Search

Chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cell therapy has revolutionized the management of relapsed and refractory myeloma, with excellent outcomes and a tolerable safety profile. High dose chemotherapy with autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (AHCT) is established as a mainstream of newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) management in patients who are young and fit enough to tolerate such intensity. This standard was developed based on randomized trials comparing AHCT to chemotherapy in the era prior to novel agents. More recently, larger studies have primarily shown a progression free survival (PFS) benefit of upfront AHCT, rather than overall survival (OS) benefit. There is debate about the significance of this lack of OS, acknowledging the potential confounders of the chronic nature of the disease, study design and competing harms and benefits of exposure to AHCT. Indeed upfront AHCT may not be as uniquely beneficial as we once thought, and is not without risk. New quadruple-agent regimens are highly active and effective in achieving a deep response as quantified by measurable residual disease (MRD). The high dose chemotherapy administered with AHCT imposes a burden of short and longterm adverse effects, which may alter the disease course and patient's ability to tolerate future therapies. Some high-risk subgroups may have a more valuable benefit from AHCT, though still ultimately suffer poor outcomes. When compared to the outcomes of CAR T cell therapy, the question of whether AHCT can or indeed should be deferred has become an important topic in the field. Deferring AHCT may be a personalized decision in patients who achieve MRD negativity, which is now well established as a key prognostic factor for PFS and OS. Reserving or re-administering AHCT at relapse is feasible in many cases and holds the promise of resetting the T cell compartment and opening up options for immune reengagement. It is likely that personalized MRD-guided decision making will shape how we sequence in the future, though more studies are required to delineate when this is safe and appropriate. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) is a rare type of lymphoma with unique histologic, immunophenotypic, and clinical features. It represents approximately one-tenth of lymphomas diagnosed in the United States and consists of two subtypes: classical Hodgkin's lymphoma (cHL), which accounts for majority of HL cases, and nodular lymphocyte predominant Hodgkin lymphoma represent approximately 5% of Hodgkin lymphoma cases. From this point, we will be focusing on cHL in this review. In general, it is considered a highly curable disease with first-line chemotherapy with or without the addition of radiotherapy. However, there are patients with disease that relapses or fails to respond to frontline regimens and the standard treatment modality for chemo sensitive cHL is high dose chemotherapy followed by autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplant (AHSCT). In recent years, targeted immunotherapy has revolutionized the treatment of cHL while many novel agents are being explored in addition to chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy which is also being investigated in clinical trials as a potential treatment option. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Despite high cure rates with standard treatment, 30% patients with Hodgkin lymphoma develop relapsed or refractory (R/R) disease. Salvage therapy followed by autologous hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) is considered standard of care. Brentuximab Vedotin (Bv) in combination with Bendamustine (B) has been tested in the salvage setting with promising results. Materials and Methodology: We conducted a single centre retrospective chart review of patients who received BBv salvage therapy to determine its activity and safety in patients with R/R classical Hodgkin lymphoma (HL). Between May 2011- December 2019, 179 patients were diagnosed with R/R HL. Results: Thirty patients received BBv [median age: 30 (15-59) years, females (n=15)]. Primary refractory disease in 19 patients (63%), and 26 patients (87%) had advanced stage at treatment. Most patients received BBv after 2 prior lines of therapy [n=16 (53%)]. The median number of cycles of BBv were 3 (1-6). The number of BBv cycles delivered as outpatient was 63%. The most common Grade III/IV hematological adverse event was neutropenia [n=21, (70%)], while grade III/IV non-hematological toxicities included infections in 4 (13%), neuropathy in 4(13%), skin rash in 2 (7%), GI toxicities in 3 (10%) and liver dysfunction in 2 (7%) patients. The ORR and CR rates were 79% and 62%, respectively. Seventeen patients (57%) underwent an autologous HCT and 8 (26%) underwent an Allogeneic HCT (all haploidentical). The median follow up time from BBv administration was 12 months. Six patients died: 2 = disease progression, and 4 = non-relapse causes (Infection and sepsis = 2, GVHD=2). In addition to this, one patient progressed soon after HCT and another patient relapsed 22 months post HCT. Three year Overall survival (OS) and Event free survival (EFS) probability post-BBv treatment was 75% and 58%, respectively. OS and EFS analysis based on response (viz., CMR) to BBv demonstrated that patients in CMR had better survival probability [93% (p=0.0022) 3yr-OS and 72% (p=0.038) 3yr-EFS probability]. Conclusions: BBv is an active and well-tolerated salvage treatment for patients with R/R HL, even in refractory and advanced settings. In middle-income settings, cost constraints and access determine patient uptake of this regimen. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]