How I treat refractory and relapsed acute myeloid leukemia.

ABSTRACT: Most patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) develop refractory/relapsed (R/R) disease even in the presence of novel and targeted therapies. Given the biological complexity of the disease and differences in frontline treatments, there are therapies approved for only subgroups of R/R AML, and enrollment in clinical trials should be first priority. Allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) is the only potentially curative strategy for most patients. Therapeutic approaches, including allogeneic HCT, triggered by the presence of measurable residual disease (MRD), have recently evolved to prevent overt hematologic relapse. Salvage therapy with chemotherapy or targeted therapy is frequently administered before HCT to reduce the leukemic burden. Gilteritinib is approved by the Food and Drug Administration and European Medicines Agency for patients with relapsed FLT3 mutated AML, whereas targeted therapy for relapsed IDH1/2 mutated AML has only FDA approval. Patients who are R/R after azacitidine and venetoclax (AZA/VEN) have a dismal outcome. In this setting, even available targeted therapies show unsatisfactory results. Examples of ongoing developments include menin inhibitors, a targeted therapy for patients with mutated NPM1 or KMT2A rearrangements, antibodies targeting the macrophage immune checkpoint CD47, and triple combinations involving AZA/VEN. The latter cause significant myelosuppressive effects, which make it challenging to find the right schedule and dose.

Second-Line Tisagenlecleucel or Standard Care in Aggressive B-Cell Lymphoma.

BACKGROUND: Patient outcomes are poor for aggressive B-cell non-Hodgkin's lymphomas not responding to or progressing within 12 months after first-line therapy. Tisagenlecleucel is an anti-CD19 chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy approved for diffuse large B-cell lymphoma after at least two treatment lines. METHODS: We conducted an international phase 3 trial involving patients with aggressive lymphoma that was refractory to or progressing within 12 months after first-line therapy. Patients were randomly assigned to receive tisagenlecleucel with optional bridging therapy (tisagenlecleucel group) or salvage chemotherapy and autologous hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation (HSCT) (standard-care group). The primary end point was event-free survival, defined as the time from randomization to stable or progressive disease at or after the week 12 assessment or death. Crossover to receive tisagenlecleucel was allowed if a defined event occurred at or after the week 12 assessment. Other end points included response and safety. RESULTS: A total of 322 patients underwent randomization. At baseline, the percentage of patients with high-grade lymphomas was higher in the tisagenlecleucel group than in the standard-care group (24.1% vs. 16.9%), as was the percentage with an International Prognostic Index score (range, 0 to 5, with higher scores indicating a worse prognosis) of 2 or higher (65.4% vs. 57.5%). A total of 95.7% of the patients in the tisagenlecleucel group received tisagenlecleucel; 32.5% of the patients in the standard-care group received autologous HSCT. The median time from leukapheresis to tisagenlecleucel infusion was 52 days. A total of 25.9% of the patients in the tisagenlecleucel group had lymphoma progression at week 6, as compared with 13.8% of those in the standard-care group. The median event-free survival in both groups was 3.0 months (hazard ratio for event or death in the tisagenlecleucel group, 1.07; 95% confidence interval, 0.82 to 1.40; P = 0.61). A response occurred in 46.3% of the patients in the tisagenlecleucel group and in 42.5% in the standard-care group. Ten patients in the tisagenlecleucel group and 13 in the standard-care group died from adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Tisagenlecleucel was not superior to standard salvage therapy in this trial. Additional studies are needed to assess which patients may obtain the most benefit from each approach. (Funded by Novartis; BELINDA ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03570892.).

Interventions and outcomes of patients with multiple myeloma receiving salvage therapy after BCMA-directed CAR T therapy.

B-cell maturation antigen (BCMA)-directed chimeric antigen receptor T-cell (CAR T) therapy has demonstrated remarkable efficacy in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma, and now there are two US Food and Drug Administration-approved BCMA-directed CAR T products. However, despite high initial response rates, most patients eventually relapse. The outcomes of patients with disease recurrence after BCMA-directed CAR T have not been comprehensively studied, and such an analysis would help define optimal treatment strategies. We analyzed the salvage treatments and outcomes of 79 patients with multiple myeloma from two academic institutions, who had progression of disease after treatment with BCMA-directed CAR T. A total of 237 post-CAR T salvage treatment lines were used, and patients received a median of 2 (range, 1-10) treatment lines. The median overall survival from the date of relapse post-CAR T therapy was 17.9 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 14.0 non-estimable). The overall response rate to the first salvage regimen was 43.4%, with a median progression-free survival of 3.5 months (CI, 2.5-4.6). Thirty-five patients (44.3%) received a T-cell-engaging therapy (bispecific antibody or subsequent CAR T) as salvage treatment. The overall survival in patients who received subsequent T-cell-engaging therapy was not reached after a median follow up of 21.3 months. Patients with multiple myeloma who relapse after BCMA-directed CAR T have a limited prognosis but can be potentially treated with multiple lines of salvage therapy. T-cell-engaging therapies appear to maintain pronounced clinical activity in this setting.

