RE-MIND: Comparing Tafasitamab + Lenalidomide (L-MIND) with a real-world lenalidomide monotherapy cohort in relapsed or refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma

Purpose: Tafasitamab, an Fc-modified, humanized, anti-CD19 monoclonal antibody, in combination with lenalidomide, demonstrated efficacy in transplant-ineligible patients with relapsed/refractory (R/R) diffuse largeB-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), in the single-arm, phase II L-MIND study (NCT02399085). RE-MIND, a retrospective observational study, generated a historic control for L-MINDto delineate the contribution of tafasitamab to the efficacy of the combination. Patients and Methods: Data were retrospectively collected from patients with R/R DLBCL treated with lenalidomide monotherapy for comparison with tafasitamab + lenalidomide-treated patients (L-MIND). Key eligibility criteria were aligned with L-MIND. Estimated propensity score-based Nearest Neighbor 1:1 Matching methodology balanced the cohorts for nine prespecified prognostic baseline covariates.The primary endpointwas investigator-assessed best overall response rate (ORR). Secondary endpoints included complete response (CR) rate, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). Results: Data from 490 patients going through lenalidomide monotherapy were collected; 140 qualified for matching with the L-MIND cohort. The primary analysis included 76 patients from each cohort who received a lenalidomide starting dose of 25 mg/day. Cohort baseline covariates were comparable. A significantly better ORR of 67.1% (95% confidence interval, 55.4-77.5) was observed for the combination therapy versus 34.2% (23.7-46.0) for lenalidomide monotherapy [odds ratio, 3.89 (1.90-8.14); P < 0.0001]. HigherCR rates were achieved with combination therapy compared with lenalidomide monotherapy [39.5% (28.4-51.4) vs. 13.2% (6.5-22.9)]. Survival endpoints favored combination therapy. Lenalidomide monotherapy outcomes were similar to previously published data. Conclusions: RE-MIND enabled the estimation of the additional treatment effect achieved by combining tafasitamab with lenalidomide in patients with R/R DLBCL

Improved Efficacy of Tafasitamab plus Lenalidomide versus Systemic Therapies for Relapsed/Refractory DLBCL: RE-MIND2, an Observational Retrospective Matched Cohort Study

PURPOSE: In RE-MIND2 (NCT04697160), patient-level outcomes from the L-MIND study (NCT02399085) of tafasitamab plus lenalidomide were retrospectively compared with patient-level matched observational cohorts treated with National Cancer Care Network (NCCN)/European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO)-listed systemic therapies for relapsed/refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Data were collected from health records of eligible patients aged ≥18 years with histologically confirmed DLBCL who had received ≥2 systemic therapies for DLBCL (including ≥1 anti-CD20 therapy). Patients from L-MIND were matched with patients from the RE-MIND2 observational cohort using estimated propensity score-based 1:1 nearest-neighbor matching, balanced for nine covariates. The primary analysis compared tafasitamab plus lenalidomide with patients who received any systemic therapy for R/R DLBCL (pooled in one cohort) or bendamustine plus rituximab (BR) or rituximab plus gemcitabine and oxaliplatin (R-GemOx; as two distinct cohorts). The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). Secondary endpoints included treatment response and time-to-event outcomes. RESULTS: In RE-MIND2, 3,454 patients were enrolled from 200 sites in North America, Europe, and Asia-Pacific. Strictly matched pairs of patients consisted of tafasitamab plus lenalidomide versus systemic therapies pooled (n = 76 pairs), versus BR (n = 75 pairs), and versus R-GemOx (n = 74 pairs). Significantly prolonged OS was reported with tafasitamab plus lenalidomide versus systemic pooled therapies [hazard ratios (HR): 0.55; P = 0.0068], BR (HR: 0.42; P < 0.0001), and R-GemOx (HR: 0.47; P = 0.0003). CONCLUSIONS: RE-MIND2, a retrospective observational study, met its primary endpoint, demonstrating prolonged OS with tafasitamab plus lenalidomide versus BR and R-GemOx. See related commentary by Cherng and Westin, p. 3908

RE-MIND2: comparative effectiveness of tafasitamab plus lenalidomide versus polatuzumab vedotin/bendamustine/rituximab (pola-BR), CAR-T therapies, and lenalidomide/rituximab (R2) based on real-world data in patients with relapsed/refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma

