CEA-CD3 bispecific antibody cibisatamab with or without atezolizumab in patients with CEA-positive solid tumours: results of two multi-institutional Phase 1 trials.

Cibisatamab is a bispecific antibody-based construct targeting carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) on tumour cells and CD3 epsilon chain as a T-cell engager. Here we evaluated cibisatamab for advanced CEA-positive solid tumours in two open-label Phase 1 dose-escalation and -expansion studies: as a single agent with or without obinutuzumab in S1 (NCT02324257) and with atezolizumab in S2 (NCT02650713). Primary endpoints were safety, dose finding, and pharmacokinetics in S1; safety and dose finding in S2. Secondary endpoints were anti-tumour activity (including overall response rate, ORR) and pharmacodynamics in S1; anti-tumour activity, pharmacodynamics and pharmacokinetics in S2. S1 and S2 enrolled a total of 149 and 228 patients, respectively. Grade ≥3 cibisatamab-related adverse events occurred in 36% of S1 and 49% of S2 patients. The ORR was 4% in S1 and 7% in S2. In S2, patients with microsatellite stable colorectal carcinoma (MSS-CRC) given flat doses of cibisatamab and atezolizumab demonstrated an ORR of 14%. In S1 and S2, 40% and 52% of patients, respectively, developed persistent anti-drug antibodies (ADAs). ADA appearance could be mitigated by obinutuzumab-pretreatment, with 8% of patients having persistent ADAs. Overall, cibisatamab warrants further exploration in immunotherapy combination strategies for MSS-CRC.

[Methodological recommendations for surgical care in patients with hemophilia A receiving prophylactic therapy with emicizumab]. / Metodicheskie rekomendatsii po okazaniyu khirurgicheskoi pomoshchi u patsientov s gemofiliei A, poluchayushchikh profilakticheskuyu terapiyu emitsizumabom.

Methodological recommendations for surgical care in patients with hemophilia A receiving prophylactic therapy with emicizumab. Recommendations of the expert group. Moscow, 2024.

Efficacy and safety of bispecific antibodies vs. immune checkpoint blockade combination therapy in cancer: a real-world comparison.

Emerging tumor immunotherapy methods encompass bispecific antibodies (BSABs), immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), and adoptive cell immunotherapy. BSABs belong to the antibody family that can specifically recognize two different antigens or epitopes on the same antigen. These antibodies demonstrate superior clinical efficacy than monoclonal antibodies, indicating their role as a promising tumor immunotherapy option. Immune checkpoints are also important in tumor immunotherapy. Programmed cell death protein-1 (PD-1) is a widely acknowledged immune checkpoint target with effective anti-tumor activity. PD-1 inhibitors have demonstrated notable therapeutic efficacy in treating hematological and solid tumors; however, more than 50% of patients undergoing this treatment exhibit a poor response. However, ICI-based combination therapies (ICI combination therapies) have been demonstrated to synergistically increase anti-tumor effects and immune response rates. In this review, we compare the clinical efficacy and side effects of BSABs and ICI combination therapies in real-world tumor immunotherapy, aiming to provide evidence-based approaches for clinical research and personalized tumor diagnosis and treatment.

Phase 1a dose escalation study of ivonescimab (AK112/SMT112), an anti-PD-1/VEGF-A bispecific antibody, in patients with advanced solid tumors.

BACKGROUND: Studies showed that vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) inhibitors could improve therapeutic efficacy of PD-1/PD-L1 antibodies by transforming the immunosuppressive tumor microenvironment (TME) into an immunoresponsive TME. Ivonescimab is a first-in-class, humanized tetravalent bispecific antibody targeting PD-1 and VEGF-A simultaneously. Here, we report the first-in-human, phase 1a study of ivonescimab in patients with advanced solid tumors. METHODS: Patients with advanced solid tumors were treated with ivonescimab 0.3, 1, 3, 10, 20 or 30 mg/kg intravenously every 2 weeks using a 3+3+3 dose escalation design. Dose expansion occurred at 10 and 20 mg/kg in selected tumor types. The primary objective was to assess the safety and tolerability, and to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD). The secondary objectives included pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics and preliminary antitumor activity based on Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors V.1.1. RESULTS: Between October 2, 2019 and January 14, 2021, a total of 51 patients were enrolled and received ivonescimab. Two dose-limiting toxicities were reported at 30 mg/kg. The MTD of ivonescimab was 20 mg/kg every 2 weeks. Grade≥3 treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) occurred in 14 patients (27.5%). The most common TRAEs of any grade were rash (29.4%), arthralgia (19.6%), hypertension (19.6%), fatigue (17.6%), diarrhea (15.7%) and pruritus (11.8%). The most common grade≥3 TRAEs were hypertension (7/51, 13.7%), alanine aminotransferase increased (3/51, 5.2%), aspartate aminotransferase increased (2/51, 3.9%) and colitis (2/51, 3.9%). Of 47 patients who had at least one postbaseline assessment, the confirmed objective response rate was 25.5% (12/47) and disease control rate was 63.8% (30/47). Among 19 patients with platinum-resistant ovarian cancer, 5 patients (26.3%) achieved partial response (PR). Efficacy signals were also observed in patients with mismatch repair proficient (pMMR) colorectal cancer, non-small cell lung cancer, and both MMR deficient and pMMR endometrial cancer. CONCLUSIONS: Ivonescimab demonstrated manageable safety profiles and promising efficacy signals in multiple solid tumors. Exploration of alternative dosing regimens of ivonescimab monotherapy and combination therapies is warranted. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04047290.

