Search

Introduction Pomalidomide (Pom) has demonstrated synergistic antiproliferative activity in combination regimens as a result of its distinct anticancer, antiangiogenic, and immunomodulatory effects. This review aimed to compare outcome measures of different Pom regimens for relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma. Methods A comprehensive literature search identified a total of 1374 studies. Thirty-five studies assessing 4623 subjects met the inclusion criteria: phase 2/3 trial, ≥ 2 prior lines of therapy, and clearly documented efficacy outcomes like overall response rate (ORR), overall survival, and progression-free survival. Statistical analyses for meta-analysis was performed by CMA version 3 and Cochrane Q statistics (P Results Pooled analysis showed ORR 47.1% across all Pom-based (2- and 3-drug) regimens. Stratified analysis for efficacy outcomes (pooled ORR [%] and mean progression-free survival [months]) are reported. With doublet regimen, Pom with low-dose dexamethasone (LoDex) was the most common regimen (35.7%, 6.1 months), and overall survival was 14.37 months. With triplet regimens, pooled ORR was 61.9% (I2 = 87.3%). These included bortezomib + Pom + LoDex (83.5%, 15.7 months), carfilzomib-Pom + LoDex (77.1%, 15.3 months), Pom + LoDex-bendamustine (74.2%), Pom-dexamethasone-daratumumab (64.5%), Pom + LoDex-cyclophosphamide (59.4%, 9.5 months), and Pom + LoDex-doxorubicin (32%). Leading adverse events were myelosuppression, with mean incidences of grade 3 or higher neutropenia, anemia, and thrombocytopenia of 47.6%, 26.5%, and 20.8%, respectively. Mean incidence of grade 3 or higher nonhematologic adverse events were infections 29.1%, pneumonia 13.8%, and fatigue 10%. Conclusion Three-drug Pom regimens yielded double the response rates compared to Pom + LoDex (pooled ORR, 61.9% vs. 35.7%), with bortezomib + Pom + LoDex and carfilzomib-Pom + LoDex demonstrating better outcomes than other regimens.

Patients undergoing allogenic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (allo-HSCT) are at a very high risk of hepatitis B virus reactivation (HBVr). Lamivudine is commonly used as prophylaxis against HBVr in high-risk patients undergoing allo-HSCT. Unfortunately, its efficacy is diminishing due to the development of HBV mutant drug-resistant strains. With the availability of newer antiviral agents such as entecavir, telbivudine, adefovir, and tenofovir, it is important to assess their role in HBVr prophylaxis. A comprehensive search of 7 databases was performed to evaluate efficacy of antiviral prophylaxis against HBVr in allo-HSCT patients (PubMed/Medline, Embase, Scopus, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, CINAHL, and ClinicalTrials.gov (June 21, 2017)). We identified 10 studies, with 2067 patients undergoing allo-HSCT; these primarily evaluated the use of lamivudine and entecavir as prophylaxis against HBVr in patients undergoing allo-HSCT because there were little or no data about adefovir, telbivudine, or tenofovir as prophylaxis in this specific patient population. Thus, included studies were categorized into 2 main prophylaxis groups: lamivudine and entecavir. Results of our meta-analysis suggest that entecavir is very effective against HBVr, although further clinical trials are required to test efficacy of new antivirals and explore the emerging threat of drug resistance.

Background: Chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) modified T cells targeting CD19 and CD20 have shown activity in Phase I, II trials of patients with hematological malignancies. CD19 and CD20 targeted CAR constructs from several different institutions have demonstrated consistently high anti-tumor efficacy in children and adults with relapsed B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia (B-ALL), chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) and B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma (B-NHL). We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of all published clinical trials studying the role of efficacy as well as safety of CD-19 and CD-20 CAR-T therapy for B-cell hematologic malignancies. Methods: Literature search was performed using MEDLINE (Ovid SP and PubMed), EMBASE, The Cochrane Library, Scopus and Web of Science. We conducted meta-analysis using random effects model using Comprehensive Metaanalysis 3.0. Heterogeneity was assessed using Q-statistic and it was quantified using I2statistic. Results: After a comprehensive literature search 4476 studies were identified and finally 15 eligible studies involving 121 patients were included in the final systematic review. The infused CAR T-cell dose was in the range of 0.76 x 106 to 3 x 107 cells/kg in seven trials and in the range of 0.8 x 107 cells to 3.3 x 109 cells/m2in 6 trials. Among 106 patients, the overall response to treatment after CAR T-cell infusion were 33% complete remission (CR), 30 % partial remission (PR), 21% stable disease (SD), and 8% progressive disease (PD). Three studies described response to immunotherapy as minimal residual disease negative (MRD-) and as no evidence of disease (NED) and after including it, the overall CR was 38%. Major adverse events included fever (38%), hypotension (23%), chills (29%), rigor (28%), fatigue 17% and dyspnea 10%. One patient died from cytokine release syndrome, which is potentially serious complication. Neurological symptoms require prompt recognition and management. Conclusion: CAR T cell therapy is a promising treatment for refractory and relapsed hematological malignancies. The durable responses of CAR T cell therapy help integrate it in standard treatment protocols. Patients who are refractory to standard salvage chemotherapy or relapse after allo - HSCT have overall poor prognosis and can potentially achieve remission again with CAR T cell therapy. Disclosures McBride: Sanofi: Research Funding. Anwer:Seattle Genetics: Other: Advisory Board Participant; Incyte: Speakers Bureau.