Salvage Therapy Including Foscarnet and Ibalizumab for Multidrug-Resistant Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type 2 Infection.

We evaluated Ibalizumab (IBA)-containing standardized optimized salvage regimen (with or without a 4-week foscarnet induction) in individuals harboring multidrug-resistant human immunodeficiency virus type 2 (HIV-2). Nine were included; 2 achieved virological suppression after foscarnet induction with a sustained suppression at Week 24 after IBA initiation, and an additional individual at Week 24 after Ibalizumab initiation.

Adjuvant and salvage radiotherapy after neoadjuvant therapy and radical prostatectomy for high-risk localized prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: We sought to describe patterns of delivery of adjuvant (aRT) and salvage RT (sRT) in patients who underwent RP after receiving neoadjuvant androgen receptor pathway inhibitor (ARPI) before radical prostatectomy (RP) for high-risk localized prostate cancer (HRLPC). METHODS: Two hundred eighteen patients treated on phase 2 neoadjuvant trials between 2006 and 2018 at two academic centers were evaluated. aRT and sRT were defined as receipt of RT with a PSA of ≤0.1 or >0.1 ng/mL, respectively. Primary outcomes were biochemical recurrence (BCR), defined as time from aRT/sRT to a PSA rising to >0.1 ng/mL, and metastasis-free survival (MFS) after RT. RESULTS: Twenty-three (11%) and 55 (25%) patients received aRT and sRT respectively. Median PSA at start of aRT and sRT was 0.01 and 0.16 ng/mL, and median duration from RP to RT was 5 and 14 months, respectively. All aRT patients had NCCN high-risk disease, 30% were pN1 and 43% had positive surgical margins; 52% had prostate bed RT. Fifty-one percent of sRT patients had biopsy Gleason 9-10, 29% were pT2 and 9% had positive surgical margins; 63% had RT to the prostate bed/pelvis. At a median follow-up of 5.3 and 3.0 years after aRT and sRT, 3-year freedom from BCR was 55% and 47%, and 3-year MFS was 56% and 53%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: aRT was infrequently used in patients who received neoadjuvant ARPI before RP for HRLPC. Outcomes of aRT and sRT were similar but generally poor. Studies evaluating intensified systemic therapy approaches with postoperative RT in this high-risk population are needed.

Glofitamab as a salvage treatment for B-cell lymphomas in the real world: A multicenter study in Taiwan.

BACKGROUND: Glofitamab is a bispecific antibody with promise for treating relapsed/refractory B-cell lymphoma according to a phase 1/2 clinical trial. This study examined its real-world effectiveness. METHODS: This was an investigator-initiated, multicenter retrospective study including 34 patients who had relapsed/refractory B-cell lymphomas after at least three prior lines of therapy and received glofitamab monotherapy in a compassionate use program in Taiwan between January 2021 and October 2022. RESULTS: At a median follow-up of 15.9 months, 56% of patients responded to glofitamab and 23% achieved complete remission. Response to the previous line of therapy significantly correlated with response to glofitamab (p = .020). Most responses were durable; only five out of the 19 responders had documented disease recurrence at the data cutoff date. The estimated progression-free survival (PFS) was 3.2 months, and the estimated 1-year PFS was 33% for the entire cohort. PFS was better for responders than nonresponders (median PFS, 16.9 vs. 1.8 months; 1-year PFS, 60% vs. 0%). Forty-three cytokine release syndrome (CRS) events were observed, three of which were grade 3; all were manageable without glofitamab discontinuation. No immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity was reported. Among seven hepatitis B virus (HBV) carriers (six had antiviral prophylaxis) and 14 patients with remote HBV (four had antiviral prophylaxis), no HBV reactivation was observed. CONCLUSIONS: In this real-world cohort, glofitamab exhibited effectiveness comparable to trial results without excessive CRS or new safety issues. With appropriate prophylaxis, glofitamab-treated patients with chronic or remote HBV infection are unlikely to experience virus reactivation.

