Allogeneic Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation in the Treatment of Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia: Why and When?

Chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) is the most common hematologic malignancy in adults with an incidence rate of 4.2 per 100,000 per year. CLL frequently takes an indolent course, with some patients not requiring treatment for years, yet is incurable by currently available chemo- and immuno-therapeutic modalities. Despite high initial response rates, particularly to purine analogues, patients invariably relapse and subsequently develop resistance to therapy. The traditional “watchful waiting” approach to CLL is being challenged by data showing that treatments used early in the disease course impact long-term overall and progression-free survivals . The only curative treatment for CLL currently, is allogeneic hematopoeietic cell transplantation (alloHCT). In contrast to autologous transplant, myeloablative alloHCT for CLL patients generates durable remissions with promising survival plateaus; however, significant transplant related mortality (TRM) is also observed (25-50%) . At present the fact remains that for poor-risk CLL, alloHCT is the only treatment with the potential of providing long-term disease control. Future combinations with emerging low-toxicity therapies may further enhance the curative potential of allogeniec hematopoietic cell transplant. New drugs can also potentially enable refractory patients to attain response as a bridge to more effective stem cell transplantation

High-Dose Therapy and Autologous Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation in Peripheral T Cell Lymphoma (PTCL): Analysis of Prognostic Factors

Patients with peripheral T cell lymphoma (PTCL) have a poor prognosis with current treatment approaches. We examined the outcomes of high-dose therapy (HDT) and autologous hematopoietic cell transplant (AHCT) on the treatment of PTCL and the impact of patient/disease features on long-term outcome. Sixty-seven patients with PTCL–not otherwise specified (n = 30), anaplastic large cell lymphoma (n = 30), and angioimmunoblastic T cell lymphoma (n = 7) underwent HDT/AHCT at the City of Hope. The median age was 48 years (range: 5-78). Twelve were transplanted in first complete remission (1CR)/partial remission (PR) and 55 with relapsed or induction failure disease (RL/IF). With a median follow-up for surviving patients of 65.8 months (range: 24.5-216.0) the 5-year overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were 54% and 40%, respectively. The 5-year PFS was 75% for 1CR/PR compared to 32% for RL/IF patients (P = .01). When the Prognostic Index for PTCL unspecified (PIT) was applied at the time of transplant, patients in the PIT 3-4 group had 5-year PFS of only 8%. These results show that HDT/AHCT can improve long-term disease control in relapsed/refractory PTCL and that HDT/AHCT should ideally be applied either during 1CR/PR, or as part of upfront treatment. More effective and novel therapies are needed for patients with high-risk disease (PIT 3-4 factors) and allogeneic HCT should be explored in these patients

Final analysis of the phase III non-inferiority COLUMBA study of subcutaneous versus intravenous daratumumab in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma

In the primary analysis of the phase III COLUMBA study, daratumumab by subcutaneous administration (DARA SC) demonstrated non-inferiority to intravenous administration (DARA IV) for relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). Here, we report the final analysis of efficacy and safety from COLUMBA after a median of 29.3 months follow-up (additional 21.8 months after the primary analysis). In total, 522 patients were randomized (DARA SC, n=263; DARA IV, n=259). With longer follow-up, DARA SC and DARA IV continued to show consistent efficacy and maximum trough daratumumab concentration as compared with the primary analysis. The overall response rate was 43.7% for DARA SC and 39.8% for DARA IV. The maximum mean (standard deviation [SD]) trough concentration (cycle 3, day 1 pre-dose) of serum DARA was 581 (SD, 315) µg/mL for DARA SC and 496 (SD, 231) µg/mL for DARA IV. Median progression-free survival was 5.6 months for DARA SC and 6.1 months for DARA IV; median overall survival was 28.2 months and 25.6 months, respectively. Grade 3/4 treatment-emergent adverse events occurred in 50.8% of patients in the DARA SC group and 52.7% in the DARA IV group; the most common (≥10%) were thrombocytopenia (DARA SC, 14.2%; DARA IV, 13.6%), anemia (13.8%; 15.1%), and neutropenia (13.1%; 7.8%). The safety profile remained consistent with the primary analysis after longer follow-up. In summary, DARA SC and DARA IV continue to demonstrate similar efficacy and safety, with a low rate of infusion-related reactions (12.7% vs. 34.5%, respectively) and shorter administration time (3-5 minutes vs. 3-7 hours) supporting DARA SC as a preferable therapeutic choice

Switching to daratumumab SC from IV is safe and preferred by patients with multiple myeloma

