS: This biomarker analysis expands on clinical findings of odronextamab in patients with R/R B-NHL, providing verification of the suitability of CD20 as a therapeutic target, as well as evidence for potential mechanisms of action and resistance.

The value of FDG PET/CT imaging in outcome prediction and response assessment of lymphoma patients treated with immunotherapy: a meta-analysis and systematic review.

PURPOSE: Treatment strategies of lymphoid malignancies have been revolutionized by immunotherapy. Because of the inherent property of Hodgkin lymphoma and some subtypes of non-Hodgkin lymphoma as a highly FDG-avid tumor, functional 18F-FDG PET/CT imaging is already embedded in their routine care. Nevertheless, the question is whether it is still valuable in the context of these tumors being treated with immunotherapy. Herein, we will review the value of 18F-FDG PET/CT imaging lymphoid tumors treated with immunotherapy regimens. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search of the PubMed database was conducted on the value of the 18F-FDG PET/CT for immunotherapy response monitoring of patients with malignant lymphoma. The articles were considered eligible if they met all of the following inclusion criteria: (a) clinical studies on patients with different types of malignant lymphoma, (b) treatment with anti-CD20 antibodies, immune checkpoint inhibitors or immune cell therapies, (c) and incorporated PET/CT with 18F-FDG as the PET tracer. RESULTS: From the initial 1488 papers identified, 91 were ultimately included in our study. In anti-CD20 therapy, the highest pooled hazard ratios (HRs) of baseline, early, and late response monitoring parameters for progression-free survival (PFS) belong to metabolic tumor volume (MTV) (3.19 (95%CI: 2.36-4.30)), maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax) (3.25 (95%CI: 2.08-5.08)), and Deauville score (DS) (3.73 (95%CI: 2.50-5.56)), respectively. These measurements for overall survival (OS) were MTV (4.39 (95%CI: 2.71-7.08)), DS (3.23 (95%CI: 1.87-5.58)), and DS (3.64 (95%CI: 1.40-9.43)), respectively. Early and late 18F-FDG PET/CT response assessment in immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) and immune cell therapy might be an effective tool for prediction of clinical outcome. CONCLUSION: For anti-CD20 therapy of lymphoma, the MTV as a baseline 18F-FDG PET/CT-derived parameter has the highest HRs for PFS and OS. The DS as visual criteria in early and late response assessment has higher HRs for PFS and OS compared to the international harmonization project (IHP) visual criteria in anti-CD20 therapy. Early changes in 18F-FDG PET parameters may be predictive of response to ICIs and cell therapy in lymphoma patients.

Assessment of therapeutic effect of CD20-targeted immunoliposome in primary central nervous system lymphoma.

Primary central nervous system lymphoma (PCNSL) is a form of extranodal non-Hodgkin's B-cell lymphoma limited to the CNS. The treatment of PCNSL is ineffective partly due to the blood-brain barrier (BBB) restriction of delivery of many drugs including anti-CD20 (Rituximab; RTX) which is a standard treatment for systemic B-cell lymphomas. In this study, liposome with tween-80 surface modification was fabricated and conjugated with RTX for enhancing BBB penetration to target lymphoma cells in the CNS. Physicochemical characterizations of Lip/RTX were performed and spherical shape liposomes with narrow size distribution were demonstrated by TEM. An average diameter of Lip/RTX was 168.57 ± 1.57 nm with the percentage of RTX conjugation at 90.94. Cell internalization monitored by flow cytometry confirmed that conjugation of RTX promoted liposome entry into Raji cells expressing CD20. Antitumor activity of Lip/RTX was comparable to free RTX indicating that RTX moieties on liposome remained their therapeutic function. In addition, Lip/RTX inhibited tumor aggressiveness by limiting cell migration and invasion. Systemic administration of Lip/RTX significantly prolonged survival of mice harboring intracranial lymphoma xenografts. Taken together, Lip/RTX presents a new potential treatment for patients with PCNSL.

Pharmacodynamic modelling and exposure-response assessment of inebilizumab in subjects with neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorders.

AIMS: Neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorders (NMOSD) is an autoantibody-mediated, B cell-driven disease. Inebilizumab is a humanized, affinity-optimized, afucosylated IgG1 κ monoclonal antibody that binds to the B-cell specific surface antigen CD19, resulting in rapid, profound and sustained depletion of circulating peripheral B cells in NMOSD subjects (pivotal study). The objective of this study was to conduct population modelling of B-cell response following inebilizumab treatment in adult subjects with NMOSD, and to assess the impact of drug exposure to outcome. METHODS: A haematopoietic transit model was developed to describe the joint effects of reducing influx from pro-B cells and accelerating CD20+ B-cell depletion in the blood by inebilizumab. Furthermore, the relationships between inebilizumab pharmacokinetic (PK) exposure and the primary efficacy endpoint and key secondary efficacy endpoints were evaluated. RESULTS: At the 300-mg dose, there was no apparent relationship between efficacy (reduction in disease attack risk, risk of worsening from baseline in Expanded Disability Status Scale, cumulative total active MRI lesions, and the number of NMOSD-related in-patient hospitalizations) and PK exposure. Subjects with low, medium and high PK exposure had a similar hazard ratio of NMOSD attack vs. placebo group. CONCLUSION: The pharmacodynamic modelling confirmed effective depletion of B cells is achieved with a 300 mg intravenous dose of inebilizumab administered on Day 1 and Day 15 and every 6 months thereafter. The PK variability between patients had no apparent effect on clinical efficacy.