Sequence not salvage.

Chimeric antigen receptor T-cell (CAR-T) therapy for the treatment of multiple myeloma (MM) has fundamentally changed the relapsed and refractory therapeutic landscape, but the disease remains incurable. Two CAR-T products, idecabtagene vicleucel (ide-cel; Abecma) and ciltacabtagene autoleucel (cilta-cel, Carvykti), have been FDA- and EMA-approved for the treatment of relapsed/refractory MM (RRMM); both target B-cell maturation antigen (BCMA), a surface glycoprotein highly expressed on MM cells. Despite deep and durable responses following CAR-T therapy, most patients will need subsequent treatment, and the optimal next-line therapy is presently unclear. Commentary on: Liu et al. Outcomes in patients with multiple myeloma receiving salvage treatment after BCMA-specific CAR-T therapy: A retrospective analysis of LEGEND-2. Br J Haematol 2024;204:1780-1789.

Outcomes in patients with multiple myeloma receiving salvage treatment after BCMA-specific CAR-T therapy: A retrospective analysis of LEGEND-2.

Chimeric antigen receptor T-cell (CAR-T) therapy targeting B-cell maturation antigen (BCMA) has shown profound efficacy and manageable toxicity in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). However, determining the best course of treatment for post-CAR-T therapy relapse remains a significant challenge. We conducted a retrospective analysis of patients from the phase I LEGEND-2 study (NCT03090659) enrolled at the Xi'an site, analysing the first salvage line of therapy and outcomes in patients with RRMM who progressed after receiving LCAR-B38M CAR-T therapy. Of 45 eligible patients, 34 (76%) had progressive disease (PD). Overall response rate (ORR) to salvage treatment was 50.0%. Median progression-free survival (PFS) after starting salvage treatment was 16.3 months. Median PFS of patients receiving proteasome inhibitor (PI)-based combination therapy was longer (28.2 months) than that of patients receiving a second BCMA CAR-T (including LCAR-B38M; 3.9 months, p = 0.0022) or chemotherapy (1.67 months, p = 0.0001). All patients with extramedullary disease at baseline (n = 11) progressed after CAR-T therapy; ORR to salvage therapy was 25.0% and median PFS was 9.7 months. In conclusion, salvage therapy in patients with PD after receiving LCAR-B38M CAR-T cells produced moderate efficacy, with better outcomes for PI-based salvage regimens.

Clofarabine monotherapy in aggressive, relapsed and refractory Langerhans cell histiocytosis.

Over 50% of patients with systemic LCH are not cured with front-line therapies, and data to guide salvage options are limited. We describe 58 patients with LCH who were treated with clofarabine. Clofarabine monotherapy was active against LCH in this cohort, including heavily pretreated patients with a systemic objective response rate of 92.6%, higher in children (93.8%) than adults (83.3%). BRAFV600E+ variant allele frequency in peripheral blood is correlated with clinical responses. Prospective multicentre trials are warranted to determine optimal dosing, long-term efficacy, late toxicities, relative cost and patient-reported outcomes of clofarabine compared to alternative LCH salvage therapy strategies.

Five-Year Follow-Up of POLARIS-01 Phase II Trial: Toripalimab as Salvage Monotherapy in Chinese Patients With Advanced Melanoma.

