Search

Abstract Despite therapeutic advancements, multiple myeloma (MM) remains incurable. NK cells have emerged as a promising option for the treatment of MM. NK cells are heterogenous and typically classified based on the relative expression of their surface markers (e.g., CD56 and CD16a). These cells elicit an antitumor response in the presence of low mutational burden and without neoantigen presentation via germline-encoded activating and inhibitory receptors that identify the markers of transformation present on the MM cells. Higher NK cell activity is associated with improved survival and prognosis, whereas lower activity is associated with advanced clinical stage and disease progression in MM. Moreover, not all NK cell phenotypes contribute equally toward the anti-MM effect; higher proportions of certain NK cell phenotypes result in better outcomes. In MM, the proportion, phenotype, and function of NK cells are drastically varied between different disease stages; this is further influenced by the bone marrow microenvironment, proportion of activating and inhibitory receptors on NK cells, expression of homing receptors, and bone marrow hypoxia. Antimyeloma therapies, such as autologous stem cell transplant, immunomodulation, proteasome inhibition, and checkpoint inhibition, further modulate the NK cell landscape in the patients. Thus, NK cells can naturally work in tandem with anti-MM therapies and be strategically modulated for improved anti-MM effect. This review article describes immunotypic and phenotypic differences in NK cells along with the functional changes in homeostatic and malignant states and provides expert insights on strategies to harness the potential of NK cells for improving outcomes in MM.

BackgroundMelphalan is the most common conditioning regimen used prior to autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT); however, there are varying data on optimal melphalan timing prior to transplant for best safety and efficacy. Historically, ASCT conditioning consisted of melphalan 200 mg/m2 on day 2 (D-2) (48 h prior to ASCT), but many institutions have since adopted a melphalan protocol with administration on day 1 (D-1) (24 h prior to SCT) or split dosing over the 2 days. The optimal timing of melphalan has yet to be determined.MethodsIn this single-center retrospective study, we analyzed transplant outcomes for patients between March 2011 and September 2020 admitted for high-dose, single-agent melphalan 200 mg/m2 on D-1 vs. D-2. The primary outcomes were time to neutrophil and platelet engraftment. Secondary outcomes include incidence of hospital readmission within 30 days, 2-year progression-free survival, and 2-year overall survival.ResultsA total of 366 patients were studied (D-2 n = 269 and D-1 n = 97). The incidence of high-risk cytogenetics was similar between the two groups (37% vs. 40%). Median days to absolute neutrophil count engraftment was similar at 11 days in the D-2 and D-1 cohort (n = 269, range 0–14, IQR 11–11 vs. n = 97, range 0–14, IQR 11–12). Median days to platelet engraftment >20,000/mcL was 18 days for D-2 melphalan (range: 0–28, IQR 17–20) versus 19 days for D-1 melphalan (range: 0–32, IQR 17–21). Overall survival at 2 years post-transplant was similar in both cohorts (94%; p = 0.76), and PFS was 70% in D-2 compared with 78% in D-1 (p = 0.15). In a multivariable model including age and performance status, hospital readmission within 30 days of transplant was higher in the D-1 cohort (odds ratio 1.9; p = 0.01).ConclusionThis study demonstrates similar neutrophil and platelet engraftment in D-1 and D-2 melphalan cohorts with similar 2-year PFS and OS. Either D-2 or D-1 melphalan dosing schedule is safe and effective.

The use of chimeric antigen receptor modified immune cell therapeutics has improved the treatment of a range of tumours. Here the authors explore a dual-target iPSC-derived NK cell product as a potential therapeutic for the treatment of multiple myeloma.