Eficacia y seguridad de baricitinib para el tratamiento de pacientes adultos con artritis reumatoide activa, moderada a severa con falla, intolerancia o contraindicación a dos anti-tnf y un anti-CD20 / Efficacy and safety of baricitinib for the treatment of adult patients with active, moderate to severe rheumatoid arthritis with failure, intolerance or contraindication to two anti-tnf and one anti-CD20

ANTECEDENTES: En el marco de la metodología ad hoc para evaluar solicitudes de tecnologías sanitarias, aprobada mediante Resolución de Institución de Evaluación de Tecnologías en Salud e Investigación N° 111-IETSI-ESSALUD-2021, se ha elaborado el presente dictamen, el cual expone la evaluación de la eficacia y seguridad de baricitinib en pacientes adultos con artritis reumatoide activa, moderada a severa con respuesta inadecuada o intolerancia a dos fármacos antirreumáticos modificadores de la enfermedad (FARME) anti-TNF y un FARME anti-CD20. Mediante la Nota N° 264-GHNERM-ESSALUD-2020, la Dra. Claudia Selene Mora Trujillo, médico especialista en reumatología del Hospital Nacional Edgardo Rebagliati Martins, siguiendo la Directiva N° 003-IETSI-ESSALUD-2016, envía al Instituto de Evaluación de Tecnologías en Salud e Investigación - IETSI la solicitud de uso fuera del petitorio del producto baricitinib. Con el objetivo de hacer precisiones respecto a los componentes de la pregunta PICO inicial, se llevó a cabo una reunión técnica con el médico especialista en reumatología, Dr. Víctor Román Pimentel Quiroz, además de los representantes del equipo técnico del IETSI. METODOLOGÍA: Se llevó a cabo una búsqueda bibliográfica amplia y exhaustiva con el objetivo de identificar la mejor evidencia disponible sobre la eficacia y seguridad de baricitinib para el tratamiento de pacientes adultos con artritis reumatoide activa, moderada a severa con respuesta inadecuada o intolerancia a dos FARME anti-TNF y un FARME anti-CD20. RESULTADOS: Luego de la búsqueda bibliográfica hasta noviembre de 2021 se identificaron: tres guías de práctica clínica (GPC) (EULAR, Sociedad de Reumatología de Hong Kong y Colegio Mexicano de Reumatología), cinco evaluaciones de tecnologías sanitarias (ETS) (NICE, CADTH, SMC, HAS y CONITEC), una revisión sistemática con metaanálisis en red (Bae S-C et al., 2018), un ECA fase III (Genovese et al., 2016) y un estudio observacional (Iwamoto et al., 2018). Los desenlaces de interés fueron: respuesta clínica (escala ACR 20/50/70), actividad de la enfermedad y remisión (DAS28-VSG/DAS28-PCR/SDAI/CDAI), respuesta radiográfica (mTSS), respuesta de la función física (HAQ-DI), eventos adversos y calidad de vida. CONCLUSIÓN: Por lo expuesto, el Instituto de Evaluación de Tecnologías en Salud e Investigación-IETSI no aprueba el uso de baricitinib en pacientes adultos con artritis reumatoide activa, moderada a severa con respuesta inadecuada o intolerancia a dos FARME anti-TNF y un FARME anti-CD20, como producto farmacéutico no incluido en el Petitorio Farmacológico de EsSalud. Se recomienda a los especialistas que, en caso de identificar nueva evidencia que responda a la población de la PICO de interés, envíen sus propuestas para ser evaluadas en el marco de la Directiva N° 003-IETSI-ESSALUD-2016.

Eficacia y seguridad de tocilizumab intravenoso para el tratamiento de pacientes con artritis reumatoide activa con falla o intolerancia al tratamiento con Anti-TNF, Anti -CD20 y Sintético-Específicos / Efficacy and safety of intravenous tocilizumab for the treatment of patients with active rheumatoid arthritis with failure or intolerance to treatment with Anti-TNF, Anti-CD20 and Synthetic-Specifics

