Search

PURPOSE: Vaccination with dendritic cell (DC)/multiple myeloma (MM) fusions has been shown to induce the expansion of circulating multiple myeloma-reactive lymphocytes and consolidation of clinical response following autologous hematopoietic cell transplant (auto-HCT). PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this randomized phase II trial (NCT02728102), we assessed the effect of DC/MM fusion vaccination, GM-CSF, and lenalidomide maintenance as compared with control arms of GM-CSF and lenalidomide or lenalidomide maintenance alone on clinical response rates and induction of multiple myeloma-specific immunity at 1-year posttransplant. RESULTS: The study enrolled 203 patients, with 140 randomized posttransplantation. Vaccine production was successful in 63 of 68 patients. At 1 year, rates of CR were 52.9% (vaccine) and 50% (control; P = 0.37, 80% CI 44.5%, 61.3%, and 41.6%, 58.4%, respectively), and rates of VGPR or better were 85.3% (vaccine) and 77.8% (control; P = 0.2). Conversion to CR at 1 year was 34.8% (vaccine) and 27.3% (control; P = 0.4). Vaccination induced a statistically significant expansion of multiple myeloma-reactive T cells at 1 year compared with before vaccination (P = 0.024) and in contrast to the nonvaccine arm (P = 0.026). Single-cell transcriptomics revealed clonotypic expansion of activated CD8 cells and shared dominant clonotypes between patients at 1-year posttransplant. CONCLUSIONS: DC/MM fusion vaccination with lenalidomide did not result in a statistically significant increase in CR rates at 1 year posttransplant but was associated with a significant increase in circulating multiple myeloma-reactive lymphocytes indicative of tumor-specific immunity. Site-specific production of a personalized cell therapy with centralized product characterization was effectively accomplished in the context of a multicenter cooperative group study. See related commentary by Qazilbash and Kwak, p. 4703.

Measuring response among patients with multiple myeloma is essential for the care of patients. Deeper responses are associated with better progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). To test the hypothesis that Mass-Fix, a mass spectrometry-based means to detect monoclonal proteins, is superior to existing methodologies to predict for survival outcomes, samples from the STAMINA trial (NCT01109004), a trial comparing three transplant approaches, were employed. Samples from 575 patients from as many as three time points (post-induction [post-I; pre-maintenance [pre-M]; 1 year post enrollment [1YR]) were tested when available. Four response parameters were assessed: Mass-Fix, serum immunofixation, complete response, and measurable residual disease (MRD) by next generation flow cytometry. Of the four response measures, only MRD and Mass-Fix predicted for PFS and OS at multiple testing points on multivariate analyses. Although MRD drove Mass-Fix from the model for PFS at post-I and pre-M, 1YR Mass-Fix was independent of 1YR MRD. For OS, the only prognostic pre-I measure was Mass-Fix, and the only 1YR measures that were prognostic on multivariate analysis were 1YR MRD and 1YR Mass-Fix. SIFE and CR were not. Mass-Fix is a powerful means to track response.