BACKGROUND: To investigate the efficacy and toxicity after long-term follow-up of anti-PD-1 antibody in advanced melanoma with predominantly acral and mucosal subtypes. METHODS AND PATIENTS: In the POLARIS-01 phase II trial, 128 Chinese patients with advanced melanoma refractory to standard therapy received toripalimab until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity for ≤2 years. For those who progressed after discontinuation due to 2-year treatment completion, rechallenge was allowed. The primary objectives were safety and overall response rate (ORR). RESULTS: As of February 8, 2021, ORR was 17.3% (95% CI: 11.2-25.0) evaluated by the independent radiologic review committee. The median overall survival (OS) for patients with known melanoma subtypes was 16.3 m for acral, 41.5 m for nonacral cutaneous, and 10.3 m for mucosal melanoma. Thereafter, the evaluation was continued by investigators. As of November 4, 2022, 5 years after the last enrollment, median duration of response was 15.6 months (range, 3.7-64.5+), median progression-free survival (PFS) was 3.5 months (95% CI, 2.2-5.3), and 60-month OS rate was 28.5% (95% CI: 20.2-37.2). Thirteen patients completed a 2-year treatment of toripalimab, with the subtypes of acral (2/13), non-acral cutaneous (4/13), mucosal (3/13) and unknown primary (4/13). Five patients were rechallenged. Four of them, all of whom were non-mucosal, completed the rechallenge course of 2 years with PFS ≥ 24 months. CONCLUSIONS: This is the largest prospective anti-PD-1 trial with mature data in advanced melanoma in China. Toripalimab demonstrated a manageable safety profile and durable clinical response in Chinese patients with metastatic melanoma who had failed in standard therapy. Immunotherapy seems less efficacious for long-term responders with mucosal primaries as rechallenge therapy.

Timing of radiotherapy (RT) after radical prostatectomy (RP): long-term outcomes in the RADICALS-RT trial (NCT00541047).

BACKGROUND: The optimal timing of radiotherapy (RT) after radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer has been uncertain. RADICALS-RT compared efficacy and safety of adjuvant RT versus an observation policy with salvage RT for prostate-specific antigen (PSA) failure. PATIENTS AND METHODS: RADICALS-RT was a randomised controlled trial enrolling patients with ≥1 risk factor (pT3/4, Gleason 7-10, positive margins, preoperative PSA≥10 ng/ml) for recurrence after radical prostatectomy. Patients were randomised 1:1 to adjuvant RT ('Adjuvant-RT') or an observation policy with salvage RT for PSA failure ('Salvage-RT') defined as PSA≥0.1 ng/ml or three consecutive rises. Stratification factors were Gleason score, margin status, planned RT schedule (52.5 Gy/20 fractions or 66 Gy/33 fractions) and treatment centre. The primary outcome measure was freedom-from-distant-metastasis (FFDM), designed with 80% power to detect an improvement from 90% with Salvage-RT (control) to 95% at 10 years with Adjuvant-RT. Secondary outcome measures were biochemical progression-free survival, freedom from non-protocol hormone therapy, safety and patient-reported outcomes. Standard survival analysis methods were used; hazard ratio (HR)<1 favours Adjuvant-RT. RESULTS: Between October 2007 and December 2016, 1396 participants from UK, Denmark, Canada and Ireland were randomised: 699 Salvage-RT, 697 Adjuvant-RT. Allocated groups were balanced with a median age of 65 years. Ninety-three percent (649/697) Adjuvant-RT reported RT within 6 months after randomisation; 39% (270/699) Salvage-RT reported RT during follow-up. Median follow-up was 7.8 years. With 80 distant metastasis events, 10-year FFDM was 93% for Adjuvant-RT and 90% for Salvage-RT: HR=0.68 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.43-1.07, P=0.095]. Of 109 deaths, 17 were due to prostate cancer. Overall survival was not improved (HR=0.980, 95% CI 0.667-1.440, P=0.917). Adjuvant-RT reported worse urinary and faecal incontinence 1 year after randomisation (P=0.001); faecal incontinence remained significant after 10 years (P=0.017). CONCLUSION: Long-term results from RADICALS-RT confirm adjuvant RT after radical prostatectomy increases the risk of urinary and bowel morbidity, but does not meaningfully improve disease control. An observation policy with salvage RT for PSA failure should be the current standard after radical prostatectomy. TRIAL IDENTIFICATION: RADICALS, RADICALS-RT, ISRCTN40814031, NCT00541047.

Salvage Therapy for Prostate Cancer: AUA/ASTRO/SUO Guideline Part III: Salvage Therapy After Radiotherapy or Focal Therapy, Pelvic Nodal Recurrence and Oligometastasis, and Future Directions.