INTRODUCCIÓN: El presente dictamen expone la evaluación de la eficacia y seguridad de tocilizumab, comparado con placebo o la mejor terapia de soporte, para el tratamiento de pacientes con artritis reumatoide (AR) activa con falla o intolerancia al tratamiento con fármacos antirreumáticos modificadores de la enfermedad (FARME) biológicos anti-TNF (etanercept e infliximab), FARME biológicos anti-CD20 (rituximab) y FARME sintético-específicos (tofacitinib). La artritis reumatoide (AR) es una enfermedad crónica, inflamatoria, degenerativa y progresiva de las articulaciones. La AR es una enfermedad de baja prevalencia. Dos estudios realizados en localidades peruanas reportaron prevalencias del 0.5 % y 1.27 % en los años 2009 y 2018 respectivamente. La AR no tiene cura, pero puede ser controlada con fármacos antirreumáticos modificadores de la enfermedad (FARME). No obstante, alrededor del 30 % a 40 % de estos pacientes, presentan intolerancia o falla a los FARME. A la fecha, en EsSalud, los pacientes con AR cuentan con FARME convencionales (leflunomida, sulfasalazina y metrotexato); FARME biológicos de tipo anti-TNF (etanercept e infliximab), anti-CD20 (rituximab) y sintético-específicos (tofacitinib). Sin embargo, algunos pacientes han presentado intolerancia o falla a todas las opciones terapéuticas antes mencionadas; enmarcándose en un contexto de vacío terapéutico. Por ello, algunos especialistas de la institución consideran que el uso de tocilizumab, un anticuerpo monoclonal humanizado anti IL-6, podría ser de beneficio para estos pacientes. METODOLOGÍA: Se realizó una búsqueda de literatura científica con el objetivo de identificar evidencia sobre la eficacia y seguridad de tocilizumab, comparado con placebo, para el tratamiento de pacientes adultos con AR activa con falla o intolerancia al tratamiento con FARME biológicos anti-TNF (etanercept e infliximab), FARME biológicos anti-CD20 (rituximab) y FARME sintético-específicos (tofacitinib). La búsqueda de la evidencia se realizó en las bases de datos bibliográficas: PubMed, LILACS y The Cochrane Library. Adicionalmente, se revisó la evidencia generada por grupos internacionales que realizan revisiones sistemáticas, evaluaciones de tecnologías sanitarias y guías de práctica clínica, tales como The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE), The Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health (CADTH), Centro Nacional de Excelencia Tecnológica en Salud (CENETEC), Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN), Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Health Care (IQWiG), Scottish Medicines Consortium (SMC), Haute Autorité de Santé (HAS), Institute for Clinical and Economic Review (ICER), y Comissão nacional de incorporação de tecnologías no SUS (CONITEC). También se realizó una búsqueda manual en las bases The Guidelines International Network (G-I-N), el portal de la Base Regional de Informes de Evaluación de Tecnologías en Salud de las Américas (BRISA) y en las páginas web de sociedades especializadas en AR, como The American College of Rheumatology, The Australian Rheumatology Association, y The Canadian Rheumatology Association. Asimismo, se recolectó información sobre el medicamento de interés del presente dictamen en las páginas web de la EMA y FDA. Finalmente, se realizó una búsqueda manual en el portal ClinicalTrials.gov del National Institutes of Health (NIH) para identificar ensayos clínicos en desarrollo o cuyos resultados aún no hayan sido publicados en una revista científica. RESULTADOS: Se presenta la evidencia disponible según el tipo de publicación; siguiendo lo indicado en los criterios de elegibilidad. CONCLUSIONES: El presente dictamen recoge la mejor evidencia científica disponible sobre la eficacia y seguridad de tocilizumab, en comparación con placebo o la mejor terapia de soporte, para el tratamiento de pacientes con AR activa con falla o intolerancia al tratamiento con FARME biológicos anti-TNF (etanercept e infliximab), FARME biológicos anti-CD20 (rituximab) y FARME sintético-específicos (tofacitinib). Aunque en EsSalud se cuenta con alternativas para el tratamiento de pacientes con AR, algunos pacientes presentan falla o intolerancia a todas las alternativas actualmente disponibles; enmarcándose en un contexto de vacío terapéutico. Se incluyeron tres GPC elaboradas por HKSR, EULAR y TRA que emitieron recomendaciones para el tratamiento de pacientes con AR y falla al tratamiento con FARME biológicos o sintético-específicos y un ECA que evaluó la eficacia y seguridad de tocilizumab, en comparación con placebo, en pacientes con respuesta inadecuada a uno o más FARME. Las tres GPC coinciden en recomendar que los pacientes que presentan falla a un FARME biológico o sintético-específico podrían beneficiarse al cambiar a un FARME (biológico o sintético-específico) con diferente mecanismo de acción. El mecanismo de acción de tocilizumab (un anti-IL-6) es diferente al de los otros FARME actualmente utilizados en EsSalud para el tratamiento de pacientes con AR. Los resultados del ECA de Nishimoto et al. sugieren que, en el corto plazo (12 semanas), tocilizumab sería más eficaz que placebo; pero igual de seguro, en el tratamiento pacientes con AR y falla a uno o más FARME. Sin embargo, las limitaciones de su diseño de estudio afectan la validez de sus resultados. La evidencia de otros estudios que evaluaron la seguridad de tocilizumab en el tratamiento de pacientes con AR muestran que, su seguridad es menor a la de placebo (y esta diferencia incrementa con el tiempo); pero es similar a la de los otros FARME utilizados en EsSalud para el tratamiento de pacientes con AR. Los especialistas señalan que, en un contexto de vacío terapéutico para una enfermedad degenerativa y progresiva, como la AR; las ventajas de tocilizumab (diferente mecanismo de acción y similar eficacia y seguridad que otros FARME disponibles en EsSalud) y la capacidad de manejar sus EA de forma eficaz, hacen que tocilizumab pueda ser considerada como una alternativa de tratamiento viable para la población de interés del presente dictamen. Por lo expuesto, el IETSI aprueba el uso de tocilizumab en pacientes con artritis reumatoide activa con falla o intolerancia al tratamiento con FARME biológicos anti-TNF (etanercept e infliximab), FARME biológicos anti-CD20 (rituximab) y FARME sintético-específicos (tofacitinib), según lo establecido en el Anexo N° 1. La vigencia del presente dictamen preliminar es de un año a partir de la fecha de publicación. Así, la continuación de dicha aprobación estará sujeta a la evaluación de los resultados obtenidos y de mayor evidencia que pueda surgir en el tiempo.

Immunophenotypic shift in the B-cell precursors from regenerating bone marrow samples: A critical consideration for measurable residual disease assessment in B-lymphoblastic leukemia.