BackgroundPrevention of graft-versus-host disease (GvHD) without malignant relapse is the overall goal of allogeneic haemopoietic cell transplantation (HCT). We aimed to evaluate regimens using either maraviroc, bortezomib, or post-transplantation cyclophosphamide for GvHD prophylaxis compared with controls receiving the combination of tacrolimus and methotrexate using a novel composite primary endpoint to identify the most promising intervention to be further tested in a phase 3 trial.MethodsIn this prospective multicentre phase 2 trial, adult patients aged 18-75 years who received reduced-intensity conditioning HCT were randomly assigned (1:1:1) by random block sizes to tacrolimus, mycophenolate mofetil, and post-transplantation cyclophosphamide (cyclophosphamide 50 mg/kg on days 3 and 4, followed by tacrolimus starting on day 5 and mycophenolate mofetil starting on day 5 at 15 mg/kg three times daily not to exceed 1 g from day 5 to day 35); tacrolimus, methotrexate, and bortezomib (bortezomib 1·3 mg/m2 intravenously on days 1, 4, and 7 after HCT); or tacrolimus, methotrexate, and maraviroc (maraviroc 300 mg orally twice daily from day -3 to day 30 after HCT). Methotrexate was administered as a 15 mg/m2 intravenous bolus on day 1 and 10 mg/m2 intravenous bolus on days 3, 6, and 11 after HCT; tacrolimus was given intravenously at a dose of 0·05 mg/kg twice daily (or oral equivalent) starting on day -3 (except the post-transplantation cyclophosphamide, as indicated), with a target level of 5-15 ng/mL. Tacrolimus was continued at least until day 90 and was tapered off by day 180. Each study group was compared separately to a contemporary non-randomised prospective cohort of patients (control group) who fulfilled the same eligibility criteria as the trial, but who were treated with tacrolimus and methotrexate at centres not participating in the trial. The primary endpoint (GvHD-free, relapse-free survival [GRFS]) was defined as the time from HCT to onset of grade 3-4 acute GvHD, chronic GvHD requiring systemic immunosuppression, disease relapse, or death. The study was analysed by modified intention to treat. The study is closed to accrual and this is the planned analysis. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02208037.FindingsBetween Nov 17, 2014, and May 18, 2016, 273 patients from 31 US centres were randomly assigned to the three study arms: 89 to tacrolimus, methotrexate, and bortezomib; 92 to tacrolimus, methotrexate, and maraviroc; 92 to tacrolimus, mycophenolate mofetil, and post-transplantation cyclophosphamide; and six were excluded. Between Aug 1, 2014, and Sept 14, 2016, 224 controls received tacrolimus and methotrexate. Controls were generally well matched except for more frequent comorbidities than the intervention groups and a different distribution of types of conditioning regimens used. Compared with controls, the hazard ratio for GRFS was 0·72 (90% CI 0·54-0·94; p=0·044) for tacrolimus, mycophenolate mofetil, and post-transplantation cyclophosphamide, 0·98 (0·76-1·27; p=0·92) for tacrolimus, methotrexate, and bortezomib, and 1·10 (0·86-1·41; p=0·49) for tacrolimus, methotrexate, and maraviroc. 238 patients experienced grade 3 or 4 toxicities: 12 (13%) had grade 3 and 67 (73%) grade 4 events with tacrolimus, mycophenolate mofetil, and post-transplantation cyclophosphamide; ten (11%) had grade 3 and 68 (76%) had grade 4 events with tacrolimus, methotrexate, and bortezomib; and 18 (20%) had grade 3 and 63 (68%) had grade 4 events with tacrolimus, methotrexate, and maraviroc. The most common toxicities were haematological (77 [84%] for tacrolimus, mycophenolate mofetil, and post-transplantation cyclophosphamide; 73 [82%] for tacrolimus, methotrexate, and bortezomib; and 78 [85%] for tacrolimus, methotrexate, and maraviroc) and cardiac (43 [47%], 44 [49%], and 43 [47%], respectively).InterpretationTacrolimus, mycophenolate mofetil, and post-transplantation cyclophosphamide was the most promising intervention, yielding the best GRFS; this regimen is thus being prospectively compared with tacrolimus and methotrexate in a phase 3 randomised trial.FundingUS National Health, Lung, and Blood Institute; National Cancer Institute; National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease; and Millennium Pharmaceuticals.

