Novel Mechanisms for Post-Transplant Maintenance Therapy in Acute Myeloid Leukemia.

Allogeneic stem cell transplantation has improved survival for patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML), especially for patients with disease at high risk of relapse. However, relapse remains the most common cause of treatment failure and death in the post-transplant period. Maintenance therapy, an extended course of treatment after achieving remission to reduce the rate of relapse, is an important component of the treatment of various hematologic malignancies; however, its role in the treatment of AML is far less well-defined. Recently, there has been significant interest in the use of novel therapeutic agents as maintenance therapy after allogeneic stem cell transplant, utilizing new mechanisms of treatment and more favorable toxicity profiles. In this review, we will discuss the mechanistic and clinical data for post-transplant maintenance therapies in AML. Then, we will review several emergent and current clinical trials which aim to incorporate novel agents into maintenance therapy regimens.

Myeloablative Conditioning for Allogeneic Transplantation Results in Superior Disease-Free Survival for Acute Myelogenous Leukemia and Myelodysplastic Syndromes with Low/Intermediate but not High Disease Risk Index: A Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research Study.

Compared with reduced-intensity conditioning (RIC), myeloablative conditioning (MAC) is generally associated with lower relapse risk after allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) for acute myelogenous leukemia (AML) and myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS). However, disease-specific risk factors in AML/MDS can further inform when MAC and RIC may yield differential outcomes. We analyzed HCT outcomes stratified by the Disease Risk Index (DRI) in 4387 adults (age 40 to 65 years) to identify the impact of conditioning intensity. In the low/intermediate-risk DRI cohort, RIC was associated with lower nonrelapse mortality (NRM) (hazard ratio [HR], .74; 95% confidence interval [CI], .62 to .88; P < .001) but significantly greater relapse risk (HR, 1.54; 95% CI, 1.35 to 1.76; P < .001) and thus inferior disease-free survival (DFS) (HR, 1.19; 95% CI, 1.07 to 1.33; P = .001). In the high/very high-risk DRI cohort, RIC was associated with marginally lower NRM (HR, .83; 95% CI, .68 to 1.00; P = .051) and significantly higher relapse risk (HR, 1.23; 95% CI, 1.08 to 1.41; P = .002), leading to similar DFS using either RIC or MAC. These data support MAC over RIC as the preferred conditioning intensity for patients with AML/MDS with low/intermediate-risk DRI, but with a similar benefit as RIC in high/very high-risk DRI. Novel MAC regimens with less toxicity could benefit all patients, but more potent antineoplastic approaches are needed for the high/very-high risk DRI group.