Accurate knowledge of expression patterns/levels of commonly used MRD markers in regenerative normal-B-cell-precursors (BCP) is highly desirable to distinguish leukemic-blasts from regenerative-BCP for multicolor flow cytometry (MFC)-based measurable residual disease (MRD) assessment in B-lymphoblastic leukemia (B-ALL). However, the data highlighting therapy-related immunophenotypic-shift in regenerative-BCPs is scarce and limited to small cohort. Herein, we report the in-depth evaluation of immunophenotypic shift in regenerative-BCPs from a large cohort of BALL-MRD samples. Ten-color MFC-MRD analysis was performed in pediatric-BALL at the end-of-induction (EOI), end-of-consolidation (EOC), and subsequent-follow-up (SFU) time-points. We studied normalized-mean fluorescent intensity (nMFI) and coefficient-of-variation of immunofluorescence (CVIF) of CD10, CD19, CD20, CD34, CD38, and CD45 expression in regenerative-BCP (early, BCP1 and late, BCP2) from 200 BALL-MRD samples, and compared them with BCP from 15 regenerating control (RC) TALL-MRD samples and 20 treatment-naïve bone-marrow control (TNSC) samples. Regenerative-BCP1 showed downregulation in CD10 and CD34 expression with increased CVIF and reduced nMFI (p < 0.001), upregulation of CD20 with increased nMFI (p = 0.014) and heterogeneous CD45 expression with increased CVIF (p < 0.001). Immunophenotypic shift was less pronounced in the BCP2 compared to BCP1 compartment with increased CVIF in all but CD45 (p < 0.05) and reduced nMFI only in CD45 expression (p = 0.005). Downregulation of CD10/CD34 and upregulation of CD20 was higher at EOI than EOC and SFU time-points (p < 0.001). Regenerative-BCPs are characterized by the significant immunophenotypic shift in commonly used B-ALL-MRD markers, especially CD10 and CD34 expression, as compared to treatment-naïve BCPs. Therefore, the templates/database for BMRD analysis must be developed using regenerative-BCP.

Evaluation of a 10color protocol as part of a 2tube screening panel for flow cytometric assessment of peripheral blood leukocytic subsets.

Peripheral blood (PB) immunophenotyping is commonly required for initial evaluation of various suspected disease entities. Several approaches have been proposed. The objective of this work is to explore the value of a 10color protocol developed in our laboratory for flow cytometric assessment of PB leukocytic subsets, as part of a 2tube screening panel. A combination of CD16/CD56/CD34/CD33/CD19/CD4/CD8/CD3/CD20/CD45 antibodies in 1 tube was applied routinely during flow cytometric analysis of PB samples for diagnostic purposes. The protocol was systematically complemented by a 2nd tube with anti-kappa, anti-lambda, CD5, CD19, and CD45 antibodies for adults and selected pediatric patients, and specifically oriented panels when necessary. 25 samples with no detectable neoplastic PB involvement and 31 samples with a hematolymphoid disorder were investigated retrospectively. The contribution of CD33 in the separation of leukocytic populations, as well as the benefits from the simultaneous assessment of CD20/CD19/CD45, CD16/CD56 and the detection of CD34+ cells were examined. The gating strategy with the use of CD33 provided additional information in certain cases. The protocol enabled recognition of differential expression of CD20 and CD45 in CD19+ cells with chronic lymphocytic leukemia phenotype, overall evaluation of NK and NK like T cells, estimation of CD16- granulocytes and CD56/CD16 expression in monocytes, as well as identification of minor cell subsets, such as CD34+ cells. The proposed 10color combination of antibodies analyzed in a standardized manner can offer significant information in the initial evaluation of PB samples, thus, guiding subsequent investigation if needed.

PKPD Assessment of the Anti-CD20 Antibody Obinutuzumab in Cynomolgus Monkey is Feasible Despite Marked Anti-Drug Antibody Response in This Species.

The pharmacokinetics (PK) of the anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody obinutuzumab was assessed after single intravenous dosing to cynomolgus monkeys. In addition, the pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic (PKPD) relationship for B-cell depletion was characterized. The PKPD model was used to estimate the B-cell repopulation during the recovery phase of chronic toxicology studies, thereby supporting the study design, in particular planning the recovery phase duration. Marked immunogenicity against obinutuzumab was observed approximately 10 days after single dose, leading to an up to ∼30-fold increase in obinutuzumab clearance in the affected monkeys. Despite this accelerated clearance, the PK could be characterized, either by disregarding the clearance in noncompartmental PK analysis or by capturing it explicitly as an additional time-dependent clearance process in compartmental modeling. This latter step was crucial to model the PKPD of B-cells as an indirect response to obinutuzumab exposure, showing that-without immune response-the limiting factor is obinutuzumab elimination with concentrations below 0.02 µg/mL required for initiation of B-cell recovery. Overall, the results demonstrate that despite a marked anti-drug antibody response in the nonclinical animal species, the PK and PKPD of obinutuzumab could be characterized successfully by appropriately addressing the immune-modulated clearance pathway in data analysis and modeling.

Role of interim and end of treatment positron emission tomography for response assessment and prediction of relapse in posttransplant lymphoproliferative disorder.

Background: Fluorine-18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (PET) has an established and central role in diagnosis, staging and response evaluation of lymphoproliferative diseases. It has shown a high sensitivity and specificity at diagnosis in posttransplant lymphoproliferative disorders (PTLDs). However, little is known about the performance of interim and end of treatment (EOT) PET in PTLD patients with regards to response assessment, relapse prediction and outcome. Methods: We performed a single-center retrospective study in which we analyzed consecutive patients diagnosed with CD20-positive PTLD after solid organ transplantation between 2008 and 2017, who all received risk-stratified sequential treatment according to the PTLD-1 phase II trial. Interim and EOT PET studies were scored according to the Deauville criteria. Results: Forty-one patients were included with median follow-up of 41.5 months (range 1-108). Positive and negative predictive values for disease recurrence were 13% and 85% for interim and 33% and 87% for EOT PET, respectively. There was no significant difference in overall survival, progression-free survival nor time to progression between negative versus positive patients on interim and EOT scans. Conclusions: Negative interim and/or negative end of treatment PET identify PTLD patients with low risk of disease recurrence.