Abstract: RE-MIND2 (NCT04697160) compared patient outcomes from the L-MIND (NCT02399085) trial of tafasitamab+lenalidomide with those of patients treated with other therapies for relapsed/refractory (R/R) diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) who are autologous stem cell transplant ineligible. We present outcomes data for three pre-specified treatments not assessed in the primary analysis. Data were retrospectively collected from sites in North America, Europe, and the Asia Pacific region. Patients were aged ≥18 years with histologically confirmed DLBCL and received ≥2 systemic therapies for DLBCL (including ≥1 anti-CD20 therapy). Patients enrolled in the observational and L-MIND cohorts were matched using propensity score-based 1:1 nearest-neighbor matching, balanced for six covariates. Tafasitamab+lenalidomide was compared with polatuzumab vedotin+bendamustine+rituximab (pola-BR), rituximab+lenalidomide (R2), and CD19-chimeric antigen receptor T-cell (CAR-T) therapies. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). Secondary endpoints included treatment response and progression-free survival. From 200 sites, 3,454 patients were enrolled in the observational cohort. Strictly matched patient pairs consisted of tafasitamab+lenalidomide versus pola-BR (n = 24 pairs), versus R2 (n = 33 pairs), and versus CAR-T therapies (n = 37 pairs). A significant OS benefit was observed with tafasitamab+lenalidomide versus pola-BR (HR: 0.441; p = 0.034) and R2 (HR: 0.435; p = 0.012). Comparable OS was observed in tafasitamab+lenalidomide and CAR-T cohorts (HR: 0.953, p = 0.892). Tafasitamab+lenalidomide appeared to improve survival outcomes versus pola-BR and R2, and comparable outcomes were observed versus CAR-T. Although based on limited patient numbers, these data may help to contextualize emerging therapies for R/R DLBCL. Clinical trial registration: NCT04697160 (January 6, 2021

Global economic impacts of climate variability and change during the 20th century

Estimates of the global economic impacts of observed climate change during the 20th century obtained by applying five impact functions of different integrated assessment models (IAMs) are separated into their main natural and anthropogenic components. The estimates of the costs that can be attributed to natural variability factors and to the anthropogenic intervention with the climate system in general tend to show that: 1) during the first half of the century, the amplitude of the impacts associated with natural variability is considerably larger than that produced by anthropogenic factors and the effects of natural variability fluctuated between being negative and positive. These non-monotonic impacts are mostly determined by the low-frequency variability and the persistence of the climate system; 2) IAMs do not agree on the sign (nor on the magnitude) of the impacts of anthropogenic forcing but indicate that they steadily grew over the first part of the century, rapidly accelerated since the mid 1970's, and decelerated during the first decade of the 21st century. This deceleration is accentuated by the existence of interaction effects between natural variability and natural and anthropogenic forcing. The economic impacts of anthropogenic forcing range in the tenths of percentage of the world GDP by the end of the 20th century; 3) the impacts of natural forcing are about one order of magnitude lower than those associated with anthropogenic forcing and are dominated by the solar forcing; 4) the interaction effects between natural and anthropogenic factors can importantly modulate how impacts actually occur, at least for moderate increases in external forcing. Human activities became dominant drivers of the estimated economic impacts at the end of the 20th century, producing larger impacts than those of low-frequency natural variability. Some of the uses and limitations of IAMs are discussed

Recent Progress in the Use of Glucagon and Glucagon Receptor Antagonists in the Treatment of Diabetes Mellitus

Glucagon is an important pancreatic hormone, released into blood circulation by alpha cells of the islet of Langerhans. Glucagon induces gluconeogenesis and glycogenolysis in hepatocytes, leading to an increase in hepatic glucose production and subsequently hyperglycemia in susceptible individuals. Hyperglucagonemia is a constant feature in patients with T2DM. A number of bioactive agents that can block glucagon receptor have been identified. These glucagon receptor antagonists can reduce the hyperglycemia associated with exogenous glucagon administration in normal as well as diabetic subjects. Glucagon receptor antagonists include isoserine and beta-alanine derivatives, bicyclic 19-residue peptide BI-32169, Des-His1-[Glu9] glucagon amide and related compounds, 5-hydroxyalkyl-4-phenylpyridines, N-[3-cano-6- (1,1 dimethylpropyl)-4,5,6,7-tetrahydro-1-benzothien-2-yl]-2-ethylbutamide, Skyrin and NNC 250926. The absorption, dosage, catabolism, excretion and medicinal chemistry of these agents are the subject of this review. It emphasizes the role of glucagon in glucose homeostasis and how it could be applied as a novel tool for the management of diabetes mellitus by blocking its receptors with either monoclonal antibodies, peptide and non-peptide antagonists or gene knockout techniques

Climate change and agricultural adaptation in Sri Lanka: a review

Climate change is inevitable and will continue into the next century. Since the agricultural sector in Sri Lanka is one of the most vulnerable to climate change, a thorough understanding of climate transition is critical for formulating effective adaptation strategies. This paper provides an overview of the status of climate change and adaptation in the agricultural sector in Sri Lanka. The review clearly indicates that climate change is taking place in Sri Lanka in terms of rainfall variability and an increase in climate extremes and warming. A number of planned and reactive adaptation responses stemming from policy and farm-level decisions are reported. These adaptation efforts were fragmented and lacked a coherent connection to the national development policies and strategies. Research efforts are needed to develop and identify adaptation approaches and practices that are feasible for smallholder farmers, particularly in the dry zone where paddy and other food crops are predominately cultivated. To achieve the envisaged growth in the agricultural sector, rigorous efforts are necessary to mainstream climate change adaptation into national development policies and ensure that they are implemented at national, regional and local levels