RESUMEN
The effect of prior inotuzumab ozogamicin (InO) treatment on brexucabtagene autoleucel (brexu-cel) outcomes remains unclear in adults with acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL), particularly the influence off previous InO response and the timing of administration. We conducted a retrospective multicenter analysis of 189 patients with relapsed/refractory (r/r) ALL treated with brexu-cel. Over half of the patients received InO before brexu-cel (InO-exposed). InO-exposed patients were more heavily pretreated (p= 0.02) and frequently had active marrow disease pre-apheresis (p= 0.03). Response rate and toxicity profile following brexu-cel were comparable for InO-exposed and InO-naïve; however, consolidation therapy post brexu-cel response was utilized at a higher rate in InO-naïve patients (p= 0.005). With a median follow up of 11.4 months, InO-exposed patients had inferior progression-free survival (PFS) (p=0.013) and overall survival (OS) (p=0.006) in univariate analyses; however, prior InO exposure did not influence PFS (HR 1.20, 95%CI, 0.71-2.03) in multivariate models. When InO-exposed patients were stratified according to prior InO response, InO responders had superior PFS (p=0.002) and OS (p<0.0001) relative to InO-refractory. The timing of administering InO did not affect brexu-cel outcomes, with comparable PFS (p=0.51) and OS (p=0.86) for patients receiving InO as bridging therapy or pre-apheresis. In conclusion, while InO exposure was associated with inferior survival outcomes following brexu-cel in unadjusted analyses, these associations were no longer significant in multivariate analyses, suggesting it is unlikely that InO negatively impacts brexu-cel efficacy. Our data instead imply that InO-exposed recipients of brexu-cel tend to be higher-risk patients with intrinsic adverse leukemia biology.
RESUMEN
Allogeneic transplant remains the best postremission therapy for patients with nonfavorable risk acute myeloid leukemia (AML). However, some patients are ineligible because of psychosocial barriers, such as lack of appropriate caregiver support. We hypothesized that immune checkpoint inhibition after autologous transplant might represent effective postremission therapy in such patients. We conducted a phase 2 study of autologous transplantation followed by administration of pembrolizumab (8 cycles starting day +1). Twenty patients with nonfavorable AML in complete remission were treated (median age, 64 years; CR1, 80%); 55% were non-White and adverse-risk AML was present in 40%. Treatment was well tolerated, with only 1 nonrelapse death. Immune-related adverse events occurred in 9 patients. After a median follow-up of 80 months, 14 patients remain alive, with 10 patients in continuous remission. The estimated 2-year LFS was 48.4%, which met the primary end point of 2-year LFS >25%; the 2-year overall survival (OS), nonrelapse mortality, and cumulative incidences of relapse were 68%, 5%, and 46%, respectively. In comparison with a propensity score-matched cohort group of patients with AML receiving allogeneic transplant, the 3-year OS was similar (73% vs 76%). Patients in the study had inferior LFS (51% vs 75%) but superior postrelapse survival (45% vs 14%). In conclusion, programmed cell death protein-1 blockade after autologous transplant is a safe and effective alternative postremission strategy in patients with nonfavorable risk AML who are ineligible for allogeneic transplant, a context in which there is significant unmet need. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT02771197.