Eficacia y seguridad de tofacitinib y abatacept en comparación a adalimumab en el tratamiento de pacientes con artritis reumatoide activa moderada a severa con falla a Anti-TNF Y Anti-CD20 / Efficacy and safety of tofacitinib and abatacept compared to adalimumab in the treatment of patients with moderate to severe active rheumatoid arthritis with anti-TNF and anti-CD20 failure

INTRODUCCIÓN: El presente dictamen expone la evaluación múltiple de abatacept, tofacitinib y adalimumab para el tratamiento de pacientes con artritis reumatoide (AR) activa moderada a severa con falla a anti-TNF y anti-CD20. El objetivo del tratamiento de la artritis reumatoide (AR) de inducir y mantener la remisión clínica para limitar la progresión del deterioro de las articulaciones, no es posible lograrlo con un solo tratamiento. El manejo clínico de esta enfermedad requiere disponer de varias opciones terapéuticas debido a su curso clínico crónico con actividad de enfermedad fluctuante y eventuales fallas a los tratamientos instaurados. En la institución se encuentran disponibles dos anti-TNF y rituximab para el manejo progresivo de los pacientes con AR activa. Sin embargo, algunos pacientes no responderán a estos tratamientos o eventualmente perderán la respuesta inicial, es por ello que se requiere evaluar otras opciones terapéuticas para estos pacientes. METODOLOGÍA: Se realizó una búsqueda de la literatura con respecto a la eficacia y seguridad comparativa entre abatacept, tofacitinib y adalimumab para el tratamiento de pacientes con artritis reumatoide (AR) moderada a severa con falla a un anti-TNF y un anti-CD20. Esta búsqueda se realizó utilizando los meta-buscadores: Translating Research into Practice (TRIPDATABASE), National Library of Medicine (Pubmed-Medline) y Health Systems Evidence. Adicionalmente, se amplió la búsqueda revisando la evidencia generada por grupos internacionales que realizan revisiones sistemáticas (RS), evaluación de tecnologías sanitarias (ETS) y guías de práctica clínica (GPC), tales como la Cochrane Group, The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE), the Agency for Health care Research and Quality (AHRQ), The Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health (CADTH) y the Scottish Medicines Consortium (SMC). Esta búsqueda se completó ingresando a la página web www.clinicaltrials.gov, para así poder identificar ensayos clínicos en elaboración o que no hayan sido publicados aún, y asím disminuir el riesgo de sesgo de publicación. RESULTADOS: Se realizó la búsqueda bibliográfica y de evidencia científica respecto a la eficacia clínica relativa y perfil de toxicidad entre el uso de abatacept, tofacitinib y adalimumab en el tratamiento de pacientes con artritis reumatoide (AR) activa moderada a severa con falla a anti-TNF y anti-CD20. CONCLUSIONES: El objetivo del tratamiento de la artritis reumatoide es inducir y mantener la remisión clínica y limitar la progresión del deterioro de las articulaciones. El tratamiento debe ser lo más precoz posible después de realizado el diagnóstico a fin de obtener la remisión clínica. Las GPC consultadas no contienen recomendaciones específicas para los pacientes con AR que han fallado a un DMARD convencional, un anti-TNF y un anti-CD-20 (i.e. un convencional y dos biológicos). En general, las guías presentan recomendaciones de tratamiento homogéneas y claras hasta la falla de un DMARD convencional y un DMARD biológico, para quienes se recomienda usar un biológico del mismo o diferente mecanismo de acción. La ETS de NICE hace una recomendación condicionada a la aplicación del descuento acordado de manera confidencial, para el uso de tofacitinib en pacientes que han fallado al menos a un DMARD biológico y no puede recibir rituximab. La ETS de Francia concluyó que, aunque tofacitinib probablemente tenga un impacto, este sea pequeño debido a que existen otras opciones con las que no ha sido comparado y la preocupación por sus efectos tóxicos a largo plazo que incluyen riesgos de efectos adversos cardiovasculares, gastrointestinales y neoplasias malignas. En el caso de abatacept, NICE recomienda el uso en pacientes que han fallado al menos a un biológico anti-TNF, al igual que otros biológicos anti-TNF (adalimumab, infliximab y etanercept), y solamente si el paciente no podía recibir rituximab debido a un evento adverso u otra contraindicación. Tofacitinib, abatacept no han sido comparados directamente con adalimumab. Los ensayos identificados sobre abatacept y tofacitinib presentan problemas relacionados con las características de la población estudiada, los tiempos de evaluación y perfil de toxicidad a largo plazo. El estudio de abatacept incluyó a pacientes que fallaron a un solo anti-TNF resultando en una recomendación equivalente al grupo de anti-TNF. Tofacitinib mantuvo los grupos aleatorizados solo hasta el tercer mes, cuando la práctica habitual es evaluar la respuesta al sexto mes, teniendo que incurrir en métodos de imputación para calcular los efectos a mayor plazo, práctica que disminuye la confianza en los resultados. Además, existe preocupación por mayores riesgos cardiovasculares, gastrointestinales y cancerígenos. Adalimumab es un anti-TNF que tiene extensa experiencia de uso fuera y dentro de la institución. Se usa en el tratamiento de varias patologías incluyendo varias enfermedades reumatológicas, y puede ser una alternativa más en pacientes con AR activa que han fallado a varios biológicos, incluyendo anti-TNF y no anti-TNF. No hay información específica en la población de interés, pero estudios en población que fallaron a un metotrexate muestran que el tratamiento con adalimumab es similar a tofacitinib y abatacept. En la actualidad, no es posible establecer una jerarquía preferencial dentro de los medicamentos biológicos propuestos en vista de la ausencia de datos comparativos de eficacia y/o tolerancia. Sin embargo, existe evidencia que muestra que tofacitinib o abatacept son similares a adalimumab en pacientes con falla previa a metotrexate. Aunque se trata de evidencia indirecta, cabe señalar, que, de acuerdo con las recomendaciones, la preferencia es usar un anti-TNF como segunda y tercera línea (después de un DMARD convencional), debido a la experiencia clínica y el seguimiento de 15 años y la excelente eficacia estructural de esta clase terapéutica. Por lo expuesto, el Instituto de Evaluación de Tecnologías en Salud e Investigación IETSI aprueba el uso de adalimumab en combinación con metotrexate en pacientes con artritis reumatoides activa moderada a severa que han fallado a anti-TNF y un anti-CD20; según lo establecido en el Anexo N° 01. La vigencia del presente dictamen preliminar es de dos años, la continuación de dicha aprobación estará́ sujeta a los resultados obtenidos de los pacientes que reciban este tratamiento, a los reportes de seguridad que puedan surgir durante la farmacovigilancia activa, la nueva evidencia que pueda surgir en el tiempo y a un análisis farmacoeconómico.