Effectiveness and infectious complications of BCMA T-cell engagers in treating multiple myeloma: Real-world evidence from Sweden.

BACKGROUND: Multiple myeloma (MM), an incurable disease characterized by frequent relapses and a need for multiple treatments, often progresses to a relapse/refractory status resistant to all available drugs and drug classes. Bispecific antibodies, specifically BCMA T-cell engagers, have emerged as effective treatments for MM, demonstrating impressive efficacy. However, these treatments can adversely affect the immune system, increasing vulnerability to infections. METHODS/RESULTS: This study evaluated the efficacy and safety of BCMA T-cell engagers in 58 Swedish patients with poor MM prognosis. The patients exhibited a 69% overall response rate, with 69% survival and 60% progression-free survival at 15 months. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the risk of infectious complications, the prognosis of MM patients can be significantly improved with vigilant monitoring and proactive management of infections. This real-world data highlight the potential of BCMA T-cell engagers in treating MM, emphasizing the need for careful patient monitoring to mitigate infection risks.

Reduced-dose chemotherapy followed by blinatumomab in induction therapy for newly diagnosed B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia.

BACKGROUND: Blinatumomab early-line treatment in B-cell precursor acute lymphoblastic leukemia (B-ALL) might improve clinical outcomes. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective real-world cohort analysis in 20 newly diagnosed B-ALL patients who received reduced-dose chemotherapy (idarubicin, vindesine, and dexamethasone) for 1-3 weeks, followed by blinatumomab for 1-4 weeks as an induction therapy. RESULTS: At the end of the induction therapy, a complete remission rate of 100% was achieved; 17 (85%) patients were minimal residual disease (MRD) negative (<1 × 10-4 ). Adverse events (AEs) were reported in 12 (60%) patients-43.8% were grade 1-2 and 56.2% were grade 3-4. No incidence of neurotoxicity or grade ≥3 cytokine release syndrome was reported. CONCLUSIONS: Blinatumomab demonstrated a significant improvement in clinical outcomes in patients with newly diagnosed B-ALL irrespective of their poor-risk factor status and the pretreatment blast burden.

Efficacy and safety of bispecific antibodies therapy for relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma: a systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective clinical trials.

Objective: Bispecific antibody (BsAbs) therapy represents a promising immunotherapeutic approach with manageable toxicity and noteworthy preliminary efficacy in treating patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to compare the efficacy and safety of B-cell maturation antigen (BCMA)-targeted BsAbs and non-BCMA-targeted BsAbs in the treatment of RRMM patients. Methods: PubMed/MEDLINE, Web of Science, EMBASE, Cochrane Library and meeting libraries were searched from inception to August 16th, 2023. The efficacy evaluation included the complete objective response rate (ORR), complete response (CR) rate, stringent CR (sCR) rate, partial response (PR) rate, and very good PR (VGPR) rate. The efficacy evaluation included any grade adverse events (AEs) and grade ≥ 3 AEs. Results: Fourteen studies with a total of 1473 RRMM patients were included. The pooled ORR of the entire cohort was 61%. The non-BCMA-targeted BsAbs group displayed a higher ORR than the BCMA-targeted BsAbs group (74% vs. 54%, P < 0.01). In terms of hematological AEs, BCMA-targeted BsAbs therapy exhibited higher risks of neutropenia (any grade: 48% vs. 18%, P < 0.01; grade ≥ 3: 43% vs. 15%, P < 0.01) and lymphopenia (any grade: 37% vs. 8%, P < 0.01; grade ≥ 3: 31% vs. 8%, P = 0.07). Regarding non-hematological AEs, there were no significant differences in the risks of cytokine release syndrome (CRS, any grade: 64% vs. 66%, P = 0.84; grade ≥ 3: 1% vs. 1%, P = 0.36) and infections (any grade: 47% vs. 49%, P = 0.86; grade ≥ 3: 24% vs. 20%, P = 0.06) between the two groups. However, non-BCMA-targeted BsAbs therapy was associated with a higher risk of immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome (ICANS, any grade: 11% vs. 2%, P < 0.01) and lower risks of fatigue (any grade: 14% vs. 30%, P < 0.01) and pyrexia (any grade: 14% vs. 29%, P < 0.01). Conclusion: This analysis suggest that non-BCMA-targeted BsAbs therapy may offer a more favorable treatment response and tolerability, while BCMA-targeted BsAbs therapy may be associated with diminished neurotoxic effects. Systematic Review Registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/, identifier CRD42018090768.

