19 research outputs found
Limited efficacy of APRIL CAR in patients with multiple myeloma indicate challenges in the use of natural ligands for CAR T-cell therapy
BACKGROUND: We used a proliferating ligand (APRIL) to construct a ligand-based third generation chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) able to target two myeloma antigens, B-cell maturation antigen (BCMA) and transmembrane activator and CAML interactor. METHODS: The APRIL CAR was evaluated in a Phase 1 clinical trial (NCT03287804, AUTO2) in patients with relapsed, refractory multiple myeloma. Eleven patients received 13 doses, the first 15×106 CARs, and subsequent patients received 75,225,600 and 900×106 CARs in a 3+3 escalation design. RESULTS: The APRIL CAR was well tolerated. Five (45.5%) patients developed Grade 1 cytokine release syndrome and there was no neurotoxicity. However, responses were only observed in 45.5% patients (1×very good partial response, 3×partial response, 1×minimal response). Exploring the mechanistic basis for poor responses, we then compared the APRIL CAR to two other BCMA CARs in a series of in vitro assays, observing reduced interleukin-2 secretion and lack of sustained tumor control by APRIL CAR regardless of transduction method or co-stimulatory domain. There was also impaired interferon signaling of APRIL CAR and no evidence of autoactivation. Thus focusing on APRIL itself, we confirmed similar affinity to BCMA and protein stability in comparison to BCMA CAR binders but reduced binding by cell-expressed APRIL to soluble BCMA and reduced avidity to tumor cells. This indicated either suboptimal folding or stability of membrane-bound APRIL attenuating CAR activation. CONCLUSIONS: The APRIL CAR was well tolerated, but the clinical responses observed in AUTO2 were disappointing. Subsequently, when comparing the APRIL CAR to other BCMA CARs, we observed in vitro functional deficiencies due to reduced target binding by cell-expressed ligand
Dual targeting of CD19 and CD22 with Bicistronic CAR-T cells in Patients with Relapsed/Refractory Large B Cell Lymphoma
Relapse following CD19-directed chimeric antigen receptor T-cells (CAR-T) for relapsed/refractory large B-cell lymphoma (r/r LBCL) is commonly ascribed to antigen loss or CAR-T exhaustion. Multi-antigen targeting and PD-1 blockade are rational approaches to prevent relapse. Here, we test CD19/22 dual-targeting CAR-T (AUTO3) plus pembrolizumab in r/r LBCL as inpatient or outpatient therapy (NCT03289455, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03289455). Endpoints include toxicity (primary) and response rates (secondary). AUTO3 was manufactured for 62 patients using autologous leukapheresis, modified with a bicistronic transgene. 52 patients received AUTO3 (7/52,50x106; 45/52,150-450x106) and 48/52 received pembrolizumab. Median age was 59 years (range,27-83) and 46/52 had stage III/IV disease. Median follow-up was 21.6 months (range,15.1-51.3) at last data cut (Feb 28, 2022). AUTO3 was safe: grade 1-2 and grade 3 CRS affected 18/52 (34.6%) and 1/52 (1.9%) patients, neurotoxicity arose in 4 patients (2/4, grade 3-4), HLH affected 2 patients, and no Pembrolizumab-associated autoimmune sequalae were observed. On this basis, outpatient administration was tested in 20 patients, saving a median of 14 hospital days/patient. AUTO3 was effective: overall response rates were 66% (48.9%, CR; 17%, PR). For patients with CR, median DOR was not reached, with 54.4% (CI: 32.8, 71.7) projected to remain progression-free beyond 12 months after onset of remission. DOR for all responding patients was 8.3 months (95% CI: 3.0, NE) with 42.6% projected to remain progression-free beyond 12 months after onset of remission. Overall, AUTO3 +/- pembrolizumab for r/r LBCL was safe, lending itself to outpatient administration, and delivered durable remissions in 54.4% of complete responders, associated with robust CAR-T expansion. Neither dual-targeting CAR-T nor pembrolizumab prevented relapse in a significant proportion of patients, and future developments include next-generation-AUTO3, engineered for superior expansion/persistence in vivo, and selection of CAR binders active at low antigen densities
Daratumumab plus lenalidomide and dexamethasone versus lenalidomide and dexamethasone in relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma: updated analysis of POLLUX.