PURPOSE: The summary presented herein covers recommendations on salvage therapy for recurrent prostate cancer intended to facilitate care decisions and aid clinicians in caring for patients who have experienced a recurrence following prior treatment with curative intent. This is Part III of a three-part series focusing on evaluation and management of suspected non-metastatic recurrence after radiotherapy (RT) and focal therapy, evaluation and management of regional recurrence, management for molecular imaging metastatic recurrence, and future directions. Please refer to Part I for discussion of treatment decision-making and Part II for discussion of treatment delivery for non-metastatic biochemical recurrence (BCR) after radical prostatectomy (RP). MATERIALS AND METHODS: The systematic review that informs this Guideline was based on searches in Ovid MEDLINE (1946 to July 21, 2022), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (through August 2022), and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (through August 2022). Update searches were conducted on July 26, 2023. Searches were supplemented by reviewing electronic database reference lists of relevant articles. RESULTS: In a collaborative effort between AUA, ASTRO, and SUO, the Salvage Therapy for Prostate Cancer Guideline Panel developed evidence- and consensus-based guideline statements to provide guidance for the care of patients who experience BCR after initial definitive local therapy for clinically localized disease. CONCLUSIONS: Continuous and deliberate efforts for multidisciplinary care in prostate cancer will be required to optimize and improve the oncologic and functional outcomes of patients treated with salvage therapies in the future.

Salvage Therapy for Prostate Cancer: AUA/ASTRO/SUO Guideline Part I: Introduction and Treatment Decision-Making at the Time of Suspected Biochemical Recurrence after Radical Prostatectomy.

PURPOSE: The summary presented herein covers recommendations on salvage therapy for recurrent prostate cancer intended to facilitate care decisions and aid clinicians in caring for patients who have experienced a recurrence following prior treatment with curative intent. This is Part I of a three-part series focusing on treatment decision-making at the time of suspected biochemical recurrence (BCR) after radical prostatectomy (RP). Please refer to Part II for discussion of treatment delivery for non-metastatic BCR after RP and Part III for discussion of evaluation and management of recurrence after radiotherapy (RT) and focal therapy, regional recurrence, and oligometastasis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The systematic review that informs this Guideline was based on searches in Ovid MEDLINE (1946 to July 21, 2022), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (through August 2022), and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (through August 2022). Update searches were conducted on July 26, 2023. Searches were supplemented by reviewing electronic database reference lists of relevant articles. RESULTS: In a collaborative effort between AUA, ASTRO, and SUO, the Salvage Therapy for Prostate Cancer Panel developed evidence- and consensus-based statements to provide guidance for the care of patients who experience BCR after initial definitive local therapy for clinically localized disease. CONCLUSIONS: Advancing work in the area of diagnostic tools (particularly imaging), biomarkers, radiation delivery, and biological manipulation with the evolving armamentarium of therapeutic agents will undoubtedly present new opportunities for patients to experience long-term control of their cancer while minimizing toxicity.

Salvage Therapy for Prostate Cancer: AUA/ASTRO/SUO Guideline Part II: Treatment Delivery for Non-metastatic Biochemical Recurrence After Primary Radical Prostatectomy.

PURPOSE: The summary presented herein covers recommendations on salvage therapy for recurrent prostate cancer intended to facilitate care decisions and aid clinicians in caring for patients who have experienced a recurrence following prior treatment with curative intent. This is Part II of a three-part series focusing on treatment delivery for non-metastatic biochemical recurrence (BCR) after primary radical prostatectomy (RP). Please refer to Part I for discussion of treatment decision-making and Part III for discussion of evaluation and management of recurrence after radiotherapy (RT) and focal therapy, regional recurrence, and oligometastasis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The systematic review that informs this Guideline was based on searches in Ovid MEDLINE (1946 to July 21, 2022), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (through August 2022), and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (through August 2022). Update searches were conducted on July 26, 2023. Searches were supplemented by reviewing electronic database reference lists of relevant articles. RESULTS: In a collaborative effort between AUA, ASTRO, and SUO, the Salvage Therapy for Prostate Cancer Panel developed evidence- and consensus-based guideline statements to provide guidance for the care of patients who experience BCR after initial definitive local therapy for clinically localized disease. CONCLUSIONS: Optimizing and personalizing the approach to salvage therapy remains an ongoing area of work in the field of genitourinary oncology and represents an area of research and clinical care that requires well-coordinated, multi-disciplinary efforts.

Patient Preference for Surgical Methods for Ipsilateral Breast Tumor Recurrence.