Ipilimumab, nivolumab, and brentuximab vedotin combination therapies in patients with relapsed or refractory Hodgkin lymphoma: phase 1 results of an open-label, multicentre, phase 1/2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Recognising that the immune suppressive microenvironment promotes tumour growth in Hodgkin lymphoma, we hypothesised that activating immunity might augment the activity of targeted chemotherapy. We evaluated the safety and activity of combinations of brentuximab vedotin with nivolumab or ipilimumab, or both in patients with relapsed or refractory Hodgkin lymphoma. METHODS: In this multicentre, open-label, phase 1/2 trial, patients with relapsed or refractory Hodgkin lymphoma aged 18 years or older who had relapsed after at least one line of therapy, with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 2 or lower, and adequate organ and marrow function, with no pulmonary dysfunction were eligible for inclusion. Phase 1 primary objectives were to determine the maximum tolerated dose and dose limiting toxicities of brentuximab vedotin combined with ipilimumab (ipilimumab group), nivolumab (nivolumab group), or both (triplet therapy group) using a 3 + 3 dose escalation design with expansion cohorts. During the dose escalation phase, patients were enrolled sequentially into one of six cohorts: in the ipilimumab group fixed brentuximab vedotin 1·8 mg/kg with ipilimumab 1 mg/kg (cohort A) or 3 mg/kg (cohort B); in the nivolumab group fixed nivolumab 3 mg/kg with brentuximab vedotin 1·2 mg/kg (cohort D) or 1·8 mg/kg (cohort E); and in the triplet therapy group fixed nivolumab 3 mg/kg and ipilimumab 1 mg/kg with brentuximab vedotin 1·2 mg/kg (cohort G) or 1·8 mg/kg (cohort H). Additional patients were enrolled in the expansion phase at the same doses of cohorts B, E, and H. All drugs were given intravenously; brentuximab vedotin and nivolumab were given every 3 weeks, ipilimumab was given every 6 weeks in the ipilimumab group and every 12 weeks in the triplet therapy group. All eligible and treated patients were included in the analysis. This phase 1/2 study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01896999. The phase 2, randomised portion of the trial is still enrolling. FINDINGS: Between March 7, 2014, and Dec 28, 2017, 64 patients were enrolled; two patients in the ipilimumab group and one patient in the nivolumab group were excluded due to ineligibility after enrolment and 61 were evaluable. A total of six dose limiting toxicities were reported in four patients, and the doses used in cohorts B, E, and H were established as maximum tolerated doses and patients were subsequently enrolled onto expansion cohorts (C, F, and I) with these schedules. There were ten (43%) grade 3-4 treatment related adverse events in the ipilimumab group, three (16%) in the nivolumab group, and 11 (50%) in the triplet therapy group including: eight (13%) of 64 patients reporting rash, and colitis, gastritis, pancreatitis and arthritis, and diabetic ketoacidosis each occurring in one (2%) patient. There were two (3%) treatment related deaths, one in the nivolumab group and one in the triplet therapy group. The overall response rate was 76% (95% CI 53-92) in the ipilimumab group, 89% (65-99) in the nivolumab group, and 82% (60-95) in the triplet therapy group, and the complete response rate was 57% (95% CI 34-78%) in the ipilimumab group, 61% (36-83%) in the nivolumab group, and 73% (50-89%) in the triplet therapy group. With a median follow-up of 2·6 years (IQR 1·8-2·9) in the ipilimumab group, 2·4 years (2·2-2·6) in the nivolumab group, and 1·7 years (1·6-1·9) in the triplet therapy group, median progression-free survival is 1·2 years (95% CI 1·7-not reached) in the ipilimumab group, but was not reached in the other two treatment groups. Median overall survival has not been reached in any of the groups. INTERPRETATION: There are clear differences in activity and toxicity of the three combination regimens. The tolerability and preliminary activity for the two most active regimens, brentuximab vedotin with nivolumab and the triplet therapy, are being compared in a randomised phase 2 trial (NCT01896999). FUNDING: Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group-American College of Radiology Imaging Network and the National Cancer Institute of the National Institutes of Health.

Blimp-1 impairs T cell function via upregulation of TIGIT and PD-1 in patients with acute myeloid leukemia.

BACKGROUND: T cell immunoglobulin and immunoreceptor tyrosine-based inhibitory motif (ITIM) domain (TIGIT) and programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) are important inhibitory receptors that associate with T cell exhaustion in acute myeloid leukemia (AML). In this study, we aimed to determine the underlying transcriptional mechanisms regulating these inhibitory pathways. Specifically, we investigated the role of transcription factor B lymphocyte-induced maturation protein 1 (Blimp-1) in T cell response and transcriptional regulation of TIGIT and PD-1 in AML. METHODS: Peripheral blood samples collected from patients with AML were used in this study. Blimp-1 expression was examined by flow cytometry. The correlation of Blimp-1 expression to clinical characteristics of AML patients was analyzed. Phenotypic and functional studies of Blimp-1-expressing T cells were performed using flow cytometry-based assays. Luciferase reporter assays and ChIP assays were applied to assess direct binding and transcription activity of Blimp-1. Using siRNA to silence Blimp-1, we further elucidated the regulatory role of Blimp-1 in the TIGIT and PD-1 expression and T cell immune response. RESULTS: Blimp-1 expression is elevated in T cells from AML patients. Consistent with exhaustion, Blimp-1+ T cells upregulate multiple inhibitory receptors including PD-1 and TIGIT. In addition, they are functionally impaired manifested by low cytokine production and decreased cytotoxicity capacity. Importantly, the functional defect is reversed by inhibition of Blimp-1 via siRNA knockdown. Furthermore, Blimp-1 binds to the promoters of PD-1 and TIGIT and positively regulates their expression. CONCLUSIONS: Our study demonstrates an important inhibitory effect of Blimp-1 on T cell response in AML; thus, targeting Blimp-1 and its regulated molecules to improve the immune response may provide effective leukemia therapeutics.

Polo-like kinase and its inhibitors: Ready for the match to start?

Polo-like kinases (Plks) plays a central role in the normal cell cycle and their upregulation has been shown to play a role in the pathogenesis of multiple human cancers. Preclinical work demonstrates that targeting Plk has a significant impact on the treatment of both solid and hematologic malignancies in vitro and in vivo. We review here the basic science and clinical work to date with the Plks as well as future directions with this novel class of mitotic inhibitors.