PurposeSingle-cycle melphalan 200 mg/m2 and autologous hematopoietic cell transplantation (AHCT) followed by lenalidomide (len) maintenance have improved progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) for transplantation-eligible patients with multiple myeloma (MM). We designed a prospective, randomized, phase III study to test additional interventions to improve PFS by comparing AHCT, tandem AHCT (AHCT/AHCT), and AHCT and four subsequent cycles of len, bortezomib, and dexamethasone (RVD; AHCT + RVD), all followed by len until disease progression.Patients and methodsPatients with symptomatic MM within 12 months from starting therapy and without progression who were age 70 years or younger were randomly assigned to AHCT/AHCT + len (n = 247), AHCT + RVD + len (n = 254), or AHCT + len (n = 257). The primary end point was 38-month PFS.ResultsThe study population had a median age of 56 years (range, 20 to 70 years); 24% of patients had high-risk MM, 73% had a triple-drug regimen as initial therapy, and 18% were in complete response at enrollment. The 38-month PFS rate was 58.5% (95% CI, 51.7% to 64.6%) for AHCT/AHCT + len, 57.8% (95% CI, 51.4% to 63.7%) for AHCT + RVD + len, and 53.9% (95% CI, 47.4% to 60%) for AHCT + len. For AHCT/AHCT + len, AHCT + RVD + len, and AHCT + len, the OS rates were 81.8% (95% CI, 76.2% to 86.2%), 85.4% (95% CI, 80.4% to 89.3%), and 83.7% (95% CI, 78.4% to 87.8%), respectively, and the complete response rates at 1 year were 50.5% (n = 192), 58.4% (n = 209), and 47.1% (n = 208), respectively. Toxicity profiles and development of second primary malignancies were similar across treatment arms.ConclusionSecond AHCT or RVD consolidation as post-AHCT interventions for the up-front treatment of transplantation-eligible patients with MM did not improve PFS or OS. Single AHCT and len should remain as the standard approach for this population.

Plain Language Summary What is this summary about? This summary describes the final analysis of the GRIFFIN study. In this study, participants were newly diagnosed with a type of blood and bone marrow cancer called multiple myeloma, had never received any treatment, and were able to undergo an autologous stem cell transplant. The GRIFFIN study looked at adding the drug daratumumab (D) to a combination of standard treatments called RVd (lenalidomide [R], bortezomib [V], and dexamethasone [d]) during the treatment phases induction and consolidation, followed by daratumumab and lenalidomide (D-R) maintenance. Participants also received an autologous stem cell transplant to further help reduce multiple myeloma. The GRIFFIN study looked at whether D-RVd followed by D-R maintenance was better at killing multiple myeloma cells compared with RVd on its own followed by R maintenance on its own, and if treatments were safe. This summary also describes results from 2 other GRIFFIN publications: one that looked at participants with certain multiple myeloma characteristics or demographic factors that are associated with worse outcomes, and another that looked at how treatments impacted the participants' quality of life. What were the results? At the time of the final analysis of GRIFFIN, participants who were treated with D-RVd followed by D-R maintenance had very low (undetectable) levels of multiple myeloma cells and multiple myeloma markers (biological signs) and were more likely to be alive without the multiple myeloma getting worse or coming back compared with participants who received standard RVd treatment followed by R maintenance. There was also a pattern of similar benefits achieved by participants who were at risk for worse outcomes. Additionally, participants who received D-RVd treatment followed by D-R maintenance reported less pain, less fatigue (extreme tiredness), and greater improvements in their ability to conduct daily physical activities. While some side effects (unwanted or unexpected effects of treatment) were higher with D-RVd, side effects in both groups were as expected, and adding daratumumab did not reduce a participant's ability to handle treatment. What do the results of the study mean? Results of the GRIFFIN study showed that D-RVd treatment followed by D-R maintenance was better at treating multiple myeloma than the standard treatment of RVd followed by R maintenance in adults with a new diagnosis of multiple myeloma who were able to receive an autologous stem cell transplant, with no unexpected side effects of treatment. Clinical Trial Registration:NCT02874742 (GRIFFIN) (ClinicalTrials.gov) This is an abstract of the Plain Language Summary of Publication article. To read the full Plain Language Summary of this article, click here to view the PDF. Link to original article here Link to original article here Link