[Introduction]: Two phase 3 studies demonstrated superior efficacy of intravenous daratumumab (DARA IV) plus bortezomib/melphalan/prednisone (ALCYONE) or lenalidomide/dexamethasone (Rd; MAIA) versus standard-of-care regimens for transplant-ineligible newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. In these studies, patients could switch from DARA IV to subcutaneous daratumumab (DARA SC) while receiving daratumumab monotherapy in ALCYONE (as of Cycle 11) or daratumumab plus Rd in MAIA. The phase 3 COLUMBA study demonstrated noninferiority of DARA SC to DARA IV. DARA SC reduced administration time, allowing patients to spend less time in healthcare settings, a relevant practical consideration for patient care in the COVID-19 pandemic/settings of limited healthcare resources.[Methods]: DARA SC 1800 mg was administered every 4 weeks, per approved dosing schedules. We evaluated safety and patient-reported experience (ALCYONE only) among patients who switched from DARA IV to DARA SC.[Results]: Fifty-seven patients in ALCYONE and 135 in MAIA switched to DARA SC. Three (2.2%; MAIA) patients reported injection-site reactions, all of which were mild. No infusion-related reactions occurred with DARA SC. In ALCYONE, >80% of patients preferred DARA SC over DARA IV. Grade 3/4 treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) occurred in 5.3% of patients in ALCYONE and 25.9% in MAIA; one (0.7%; MAIA) patient experienced a TEAE with an outcome of death.[Conclusion]: For transplant-ineligible newly diagnosed multiple myeloma, DARA SC (monotherapy/with Rd) was safe and preferred over DARA IV. ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02195479/NCT02252172.This work was supported by the Janssen Research & Development, LLC.Peer reviewe

Subcutaneous daratumumab plus standard treatment regimens in patients with multiple myeloma across lines of therapy (PLEIADES): an open-label Phase II study

© 2020 The Authors. Daratumumab is a CD38-targeting monoclonal antibody approved for intravenous (IV) infusion for multiple myeloma (MM). We describe the Phase II PLEIADES study of a subcutaneous formulation of daratumumab (DARA SC) in combination with standard-of-care regimens: DARA SC plus bortezomib/lenalidomide/dexamethasone (D-VRd) for transplant-eligible newly diagnosed MM (NDMM); DARA SC plus bortezomib/melphalan/prednisone (D-VMP) for transplant-ineligible NDMM; and DARA SC plus lenalidomide/dexamethasone (D-Rd) for relapsed/refractory MM. In total, 199 patients were treated (D-VRd, n = 67; D-VMP, n = 67; D-Rd, n = 65). The primary endpoints were met for all cohorts: the ≥very good partial response (VGPR) rate after four 21-day induction cycles for D-VRd was 71·6% [90% confidence interval (CI) 61·2–80·6%], and the overall response rates (ORRs) for D-VMP and D-Rd were 88·1% (90% CI 79·5–93·9%) and 90·8% (90% CI 82·6–95·9%). With longer median follow-up for D-VMP and D-Rd (14·3 and 14·7 months respectively), responses deepened (ORR: 89·6%, 93·8%; ≥VGPR: 77·6%, 78·5%), and minimal residual disease–negativity (10‒5) rates were 16·4% and 15·4%. Infusion-related reactions across all cohorts were infrequent (≤9·0%) and mild. The median DARA SC administration time was 5 min. DARA SC with standard-of-care regimens demonstrated comparable clinical activity to DARA IV–containing regimens, with low infusion-related reaction rates and reduced administration time

Circadian function in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer

This study aimed to evaluate whether patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer experience disrupted rest–activity daily rhythms, poor sleep quality, weakness, and maintain attributes that are linked to circadian function such as fatigue. This report describes the rest–activity patterns of 33 non-small-cell lung cancer patients who participated in a randomised clinical trial evaluating the benefits of melatonin. Data are reported on circadian function, health-related quality of life (QoL), subjective sleep quality, and anxiety/depression levels prior to randomisation and treatment. Actigraphy data, an objective measure of circadian function, demonstrated that patients' rest–activity circadian function differs significantly from control subjects. Our patients reported poor sleep quality and high levels of fatigue. Ferrans and Powers QoL Index instrument found a high level of dissatisfaction with health-related QoL. Data from the European Organization for Research and Treatment for Cancer reported poor capacity to fulfil the activities of daily living. Patients studied in the hospital during or near chemotherapy had significantly more abnormal circadian function than those studied in the ambulatory setting. Our data indicate that measurement of circadian sleep/activity dynamics should be accomplished in the outpatient/home setting for a minimum of 4–7 circadian cycles to assure that they are most representative of the patients' true condition. We conclude that the daily sleep/activity patterns of patients with advanced lung cancer are disturbed. These are accompanied by marked disruption of QoL and function. These data argue for investigating how much of this poor functioning and QoL are actually caused by this circadian disruption, and, whether behavioural, light-based, and or pharmacologic strategies to correct the circadian/sleep activity patterns can improve function and QoL