Search

Non-Hodgkin lymphomas (NHLs) represent a diverse group of hematologic malignancies derived from various cells. B-cell NHLs represent the largest fraction of lymphomas diagnosed and treated in the United States. Standard chemo-immunotherapies with rituximab and multiagent cytotoxic regimens have proven to be effective in the management of these lymphoproliferative neoplasms; nonetheless, a considerable fraction of patients still experience relapse or have treatment-refractory disease. Therapeutic advances using novel immunotherapeutic agents as well as cell-based treatments, such as chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapies, have improved the outcomes of relapsed/refractory (R/R) B-cell NHL. Most of these new treatment strategies are not curative and most patients succumb to R/R disease, leaving this population with an unmet need for effective and well-tolerated therapeutic options. One of these up-and-coming options are bispecific antibodies (BsAb), either as single agent or in combination with other medications. Conclusion: BsAbs offer a novel "off the shelf" chemotherapy-free approach in the management of R/R B-cell NHL. Advancements in antibody construct design along with improved safety profile and clinical effectiveness of the most recent BsAbs suggest that these agents are a promising new option in the management of R/R B-cell NHL. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Simple Summary: Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer related mortality and morbidity in the United States and worldwide. The advent of Immunotherapy has significantly improved lung cancer prognosis. However, there is a huge unmet need for novel agents, as a significant number of patients do not have durable responses to immunotherapy. This review article highlights two such novel techniques—Chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy and Tumor-infiltrating lymphocyte (TIL) therapy. Both these techniques utilize a patient's own immune cells to fight against tumors. While CAR T-cell therapy requires genetic modification of a patient's T cells to express receptors that can recognize and attack tumor cells rapidly, TILs involves extraction of immune cells from tumors and their proliferation in a laboratory before being infused back to the patient. Both these techniques are currently used in a clinical trial setting only. In this review, we discuss the limitations and future directions and potential for both these treatment strategies. Lung cancer is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality in the United States and worldwide. The introduction of immune checkpoint inhibitors has led to a marked improvement in the outcomes of lung cancer patients. Despite these advances, there is a huge unmet need for therapeutic options in patients who are not candidates for targeted or immunotherapy or those who progress after first-line treatment. With its high mutational burden, lung cancer appears to be an attractive target for novel personalized treatment approaches. In this review, we provide an overview of two adoptive cell therapy approaches–chimeric antigen receptors (CAR) T-cell therapy and Tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) in lung cancer with an emphasis on current challenges and future perspectives. While both these therapies are still in the early phases of development in lung cancer and need more refinement, they harbor the potential to be effective treatment options for this group of patients with otherwise poor prognoses. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Cancer remains a leading cause of death worldwide, placing a significant burden on healthcare systems as well as the global economy. Rare cancers comprise a group of about 200 cancers that individually occur at extremely low frequencies. In the United States (US), their frequency is approximately 15 cases per 100,000 people, and it is even lower in Europe with approximately 6 cases per 100,000 people. However, combined their frequency of occurrence is much higher than any singular cancer. Cancer treatment and management has tremendously improved in the last decade, particularly with the administration of immune-based therapies. The four most prevalent immune-based therapies are (1) the use of immune-checkpoint inhibitors, (2) macrophage therapy, (3) Chimeric Antigen Receptor (CAR) T cell therapy, and (4) neoantigen-based therapies. In our review, we discuss these various aproaches and their implementation in the treatment of a variety of rare cancers. Furthermore, we discuss their limitations and potential strategies to overcome them to enhance the therapeutic efficacy of these approaches. Finally, our article presents the future directions and other additional immune therapies that may be incorporated into the treatment of rare cancers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: It is not clear if all Americans have benefitted equally from the availability of chimeric antigen receptor T‐cell (CART) therapy. We aimed to evaluate if demographic differences existed among adult patients who received CART therapy and to assess predictors of CART treatment outcomes. Methods: Records of patients ≥18 years who received CART therapy for non‐Hodgkin's lymphoma, acute lymphoblastic leukemia, and multiple myeloma in 2018 were evaluated in the National Inpatient Sample. Acute complications and inhospital mortality were compared between two groups of CART recipients: Whites and non‐Whites. Logistic regression analysis was used to evaluate the association between sociodemographic factors and inhospital mortality. Results: Of 1275 CART recipients that met inclusion criteria, there were 40.4% of females, 66.9% of Whites, Blacks (4.2%), Hispanics (13.3%), Asians or Pacific Islanders (4.2%), and Native Americans (1.3%). Up to 96.8% of CART procedures were performed in urban teaching hospitals, and 85.3% of CART recipients lived in metropolitan counties. Non‐Whites, compared to Whites, were younger at the time of CART therapy (p < 0.001). The inhospital mortality rate was higher in non‐Whites, though not statistically significant (5.4% vs. 4.4%, p = 0.764). There were no differences in length of hospital stay, hospital charges, or rates of acute toxicities between the two race groups. We found no association between race and treatment outcomes. Gender, neurotoxicity, and Charlson Comorbidity Index were significant predictors of inhospital mortality. Conclusions: CART therapy recipients in the United States were more