to original article here [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Regulatory T (Treg) cells play a central role in immune tolerance and prevention of aberrant immune responses. Several studies have suggested that the risk of graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) after allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) can be ameliorated by increasing Tregs. We have developed an approach of in vivo expansion of Tregs with RGI-2001, a novel liposomal formulation of a synthetic derivative of alpha-galactosylceramide, a naturally occurring ligand that binds to CD1 and activates and expands invariant natural killer cells. In preclinical studies, a single intravenous infusion of RGI-2001 expanded Treg and could ameliorate GVHD in a mouse model of allogeneic HCT. To explore the role of RGI-2001 in clinical HCT, we initiated a phase 2A clinical trial (n = 29), testing 2 different doses of RGI-2001 administered as a single infusion on day 0 of allogeneic HCT. RGI-2001 was well tolerated and without infusion reactions or cytokine release syndrome. A subset of patients (8 of 29, 28%) responded to RGI-2001 by inducing a markedly increased number of cells with a Treg phenotype. The Treg had a high Ki-67 index and were almost exclusively Helios+ and Foxp3+, indicating that their accumulation was due to expansion of natural Treg. Notably, the incidence of grade 2 to 4 GVHD in the 8 patients who responded to RGI-2001 was 12.5%, compared with 52.4% in the 21 patients who did not respond. No grade 3 or 4 GVHD was observed in the responder group, compared with a 9.5% incidence among nonresponders. Immunosuppression with sirolimus was also associated with a low incidence of GVHD, suggesting that RGI-2001 may have synergized with sirolimus to promote Treg expansion.

Chronic graft-versus-host-disease (cGVHD) is one of the primary causes of morbidity and mortality for patients who undergo allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (allo-HCT). In recent years, advancements in allo-HCT have allowed a broader range of patients to receive transplant, particularly older patients. We sought to assess the impact of cGVHD on outcomes in patients undergoing allo-HCT, for older patients as compared to their counterparts. We performed a retrospective analysis of all patients who underwent allo-HCT 1999–2018. Our results showed that those patients who developed cGVHD by D + 180 had an increased risk and incidence of NRM as compared to those patients without cGVHD. There was no significant difference in outcomes for those patients with cGVHD by age (≥60 years old [yo] and <60 yo). These findings suggest the significant morbidity of cGVHD, regardless of age. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Anti‐myelin‐associated glycoprotein (MAG) neuropathy is a debilitating demyelinating polyneuropathy with no approved therapies. Our primary objective was to ascertain lenalidomide safety and maximum tolerated dose (MTD) in anti‐MAG neuropathy. Methods: This phase 1b, open‐label, single‐arm, dose‐finding trial was conducted from 2019 through 2022. The original design included a dose‐escalation/extension phase followed by a dose‐expansion phase. Three doses of lenalidomide were evaluated: 10, 15, and 25 mg. The main outcome was the MTD. Results: Eleven patients enrolled (10 men), with a mean age of 67.6 years (SD = 6.18, range 58–77 years) and mean disease duration of 8.5 years (SD = 10.9, range 1–40 years). The study terminated early due to higher‐than‐expected non‐dose‐limiting toxicity venous thromboembolism (VTE) events. The calculated MTD was 25 mg (posterior mean of toxicity probability was 0.01 with a 95% credible interval of 0.00, 0.06), but a recommended phase 2 dose of 15 mg was advised. For secondary exploratory outcomes, only EQ‐5D (−0.95, 95% CI −1.81 to −0.09) and total IgM (−162 mg/dL, 95% CI −298 to −26) showed signs of improvement by month 12. Conclusions: Lenalidomide was associated with higher‐than‐expected VTE events in anti‐MAG neuropathy patients, despite a calculated MTD of 25 mg. A recommended phase 2 dose of 15 mg was advised. Lenalidomide did not improve disability or impairment at 12 months, although this study was not powered for efficacy. The risks of long term lenalidomide may outweigh benefit for patients with anti‐MAG neuropathy. Any future efficacy study should address VTE risk, as current myeloma guidelines appear inadequate. Trial Registration: Lenalidomide in Anti‐MAG Neuropathy: Phase 1b Study, ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03701711, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03701711. First submitted October 10, 2018. First patient enrolled in January 2019. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]