Theranostic radiopharmaceuticals: established agents in current use.

Although use of the term "theranostic" is relatively recent, the concept goes back to the earliest days of nuclear medicine, with the use of radioiodine for diagnosis and therapy of benign and malignant thyroid disease being arguably the most successful molecular radiotherapy in history. A diagnostic scan with 123I-, 124I-, or a low activity of 131I-iodide is followed by therapy with high activity 131I-iodide. Similarly, adrenergic tumours such as phaeochromocytoma and neuroblastoma can be imaged with 123I-metaiodobenzylguanidine and treated with 131I-metaiodobenzylguanidine. Bone scintigraphy can be used to select patients with painful bone metastases from prostate cancer who may benefit from treatment with beta- or alpha-particle emitting bone seeking agents, the most recent and successful of which is 223Ra radium chloride. Anti-CD20 monoclonal antibodies can be used to image and treat non-Hodgkins lymphoma, though this has not been as commercially successful as initially predicted. More recently established theranostics include somatostatin receptor targeting peptides for diagnosis and treatment of neuroendocrine tumours with agents such as 68Ga-DOTATATE and 177Lu-DOTATATE, respectively. Finally, agents which target prostate-specific membrane antigen are becoming increasingly widely available, despite the current lack of a commercial product. With the recent licensing of the somatostatin peptides and the rapid adoption of 68Ga- and 177Lu-labelled prostate-specific membrane antigen targeting agents, we have built upon the experience of radioiodine and are already seeing a great expansion in the availability of widely accepted theranostic radiopharmaceuticals.

Computer-driven quantitative image analysis in the assessment of tumor cell and T cell features in diffuse large B cell lymphomas.

Diffuse large B cell lymphoma (DLBCL) is recognized as the most common non-Hodgkin lymphoma subtype. Advanced high-resolution digital scans of pathology slides have enabled the development of computer-based image analysis algorithms that may assist pathologists in quantifying immunohistochemical stains. In this retrospective study, we reviewed data from 29 patients affected by DLBCL. In order to evaluate the number of tumor cells and microenvironment T cells, we performed an analysis of CD20, Ki67, and CD3 counts, assessed with the Positive Pixel Count algorithm embedded in the Aperio ImageScope software. A lower tumor cell count was observed in patients with a non-germinal center immunophenotype, high LDH, splenomegaly and an IPI ≥ 3. A lower number of CD3 was observed in patients with bulky disease, an IPI ≥ 3 and disease stage 3-4. Overall, these data confirm that quantitative analysis of the tumor cells and of the tumor microenvironment by means of computer-driven quantitative image analysis may add new information in DLBCL diagnosis.

Rituximab in the management of acute lymphoblastic leukemia.

INTRODUCTION: The anti-CD20 chimeric monoclonal antibody rituximab has revolutionized the treatment of B-cell malignancies, significantly improving patient clinical outcome. Recently, some single-group studies have suggested that adding rituximab to chemotherapy can improve the outcome of CD20-positive B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) patients. Areas covered: An overview of the current insights of rituximab in adult ALL patients is presented here. In particular, we focused on results of multicenter randomized phase III trial (GRAALL-2005 - Group for Research on Adult Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia) that evaluated the benefit of associating rituximab to chemotherapy in Ph-negative, B-lineage ALL expressing the CD20 antigen. Expert opinion: Data from clinical trials confirm that rituximab enhances the efficacy of chemotherapy without additive toxicity in ALL. However, results of GRAAL 2005 study represent only a modest incremental improvement in the treatment of ALL. Other promising compounds as single agent or in combination with chemotherapy are currently in different stages of clinical development. The GRAALL 2005 study sets the stage for other prospective studies which will further elucidate the role of monoclonal antibodies in the management of ALL.