likely to be Whites and more likely to be residents of metropolitan areas. These observed demographic differences were not associated with treatment outcomes or inhospital mortalities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Pivotal trials of chimeric antigen receptor T-cell (CAR-T) have identified common toxicities but may have been underpowered to detect cardiovascular and pulmonary adverse events (CPAEs).Objectives: This study sought to investigate CPAEs associated with commercial CD19-directed CAR-T therapy.Methods: In this retrospective, pharmacovigilance study, the authors used the Food and Drug Administration adverse event reporting system to identify CPAEs associated with axicabtagene-ciloleucel and tisagenlecleucel. The authors evaluated disproportionate reporting by the reporting odds ratio (ROR) and the lower bound of the information component 95% credibility interval (IC025 >0 is deemed significant). Significant associations were further adjusted to age and sex (adj.ROR).Results: The authors identified CAR-T reports of 2,657 patients, including 546 CPAEs (20.5%). CPAEs overlapped with cytokine release syndrome in 68.3% (373 of 546) of the reports. Compared with the full database, CAR-T was associated with overreporting of tachyarrhythmias (n = 74 [2.8%], adj.ROR = 2.78 [95% CI: 2.21-3.51]), cardiomyopathy (n = 69 [2.6%], adj.ROR = 3.51 [2.42-5.09]), pleural disorders (n = 46 [1.7%], adj.ROR = 3.91 [2.92-5.23]), and pericardial diseases (n = 11 [0.4%], adj.ROR = 2.26 [1.25-4.09], all IC025 >0). Venous thromboembolic events (VTEs) were associated only with axicabtagene-ciloleucel therapy (n = 28 [1.6%], adj.ROR = 1.80 [1.24-2.62], IC025 >0). Atrial fibrillation (n = 55) was the leading tachyarrhythmia, followed by ventricular arrhythmias (n = 14). Tachyarrhythmias and VTEs were reported more often following axicabtagene-ciloleucel than tisagenlecleucel in an age- and sex-adjusted model (adj.ROR = 1.82 [1.04-3.18] and adj.ROR = 2.86 [1.18-6.93], respectively). Finally, the fatality rate of CPAEs was 30.9%.Conclusions: In this largest post-marketing study to date, the authors identified an association between CAR-T and various CPAEs, including tachyarrhythmias, cardiomyopathy, pericardial and pleural disorders, and VTEs. These findings should be considered in the multidisciplinary assessment for and monitoring of CAR-T therapy recipients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Highlights • Cytokine release syndrome (CRS) and neurotoxicity are common after immune effector cell (IEC) therapy. • Neurotoxicity is now termed IEC-associated neurotoxicity syndrome (ICANS). • A consensus grading system for CRS and ICANS has been developed by experts in the field. • The grading system is designed for IEC therapies in clinical trials and commercial use. • Standardized reporting through the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research will meet commercial Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategies requirements. ABSTRACT Chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cell therapy is rapidly emerging as one of the most promising therapies for hematologic malignancies. Two CAR T products were recently approved in the United States and Europe for the treatment ofpatients up to age 25years with relapsed or refractory B cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia and/or adults with large B cell lymphoma. Many more CAR T products, as well as other immunotherapies, including various immune cell- and bi-specific antibody-based approaches that function by activation of immune effector cells, are in clinical development for both hematologic and solid tumor malignancies. These therapies are associated with unique toxicities of cytokine release syndrome (CRS) and neurologic toxicity. The assessment and grading of these toxicities vary considerably across clinical trials and across institutions, making it difficult to compare the safety of different products and hindering the ability to develop optimal strategies for management of these toxicities. Moreover, some aspects of these grading systems can be challenging to implement across centers. Therefore, in an effort to harmonize the definitions and grading systems for CRS and neurotoxicity, experts from all aspects of the field met on June 20 and 21, 2018, at a meeting supported by the American Society for Transplantation and Cellular Therapy (ASTCT; formerly American Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation, ASBMT) in Arlington, VA. Here we report the consensus recommendations of that group and propose new definitions and grading for CRS and neurotoxicity that are objective, easy to apply, and ultimately more accurately categorize the severity of these toxicities. The goal is to provide a uniform consensus grading system for CRS and neurotoxicity associated with immune effector cell therapies, for use across clinical trials and in the postapproval clinical setting. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• BCMA-targeted myeloma therapies include CAR-T cells and antibody-based constructs. • Neurotoxicity from BCMA-targeted therapies is generally considered to be off-target. • Unusual peripheral or Parkinsonian neurotoxicities have recently been characterized. • Given BCMA expression on neurons, on-target neurotoxicity may be possible. • Trials of BCMA-targeted therapies should monitor and document such toxicities. B-cell maturation antigen (BCMA) has become a key target for antibody-drug conjugates, bispecific antibodies, chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapies, and other immunotherapies in multiple myeloma. Some of these agents such as belantamab mafodotin and idecabtagene vicleucel have already received regulatory approval in the United States. Although BCMA has generally been considered to be expressed almost exclusively in plasma cells with a low likelihood of on-target off-tumor toxicity, there has been a range of unusual neurotoxicity observed across the spectrum of BCMA immunotherapies. In certain cases, these unusual neurotoxicity presentations have led to patient death or withdrawal of agents from further development. Our review summarizes the literature in this field and highlights the possibility of on-target toxicities due to neural expression of BCMA. We draw attention to the need for further investigation of these toxicities. This risk becomes increasingly important as BCMA targeted therapies are brought to earlier lines of treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]