How much prophylaxis is enough in haemophilia?

INTRODUCTION: Prophylaxis has become standard of care for all persons with haemophilia (PWH) with a severe phenotype. However, 'standard prophylaxis' with either factor or non-factor therapies (currently only emicizumab available) is prohibitively expensive for much of the world. We sought to address the question of 'How much prophylaxis is enough?' and 'Can it be individualized?' and specifically 'Can emicizumab be individualized?'. METHODS: We reviewed the literature on prophylaxis in haemophilia since its inception in the 1950s to the present, the development of more and less intense factor prophylaxis regimens and their outcomes and additionally the published outcomes of prophylaxis with low dose emicizumab. RESULTS: What these experiences collectively show is that low dose emicizumab does result in significant benefits to patients whilst being much less expensive than a "one size fits all" emicizumab prophylaxis approach. We also took note that some non-factor therapies still in development are individualized given that high doses of these can potentially put patients at risk. CONCLUSIONS: Prophylaxis is now clearly accepted as standard of care for PWH with a severe phenotype but now in a very short time a large assortment of different treatment options for prophylaxis have become/are becoming available and the haemophilia community will need to determine how to best use these recognizing that no 'one treatment fits all'.

Impact of Treatment Modality and Route of Administration on Cytokine Release Syndrome in Relapsed or Refractory Multiple Myeloma: A Meta-Analysis.

B-cell maturation antigen (BCMA)-targeting immunotherapies (e.g., chimeric antigen receptor T cells (CAR-T) and bispecific antibodies (BsAbs)) have achieved remarkable clinical responses in patients with relapsed and/or refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). Their use is accompanied by exaggerated immune responses related to T-cell activation and cytokine elevations leading to cytokine release syndrome (CRS) in some patients, which can be potentially life-threatening. However, systematic evaluation of the risk of CRS with BCMA-targeting BsAb and CAR-T therapies, and comparisons across different routes of BsAb administration (intravenous (i.v.) vs. subcutaneous (s.c.)) have not previously been conducted. This study utilized a meta-analysis approach to compare the CRS profile in BCMA-targeting CAR-T vs. BsAb immunotherapies administered either i.v. or s.c. in patients with RRMM. A total of 36 studies including 1,560 patients with RRMM treated with BCMA-targeting CAR-T and BsAb therapies were included in the analysis. The current analysis suggests that compared with BsAbs, CAR-T therapies were associated with higher CRS incidences (88% vs. 59%), higher rates of grade ≥ 3 CRS (7% vs. 2%), longer CRS duration (5 vs. 2 days), and more prevalent tocilizumab use (44% vs. 25%). The proportion of CRS grade ≥ 3 may also be lower (0% vs. 4%) for BsAb therapies administered via the s.c. (3 studies, n = 311) vs. i.v. (5 studies, n = 338) route. This meta-analysis suggests that different types of BCMA-targeting immunotherapies and administration routes could result in a range of CRS incidence and severity that should be considered while evaluating the benefit-risk profiles of these therapies.

Global experience of faricimab in clinical settings - a review.

INTRODUCTION: Faricimab is a bispecific antibody that acts to reduce neoangiogenesis in exudative retinal vascular disorders. It is approved for use in neovascular age-related macular degeneration and diabetic macular edema. We review the published efficacy and safety of faricimab in clinical settings. AREAS COVERED: A comprehensive literature review was conducted. Based on the 14 published real-world studies, 1127 patients (1204 eyes) were treated with faricimab. The majority of studies (14) included pre-treated patients. Most studies (13) showed central macular thickness improvement. However visual acuity improved in only half of the studies analyzed. Four studies demonstrated an extension of the treatment. Only 4 eyes (0.33%) reported intraocular inflammation and 3 eyes (0.24%) reported retinal pigment epithelial tear. EXPERT OPINION: The clinical experience with faricimab to date has the potential to provide a stable visual outcome with reduced treatment burden in cases that are resistant to other approved anti-VEGF agents. There are no major safety concerns based on this data analysis.