Eficacia y seguridad del uso de tofacitibini en el tratamiento de artritis reumatoide refractaria a Anti-TNF y Anti-CD20 / Efficacy and safety of the use of tofacitibini in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis refractory to Anti-TNF and Anti-CD20

INTRODUCCIÓN: Antecedentes: El presente dictamen expone la evaluación de tecnología de la eficacia y seguridad tofacitinib en pacientes con artritis reumatoide con falla a tratamiento con anti-TNF y anti-CD20. Aspcetos Generales: La artritis reumatoide (AR) es un tipo de poliatritis periférica de naturaleza inflamatória y simétrica. Esta condición suele llevar a una deformación de las articulaciones a través de la erosión de cartilagos y hesos. La ausencia de un tratamiento eficaz, la inflamación y la destrucción de las articulaciones lleva la pérdida de las funciones motoras, y por tanto a la incapacidad de llevar a cabotareas cotidians, e incluso a dificuldades en el ámbito laboral. Tecnología Sanitaria de Interés: El tratamiento de AR incluye como prímera linea el uso de glucocorticoides y fármacos modificadores de la enfermedad (FARMEs) sintético. Si no se obtiene una respuesta adecuada con estos FARMEs sintéticos, es recomendable pasar al uso de agentes biológico, siendo los anti-TNF considerados como la primera opición por la alta tasa de respuesta asoiada a su uso. METODOLOGÍA: Estrategia de Búsqueda: Se realizó una búsqueda de literatura publicada sobre tofacitinib en el tratamiento de Artritis Reumatoide en las bases de datos: medline y Tripdabase. Adicionalmente, se realizaron búsquedas en los portales web de entidades que realizan revisiones sistemáticas, evaluaciones de tecnologías sanitarias y guías de práctica clínica: The Cochrane Library, National Institute for Helath and Care Excellence (NICE) del Reino Unido, American College of Rheumatology, European League Against Rheumatism, Revista Brasileira de Reumatologia, Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health. RESUlTADOS: Sinopsis de la Evidencia: Guías de práctica Clínica: Se identificó una GPC de NICE del 2015 la cual redirecciona al lector hacia las evaluaciones de tecnología sanitaria publicadas por NICE sobre los diferentes agentes en el tratamiento de AR, las cuales fueron revisadas e incluidas en los resultados cuando fue pertinente. Evaluaciones de tecnología santiaria: Se incluyó en los resultados una revisión rápida de Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health del 2015. Una ETS de NICE sobre tofacitinib se encuentra en desarrollo y se espera que esta sea publicada en el 2018. Revisiones sistemáticas con o sin meta-análisis: Se incluyó una revisión sistemática con meta-análisis de ensayos clínicos controlados, aleatorizados y doble ciego del 2013, y un análisis de data agregada del 2015. Adicionalmente, se incluyeron tres estudios que evaluaron únicamente seguridad: un análisis de dataagregada del 2014, un meta-análisis del 2015, y un análisis del 2017. Ensayos clínicos aleatorizados de fase III. Se incluyó en ECA de fase III del 2013. Adicionalmente, como sugerencia del especialista, se agregó un ECA de fase III del 2012. Resumen de congreso: A sugerencia del especialista se incluyó en los resultados un resumen del congreso del 2016. CONCLUSIONES: A la fecha no se han publicado ensayos clínicos aleatorizados del uso de tofacitinib en una población de pacientes con falla a tratamiento (primaria, secundaria o intolerancia) tanto a anti-TNFs como a anti-CD20. Las GPC identificadas presentan recomendaciones heterogéneas sobre el uso de tofacitinib. A pesar de ello, se puede concluir que, de acuerdo con las GPC, tofacitinib es considerado una alternativa tanto en pacientes que han fallado a tres o más tratamientos biológicos, como en aquellos que han fallado a uno; sin embargo, la mayoria de las GPC concuerdan en que el uso de tofacitinib se debe limitar a aquella población que ha agotado las opciones disponibles de tratamiento biológico, debido principalmente a la escasa información sobre el perfil de seguridad de tofacitinib y su efectos a largo plazo. Debido a que no es clara la relación riesgo/benefício y que existen otras alternativas que han probado ser eficaces para la misma condición (pacientes con AR con respuesta inadecuada a FARMEs biológicos) disponibles en el mercado peruano; a la fecha no se cuenta con evidencia que sustente que el uso de tofacitinib en la población de pacientes con respuesta inadecuada a mas de dos tratamientos biológicos suponga un benefício adicional al tratamiento utilizado actualmente, ni que se trate de un medicamento seguro para los pacientes. Asimismo, vale resaltar que las GPC internacionales identificadas mencionan otras posibles alternativas para la condición mencionada, e incluso algunas de ellas recomiendan otras alternativas por encima de tofacitinib, en línea con la preocupación ralacionada a su perfil de seguridad, y recomiendan reservar su uso únicamente para la población que ha agotado las opciones de tratamiento biológico disponibles en el mercado. El Instituto de Evaluación de Tecnologías en Salud e Investigación-IETSI, no aprueba el uso de tofacitinib en pacientes con AR que han fallado a tratamiento con anti-TNF y con anti-CD20.

Assessment of CD37 B-cell antigen and cell of origin significantly improves risk prediction in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma.

