Cara A. Rosenbaum

Lenalidomide after stem-cell transplantation for multiple myeloma

BACKGROUND Data are lacking on whether lenalidomide maintenance therapy prolongs the time to disease progression after autologous hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation in patients with multiple myeloma. METHODS Between April 2005 and July 2009, we randomly assigned 460 patients who were younger than 71 years of age and had stable disease or a marginal, partial, or complete response 100 days after undergoing stem-cell transplantation to lenalidomide or placebo, which was administered until disease progression. The starting dose of lenalidomide was 10 mg per day (range, 5 to 15). RESULTS The study-drug assignments were unblinded in 2009, when a planned interim analysis showed a significantly longer time to disease progression in the lenalidomide group. At unblinding, 20% of patients who received lenalidomide and 44% of patients who received placebo had progressive disease or had died (P<0.001); of the remaining 128 patients who received placebo and who did not have progressive disease, 86 crossed over to lenalidomide. At a median follow-up of 34 months, 86 of 231 patients who received lenalidomide (37%) and 132 of 229 patients who received placebo (58%) had disease progression or had died. The median time to progression was 46 months in the lenalidomide group and 27 months in the placebo group (P<0.001). A total of 35 patients who received lenalidomide (15%) and 53 patients who received placebo (23%) died (P=0.03). More grade 3 or 4 hematologic adverse events and grade 3 nonhematologic adverse events occurred in patients who received lenalidomide (P<0.001 for both comparisons). Second primary cancers occurred in 18 patients who received lenalidomide (8%) and 6 patients who received placebo (3%). CONCLUSIONS Lenalidomide maintenance therapy, initiated at day 100 after hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation, was associated with more toxicity and second cancers but a significantly longer time to disease progression and significantly improved overall survival among patients with myeloma. (Funded by the National Cancer Institute; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00114101.).

Widespread Genetic Heterogeneity in Multiple Myeloma: Implications for Targeted Therapy

We performed massively parallel sequencing of paired tumor/normal samples from 203 multiple myeloma (MM) patients and identified significantly mutated genes and copy number alterations and discovered putative tumor suppressor genes by determining homozygous deletions and loss of heterozygosity. We observed frequent mutations in KRAS (particularly in previously treated patients), NRAS, BRAF, FAM46C, TP53, and DIS3 (particularly in nonhyperdiploid MM). Mutations were often present in subclonal populations, and multiple mutations within the same pathway (e.g., KRAS, NRAS, and BRAF) were observed in the same patient. In vitro modeling predicts only partial treatment efficacy of targeting subclonal mutations, and even growth promotion of nonmutated subclones in some cases. These results emphasize the importance of heterogeneity analysis for treatment decisions.

A randomized pilot phase I study of modified carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) peptide (CAP1-6D)/montanide/GM-CSF-vaccine in patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma

BackgroundCEA is expressed in >90% of pancreatic cancers (PC) and may be an appropriate immunotherapy target. CEA is poorly immunogenic due to immune tolerance; CAP1-6D, an altered peptide ligand can help bypass tolerance. We conducted a pilot randomized phase I trial in PC patients to determine the peptide dose required to induce an optimal CD8+ T cell response.MethodsPatients with a PS 0-1, HLA-A2+ and CEA-expressing, previously-treated PC were randomized to receive 10 μg (arm A), 100 μg (arm B) or 1000 μg (arm C) of CEA peptide emulsified in Montanide and GM-CSF, given every 2 weeks until disease progression.ResultsSixty-six patients were screened and 19 enrolled of whom 14 received at least 3 doses of the vaccine and thus evaluated for the primary immunologic endpoint. A median of 4 cycles (range 1-81) was delivered. Median and mean peak IFN-γ T cell response by ELISPOT (spots per 104 CD8+ cells, Arm A/B/C) was 11/52/271 (A vs. C, p = 0.028) for medians and 37/148/248 (A vs. C, p = 0.032) for means. T cell responses developed or increased in 20%/60%/100% of pts in Arms A/B/C. Seven of the 19 patients remain alive at a minimum 32 months from trial initiation, including three with unresectable disease.ConclusionsThe T cell response in this randomized phase I trial was dose-dependent with the 1 mg CEA peptide dose eliciting the most robust T cell responses. A signal of clinical benefit was observed and no significant toxicity was noted. Further evaluation of 1 mg CEA peptide with stronger adjuvants, and/or combined with agents to overcome immune inhibitory pathways, may be warranted in PC pts.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT00203892