In the POLLUX study, daratumumab plus lenalidomide/dexamethasone significantly reduced risk of progression/death versus lenalidomide/dexamethasone alone in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma. We provide one additional year of follow up and include the effect on minimal residual disease and in clinically relevant subgroups. After 25.4 months of follow up, daratumumab plus lenalidomide/dexamethasone prolonged progression-free survival versus lenalidomide/dexamethasone alone (median not reached vs 17.5 months; hazard ratio, 0.41; 95% confidence interval, 0.31-0.53; P<0.0001). The overall response rate was 92.9% versus 76.4%, and 51.2% versus 21.0% achieved a complete response or better, respectively (both P<0.0001). At the 10-5 sensitivity threshold, 26.2% versus 6.4% were minimal residual disease-negative, respectively (P<0.0001). Post hoc analyses of clinically relevant patient subgroups demonstrated that progression-free survival was significantly prolonged for daratumumab plus lenalidomide/dexamethasone versus lenalidomide/dexamethasone regardless of number of prior lines of therapy. Patients previously treated with lenalidomide or thalidomide and those refractory to bortezomib received similar benefits (all P<0.01). Treatment benefit with daratumumab plus lenalidomide/dexamethasone was maintained in high-risk patients (median progression-free survival 22.6 vs 10.2 months; hazard ratio, 0.53; 95% confidence interval, 0.25-1.13; P=0.0921) and patients with treatment-free intervals of >12 and ≤12 months and >6 and ≤6 months. No new safety signals were observed. In relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma patients, daratumumab plus lenalidomide/dexamethasone continued to improve progression-free survival and deepen responses versus lenalidomide/dexamethasone. Trial Registration: clinicaltrials.gov identifier: 02076009
Impact of cytochrome P450 3A4 inducer and inhibitor on the pharmacokinetics of trabectedin in patients with advanced malignancies: open-label, multicenter studies
Purpose : To evaluate the pharmacokinetics, safety and survival of trabectedin, metabolized primarily by cytochrome P450 (CYP)3A4 enzyme, when coadministered with rifampin (CYP3A4 inducer) or ketoconazole (CYP3A4 inhibitor) in adult patients with advanced solid tumors. Methods : Two phase 1/2a, 2-way crossover studies were conducted. For rifampin study, 12 patients were randomized (1:1) to sequence of a cycle of trabectedin (1.3 mg/m2, 3 h, i.v.) coadministered with rifampin (600 mg/day, 6-days), and a cycle of trabectedin monotherapy (1.3 mg/m2, 3 h, i.v.). In ketoconazole study, eight patients were randomized (1:1) to sequence of a cycle of trabectedin (0.58 mg/m2, 3 h, i.v.) coadministered with ketoconazole (200 mg, twice-daily, 15-doses), and a cycle of trabectedin monotherapy (1.3 mg/m2, 3 h, i.v.). Results : The systemic exposure (geometric means) of trabectedin was decreased [22 % (C max) and 31 % (AUClast)] with rifampin coadministration and increased [22 % (C max) and 66 % (AUClast)] with ketoconazole coadministration. This correlated with an increased clearance with rifampin (39.6–59.8 L/h) and a decreased clearance with ketoconazole (20.3–12.0 L/h). Consistent with earlier studies, the most common (≥40 %) treatment-emergent adverse events in both studies were nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, hepatic function abnormal, anemia, neutropenia, thrombocytopenia and leukopenia. Conclusions : Coadministration of rifampin or ketoconazole altered the pharmacokinetics of trabectedin, but no new safety signals were observed. Coadministration of trabectedin with potent CYP3A4 inhibitors or inducers should be avoided if possible. If coadministration of trabectedin with a strong CYP3A4 inhibitor is required, close monitoring for toxicities is recommended, so that appropriate dose reductions can be instituted as warranted