BACKGROUND: Mastectomy has been the standard surgical treatment for ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence (IBTR). Recently, there has been growing interest in repeat breast-conserving surgery (rBCS) for IBTR among breast surgeons; however, there is currently little information regarding patient preferences for surgical procedure for IBTR. The purpose of this study was to evaluate preference for surgical procedure (mastectomy vs. rBCS) among breast cancer patients who had undergone salvage surgery for IBTR. METHODS: Overall, 100 breast cancer patients who had undergone salvage surgery for IBTR were asked about their preferred surgical methods for IBTR and the reason. The association of patient preference and the reasons related to various clinical and pathological factors were assessed. RESULTS: Of the 100 respondents, only 11 patients (11%) preferred rBCS. Patients who had undergone rBCS and radiotherapy for IBTR were significantly more likely to prefer to undergo rBCS than other groups (p = 0.030). The most frequent reason for choosing rBCS was the patient's desire to minimize breast deformity and surgical wounds. CONCLUSIONS: Our study revealed that there is a low rate of patients who opt to undergo rBCS among patients who had undergone salvage surgery for IBTR. Discrepancies in perceptions regarding the surgical procedure for IBTR between patients and their surgeons may exist.

How I treat relapsed multiple myeloma.

Despite recent advances, multiple myeloma remains an incurable disease for most patients, and initial remission will be followed by relapses requiring therapy. For many, there will be several remissions and relapses until resistance develops to all available therapies. With the introduction of several new agents, myeloma treatment has changed drastically, and there are new options for the management of relapsed or refractory disease, including new drug classes with distinct mechanisms of action and cellular therapies. However, resistance to major drug classes used in first-line remains the most critical factor for the choice of treatment at relapse. Continuous lenalidomide-based therapy is used extensively at first-line, and resistance to lenalidomide has become the key factor for the choice of salvage therapy. Daratumumab is increasingly used in first-line, and soon patients that relapse while on daratumumab will become a common challenge. Three-drug regimens are the standard approach to manage relapsed disease. Adding drugs with new mechanisms of activity can improve outcomes and overcomes class resistance, but, until now, while biology is important, it can offer only limited guidance for the choice of therapy.

Response-adapted anti-PD-1-based salvage therapy for Hodgkin lymphoma with nivolumab alone or in combination with ICE.

This phase 2 trial evaluated PET-adapted nivolumab alone or in combination with ifosfamide, carboplatin, and etoposide (NICE) as first salvage therapy and bridge to autologous hematopoietic cell transplantation (AHCT) in relapsed/refractory (RR) classical Hodgkin lymphoma (cHL). Patients with RR cHL received 240 mg nivolumab every 2 weeks for up to 6 cycles (C). Patients in complete response (CR) after C6 proceeded to AHCT, whereas patients with progressive disease at any point or not in CR after C6 received NICE for 2 cycles. The primary endpoint was CR rate per the 2014 Lugano classification at completion of protocol therapy. Forty-three patients were evaluable for toxicity; 42 were evaluable for response. Thirty-four patients received nivolumab alone, and 9 patients received nivolumab+NICE. No unexpected toxicities were observed after nivolumab or NICE. After nivolumab, the overall response rate (ORR) was 81%, and the CR rate was 71%. Among 9 patients who received NICE, all responded, with 8 (89%) achieving CR. At the end of protocol therapy, the ORR and CR rates were 93% and 91%. Thirty-three patients were bridged directly to AHCT, including 26 after Nivo alone. The 2-year progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival in all treated patients (n = 43) were 72% and 95%, respectively. Among 33 patients who bridged directly to AHCT, the 2-year PFS was 94% (95% CI: 78-98). PET-adapted sequential salvage therapy with nivolumab/nivolumab+NICE was well tolerated and effective, resulting in a high CR rate and bridging most patients to AHCT without chemotherapy. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov #NCT03016871.

Pembrolizumab for B-cell lymphomas relapsing after or refractory to CD19-directed CAR T-cell therapy.