Single agent subcutaneous blinatumomab for advanced acute lymphoblastic leukemia.

Blinatumomab is a BiTE® (bispecific T-cell engager) molecule that redirects CD3+ T-cells to engage and lyse CD19+ target cells. Here we demonstrate that subcutaneous (SC) blinatumomab can provide high efficacy and greater convenience of administration. In the expansion phase of a multi-institutional phase 1b trial (ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04521231), heavily pretreated adults with relapsed/refractory B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia (R/R B-ALL) received SC blinatumomab at two doses: (1) 250 µg once daily (QD) for week 1 and 500 µg three times weekly (TIW) thereafter (250 µg/500 µg) or (2) 500 µg QD for week 1 and 1000 µg TIW thereafter (500 µg/1000 µg). The primary endpoint was complete remission/complete remission with partial hematologic recovery (CR/CRh) within two cycles. At the data cutoff of September 15, 2023, 29 patients were treated: 14 at the 250 µg/500 µg dose and 13 at 500 µg/1000 µg dose. Data from two ineligible patients were excluded. At the end of two cycles, 12 of 14 patients (85.7%) from the 250 µg/500 µg dose achieved CR/CRh of which nine patients (75.0%) were negative for measurable residual disease (MRD; <10-4 leukemic blasts). At the 500 µg/1000 µg dose, 12 of 13 patients (92.3%) achieved CR/CRh; all 12 patients (100.0%) were MRD-negative. No treatment-related grade 4 cytokine release syndrome (CRS) or neurologic events (NEs) were reported. SC injections were well tolerated and all treatment-related grade 3 CRS and NEs responded to standard-of-care management, interruption, or discontinuation. Treatment with SC blinatumomab resulted in high efficacy, with high MRD-negativity rates and acceptable safety profile in heavily pretreated adults with R/R B-ALL.

An evaluation of glofitamab, the first fixed-duration bispecific antibody for relapsed or refractory large B-cell lymphomas.

INTRODUCTION: Significant proportion of patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) is refractory or relapse (R/R) after the treatment. The prognosis of this patient cohort remains poor. Novel strategies mainly based on immunotherapy and targeted agents are currently being studied. Glofitamab is novel T-cell-engaging bispecific antibody possessing a 2:1 structure with bivalent CD20 binding. Its safety and efficacy in R/R B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma including DLBCL were evaluated in phase I-II NP30179 trial. AREAS COVERED: The article summarizes the milestones and latest reports on glofitamab development in the field of B-cell lymphoma treatment. EXPERT OPINION: Recently, phase II part of the NP30179 study and several other reports were published proving glofitamab potential in R/R DLBCL patients. Based on the published data, glofitamab was approved by regulatory authorities worldwide for the monotherapy of R/R DLBCL in conventional time-limited manner. It is readily accessible in case of rapidly progressing disease, and it compares well with other novel treatment options. Its side effects are similar to those of other T-cell-engaging agents and can be mitigated by pretreatment with obinutuzumab or step-up dosing. Its safety profile with manageable toxicities heads the clinical development toward combination strategies and its use in earlier therapeutic phases.

A matching-adjusted indirect comparison of the efficacy of elranatamab versus teclistamab in patients with triple-class exposed/refractory multiple myeloma.

For patients with triple-class exposed/refractory multiple myeloma (TCE/RMM), where effective treatments options are limited, B-cell maturation antigen and CD3-directed bispecific antibodies offer a promising new approach. Teclistamab gained conditional approval in Europe and accelerated Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval based on the MajesTEC-1 trial (NCT03145181). Elranatamab, approved by the FDA demonstrated its safety and efficacy in the MagnetisMM-3 trial (NCT04649359). Given the absence of head-to-head trials, an unanchored matching-adjusted indirect comparison (MAIC) was conducted to assess their relative efficacy. Key baseline characteristics were adjusted to be comparable between the two trials. In the MAIC, elranatamab demonstrated significantly better objective response rate and progression-free survival (PFS) than teclistamab, and numerically better complete response, duration of response, and overall survival (OS). These results suggest that elranatamab is an efficacious option for treating patients with TCE/R MM.

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.