Granulocyte Colony-Stimulating Factor-Based Stem Cell Mobilization in Patients with Sickle Cell Disease

Granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) has been reported to exacerbate vaso-occlusive crises in sickle cell disease. It has been recommended to avoid its use for stem cell mobilization in this population, yet autologous transplant is the standard of care and at times a life-saving treatment for patients with various hematologic malignancies such as relapsed aggressive lymphoma or multiple myeloma. We report 5 cases of patients with sickle cell disease and related hemoglobinopathies who underwent granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF)-mobilization of peripheral blood stem cells (PBSC). Three of them developed manageable vaso-occlusive pain symptoms requiring parenteral narcotics alone. The 2 others had no complications. These cases demonstrate that stem cell mobilization using G-CSF, although complicated and not without risk, is feasible in patients with sickle cell syndromes.

Evolving Strategies in the Initial Treatment of Multiple Myeloma

Until the advents of novel agents, partial response (PR) or better was the established gold standard to initial therapy of multiple myeloma (MM), and treatment goals were focused on relieving symptoms, prevention of organ damage, and modest improvements in survival. With the introduction of autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT), deeper responses, including complete responses (CRs) were more frequent, and contributed to longer survival. In the era of novel therapies, ASCT remains commonly used and its impact on outcome appears superior, albeit less so than when compared with conventional therapy, and its survival benefit is yet to be established in either setting. In addition, in non-transplant candidates, novel therapies have now significantly improved the overall response rates, depth of response, and clinical benefit, to the levels previously only observed with ASCT, which now increasingly challenges the role and timing of ASCT in eligible patients. Nevertheless, the two approaches of treatment, transplant or no transplant, remain commonly accepted. With an improvement in the tolerability of newer regimens and the deferral of ASCT in transplant candidates, the debate has emerged whether the two-pathway approach to the treatment of newly diagnosed myeloma should be re-evaluated. At the same time, treatment goals are also shifting. Many believe that MM can be converted into a chronic disease and that a functional cure maybe a realistic goal, for at least a proportion of patients. This contribution will review these points of discussion and the evolving approach to treatment of newly diagnosed MM.

Twice‐weekly ixazomib in combination with lenalidomide‐dexamethasone in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma

Weekly ixazomib with lenalidomide‐dexamethasone (Rd) is feasible and has shown activity in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) patients. This phase 1/2 study (NCT01383928) evaluated the recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D), pharmacokinetics, safety and efficacy of twice‐weekly ixazomib plus Rd in NDMM; 64 patients were enrolled across both phases. Patients received twice‐weekly oral ixazomib 3·0 or 3·7 mg plus lenalidomide 25 mg and dexamethasone 20 mg (10 mg in cycles 9–16) for up to sixteen 21‐day cycles, followed by maintenance with twice‐weekly ixazomib alone. No dose‐limiting toxicities were reported in cycle 1; the RP2D was 3·0 mg based on overall tolerability across multiple cycles. In 62 evaluable patients, the confirmed overall response rate was 94% (68% ≥very good partial response; 24% complete response). Median progression‐free survival was 24·9 months. Responses (median duration 36·9 months for patients receiving the RP2D) deepened during treatment. Grade 3 drug‐related adverse events (AEs) occurred in 64% of patients, including: rash, 13%; peripheral neuropathy, 8%; hyperglycaemia, 8%. There were no grade 4 drug‐related AEs. Thirteen patients discontinued due to AEs. Twice‐weekly ixazomib‐Rd offers substantial activity with promising long‐term outcomes in NDMM patients but may be associated with greater toxicity compared with weekly ixazomib‐Rd in this setting.