CD37 (tetraspanin TSPAN26) is a B-cell surface antigen widely expressed on mature B cells. CD37 is involved in immune regulation and tumor suppression but its function has not been fully elucidated. We assessed CD37 expression in de novo diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), and investigated its clinical and biologic significance in 773 patients treated with rituximab plus cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (R-CHOP) and 231 patients treated with CHOP. We found that CD37 loss (CD37-) in ∼60% of DLBCL patients showed significantly decreased survival after R-CHOP treatment, independent of the International Prognostic Index (IPI), germinal center B-cell-like (GCB)/activated B-cell-like (ABC) cell of origin, nodal/extranodal primary origin, and the prognostic factors associated with CD37-, including TP53 mutation, NF-κBhigh, Mychigh, phosphorylated STAT3high, survivinhigh, p63-, and BCL6 translocation. CD37 positivity predicted superior survival, abolishing the prognostic impact of high IPI and above biomarkers in GCB-DLBCL but not in ABC-DLBCL. Combining risk scores for CD37- status and ABC cell of origin with the IPI, defined as molecularly adjusted IPI for R-CHOP (M-IPI-R), or IPI plus immunohistochemistry (IHC; IPI+IHC) for CD37, Myc, and Bcl-2, significantly improved risk prediction over IPI alone. Gene expression profiling suggested that decreased CD20 and increased PD-1 levels in CD37- DLBCL, ICOSLG upregulation in CD37+ GCB-DLBCL, and CD37 functions during R-CHOP treatment underlie the pivotal role of CD37 status in clinical outcomes. In conclusion, CD37 is a critical determinant of R-CHOP outcome in DLBCL especially in GCB-DLBCL, representing its importance for optimal rituximab action and sustained immune responses. The combined molecular and clinical prognostic indices, M-IPI-R and IPI+IHC, have remarkable predictive values in R-CHOP-treated DLBCL.

Assessment of physicochemical properties of rituximab related to its immunomodulatory activity.

Rituximab is a chimeric monoclonal antibody employed for the treatment of CD20-positive B-cell non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, chronic lymphocytic leukemia, rheumatoid arthritis, granulomatosis with polyangiitis and microscopic polyangiitis. It binds specifically to the CD20 antigen expressed on pre-B and consequently on mature B-lymphocytes of both normal and malignant cells, inhibiting their proliferation through apoptosis, CDC, and ADCC mechanisms. The immunomodulatory activity of rituximab is closely related to critical quality attributes that characterize its chemical composition and spatial configuration, which determine the recognition of CD20 and the binding to receptors or factors involved in its effector functions, while regulating the potential immunogenic response. Herein, we present a physicochemical and biological characterization followed by a pharmacodynamics and immunogenicity study to demonstrate comparability between two products containing rituximab. The physicochemical and biological characterization revealed that both products fit within the same response intervals exhibiting the same degree of variability. With regard to clinical response, both products depleted CD20+ B-cells until posttreatment recovery and no meaningful differences were found in their pharmacodynamic profiles. The evaluation of anti-chimeric antibodies did not show differential immunogenicity among products. Overall, these data confirm that similarity of critical quality attributes results in a comparable immunomodulatory activity.

Early molecular assessment of osseointegration in humans.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the early temporal-wide genome transcription regulation by the surface topography at the bone-implant interface of implants bearing microroughened or superimposed nanosurface topology. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Four commercially pure titanium implants (2.2 × 5.0 mm) with either a moderately roughened surface (TiOblast) or super-imposed nanoscale topography (Osseospeed) were placed (n = 2/surface) in edentulous sites of eleven systemically healthy subjects and subsequently removed after 3 and 7 days. Total RNA was isolated from cells adherent to retrieved implants. A whole-genome microarray using the Affymetrix Human gene 1.1 ST Array was used to describe the gene expression profiles that were differentially regulated by the implant surfaces. RESULTS: There were no significant differences when comparing the two implant surfaces at each time point. However, the microarray identified several genes that were differentially regulated at day 7 vs. day 3 for both implant surfaces. Functionally relevant categories related to the extracellular matrix (ECM), collagen fibril organization, and angiogenesis were upregulated at both surfaces (day7 vs. day3). Abundant upregulation of several differential markers of alternative activated macrophages was observed (e.g., MRC1, MSR1, MS4A4A, SLC38A6, and CCL18). The biological processes involved with the inflammatory/immune response gene expression were concomitantly downregulated. CONCLUSIONS: Gene regulation implicating collagen fibrillogenesis and ECM organization as well as the inflammatory/immune responses involving the alternative activated pathway are observed in implant adherent cells at early (3-7 days) after implantation. These gene expression events may indicate a pivotal role of collagen fibrillogenesis as well as immunomodulation in altering bone accrual and biomechanical physical properties of the implant-bone interface.

Comparative assessment of clinically utilized CD20-directed antibodies in chronic lymphocytic leukemia cells reveals divergent NK cell, monocyte, and macrophage properties.

CD20 is a widely validated, B cell-specific target for therapy in B cell malignancies. Rituximab is an anti-CD20 Ab that prolongs survival of chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) patients when combined with chemotherapy. Ofatumumab and GA101 (obinutuzumab) are CD20-directed Abs currently being developed as alternative agents to rituximab in CLL based upon different properties of enhanced direct cell death, NK cell-mediated Ab-dependent cellular cytotoxicity, or complement-dependent cytotoxicity. Despite widespread study, ofatumumab and GA101 have not been compared with each other, nor studied for their interactions with monocytes and macrophages which are critical for the efficacy of anti-CD20 Abs in murine models. In CLL cells, we show that direct cell death and complement-dependent cytotoxicity are greatest with GA101 and ofatumumab, respectively. GA101 promotes enhanced NK cell activation and Ab-dependent cellular cytotoxicity at high Ab concentrations. Ofatumumab elicits superior Ab-dependent cellular phagocytosis with monocyte-derived macrophages. GA101 demonstrated reduced activation of monocytes with diminished pERK, TNF-α release, and FcγRIIa recruitment to lipid rafts. These data demonstrate that GA101 and ofatumumab are both superior to rituximab against CLL cells via different mechanisms of potential tumor elimination. These findings bear relevance to potential combination strategies with each of these anti-CD20 Abs in the treatment of CLL.