CD19-directed chimeric antigen receptor-modified (CAR T) T cells achieve durable remissions in about 30% to 40% of relapsed/refractory large B-cell lymphomas. T-cell exhaustion and/or an immunosuppressive tumor microenvironment may contribute to CAR T-cell failure. Pembrolizumab, an anti-PD1 immune checkpoint inhibitor, may reverse T-cell exhaustion after CAR T-cell therapy. We treated 12 patients with B-cell lymphomas who were either refractory to (n = 9) or relapsed after (n = 3) CD19-directed CAR T-cell (4-1BB-costimulated) therapy with pembrolizumab 200 mg IV every 3 weeks. Median time from CAR T-cell infusion to first pembrolizumab dose was 3.3 months (range, 0.4-42.8 months). Pembrolizumab was well tolerated, and the only grade ≥3 adverse events related to pembrolizumab were neutropenia (n = 3; 25%). Best overall response rate after pembrolizumab was 25% (3 of 12 patients; 1 complete response; 2 partial responses). One (8%) patient had stable disease; thus, 4 of 12 (33%) patients had clinical benefit. After pembrolizumab, 4 patients with clinical benefit had an increase in percentage of CAR T cells by mass cytometry by time of flight (CyTOF); 3 of 4 of these patients also had increases in CAR19 transgene levels by quantitative polymerase chain reaction. Deep immune profiling using CyTOF revealed increased CAR T-cell activation and proliferation and less T-cell exhaustion in clinical responders. Together, PD1 blockade with pembrolizumab after CD19-directed CAR T-cell therapy appears safe and may achieve clinical responses in some patients with B-cell lymphomas refractory to or relapsed after CAR T-cell therapy. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gove as #NCT02650999.

Focal high-intensity focused ultrasound therapy for localized prostate cancer: An interim analysis of the multinational FASST study.

BACKGROUND: High-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) emerged as a novel approach for the treatment of localized prostate cancer (PCa). However, prospective studies on HIFU-related outcomes and predictors of treatment failure (TF) remain scarce. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a multinational prospective cohort study among patients undergoing HIFU therapy for localized, low- to intermediate-risk PCa. Follow-up data on serial prostate specific antigen (PSA), multi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI), targeted/systematic biopsies, adverse events and functional outcomes were collected. The primary endpoint was TF, defined as histologically confirmed PCa requiring whole-gland salvage treatment. Uni- and multi-variable adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) were calculated using Cox proportional hazard regression models. RESULTS: At baseline, mean (standard deviation) age was 64.14 (7.19) years, with the majority of patients showing T-stage 1 (73.9%) and International Society of Urological Pathology grading system Grade 2 (58.8%). PSA nadir (median, 1.70 ng/mL) was reached after 6 months. Of all patients recruited, 16% had clinically significant PCa, as confirmed by biopsy, of which 13.4% had TF. Notably, T-stage and number of positive cores at initial biopsy were independent predictors of TF during follow-up (HR [95% CI] 1.27 [1.02-1.59] and 5.02 [1.80-14.03], respectively). Adverse events were minimal (17% and 8% early and late adverse events, respectively), with stable or improved functional outcomes in the majority of patients. CONCLUSIONS: This interim analysis of a multinational study on HIFU therapy for the management of low-to-intermediate-risk PCa reveals good functional outcomes, minimal adverse events and low incidence of TF over the short-term. Data on long-term outcomes, specifically as it relates to oncological outcomes, are awaited eagerly.

Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) re-irradiation for local failures following radical prostatectomy and post-operative radiotherapy.

PURPOSE: Local recurrences after radical prostatectomy (RP) and postoperative radiotherapy (RT) are challenging for salvage treatment. Retrospective analysis of own experiences with salvage re-irradiation was performed. METHODS: The study included all consecutive patients treated with salvage stereotactic body radiotherapy (sSBRT) for prostate bed recurrence following RP and postoperative RT at a single tertiary center between 2014 and 2021. Treatment toxicity defined as the occurrence of CTCAE grade ≥ 2 genito-urinary (GU) or gastro-intestinal (GI) adverse events (AEs) was assessed. A PSA response, biochemical control (BC) and overall survival (OS) were also evaluated. RESULTS: The study group included 32 patients with a median age of 68 years and a median follow-up of 41 months, treated with CyberKnife (53%) or Linac (47%) sSBRT. Total dose of 33.75-36.25 Gy in five fractions (72%) was applied in the majority of them. Approximately 19% patients reported grade ≥ 2 GU AEs both at baseline and at three months, and grade ≥ 2 GI toxicity increased from 0% at baseline to 6% at three months after sSBRT. There was some clinically relevant increase in late toxicity with 31% patients reporting late ≥ 2 GU, and 12.5% late ≥ 2 GI AEs. Two grade 3 AEs were recorded: recto-urinary fistulas. The majority of patients showed a PSA response (91% at one year post-sSBRT). The 3­year BC was 40% and 3­year OS was 87%. CONCLUSIONS: Manageable toxicity profile and satisfactory biochemical response suggest that SBRT in patients with local recurrence following RP and postoperative RT might be a salvage option for selected patients.