Search

BACKGROUND: A major obstacle in translating the therapeutic potential of chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cells to children with central nervous system (CNS) tumors is the blood–brain barrier. To overcome this limitation, preclinical and clinical studies have supported the use of repeated, locoregional intracranial CAR T-cell delivery. However, there is limited literature available describing the process for the involvement of an investigational drug service (IDS) pharmacy, particularly in the setting of a children’s hospital with outpatient dosing for CNS tumors. OBJECTIVES: To describe Seattle Children’s Hospital’s experience in clinically producing CAR T cells and the implementation of IDS pharmacy practices used to deliver more than 300 intracranial CAR T-cell doses to children, as well as to share how we refined the processing techniques from CAR T-cell generation to the thawing of fractionated doses for intracranial delivery. METHODS: Autologous CD4+ and CD8+ T cells were collected and transduced to express HER2, EGFR, or B7-H3–specific CAR T cells. Cryopreserved CAR T cells were thawed by the IDS pharmacy before intracranial delivery to patients with recurrent/refractory CNS tumors or with diffuse intrinsic pontine glioma/diffuse midline glioma. RESULTS: The use of a thaw-and-dilute procedure for cryopreserved individual CAR T-cell doses provides reliable viability and is more efficient than typical thaw-and-wash protocols. Cell viability with the thaw-and-dilute protocol was approximately 75% and was always within 10% of the viability assessed at cryopreservation. Cell viability was preserved through 6 hours after thawing, which exceeded the 1-hour time frame from thawing to infusion. CONCLUSION: As the field of adoptive immunotherapy grows and continues to bring hope to patients with fatal CNS malignancies, it is critical to focus on improving the preparatory steps for CAR T-cell delivery. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Rationale: Inhaled tobramycin and oral azithromycin are common chronic therapies in people with cystic fibrosis and Pseudomonas aeruginosa airway infection. Some studies have shown that azithromycin can reduce the ability of tobramycin to kill P. aeruginosa. This trial was done to test the effects of combining azithromycin with inhaled tobramycin on clinical and microbiological outcomes in people already using inhaled tobramycin. We theorised that those randomised to placebo (no azithromycin) would have greater improvement in forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) and greater reduction in P. aeruginosa sputum in response to tobramycin.Methods: A 6-week prospective, randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial testing oral azithromycin versus placebo combined with clinically prescribed inhaled tobramycin in individuals with cystic fibrosis and P. aeruginosa airway infection.Results: Over a 6-week period, including 4 weeks of inhaled tobramycin, the relative change in FEV1 did not statistically significantly differ between groups (azithromycin (n=56) minus placebo (n=52) difference: 3.44%; 95% CI: -0.48 to 7.35; p=0.085). Differences in secondary clinical outcomes, including patient-reported symptom scores, weight and need for additional antibiotics, did not significantly differ. Among the 29 azithromycin and 35 placebo participants providing paired sputum samples, the 6-week change in P. aeruginosa density differed in favour of the placebo group (difference: 0.75 log10 CFU/mL; 95% CI: 0.03 to 1.47; p=0.043).Conclusions: Despite having greater reduction in P. aeruginosa density in participants able to provide sputum samples, participants randomised to placebo with inhaled tobramycin did not experience significantly greater improvements in lung function or other clinical outcomes compared with those randomised to azithromycin with tobramycin. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents a call to action for health-system pharmacists to assess institutional cellular-based therapy (CBT) practice standards. Topics include pharmacy roles in cellular therapy, the need of CBTs for pharmacist expertise, and importance of the establishment of CBTs in the medication use process in optimizing patient safety.

Rationale: Inhaled tobramycin and oral azithromycin are common chronic therapies in people with cystic fibrosis and Pseudomonas aeruginosa airway infection. Some studies have shown that azithromycin can reduce the ability of tobramycin to kill P. aeruginosa . This trial was done to test the effects of combining azithromycin with inhaled tobramycin on clinical and microbiological outcomes in people already using inhaled tobramycin. We theorised that those randomised to placebo (no azithromycin) would have greater improvement in forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV 1 ) and greater reduction in P. aeruginosa sputum in response to tobramycin., Methods: A 6-week prospective, randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial testing oral azithromycin versus placebo combined with clinically prescribed inhaled tobramycin in individuals with cystic fibrosis and P. aeruginosa airway infection., Results: Over a 6-week period, including 4 weeks of inhaled tobramycin, the relative change in FEV 1 did not statistically significantly differ between groups (azithromycin (n=56) minus placebo (n=52) difference: 3.44%; 95% CI: -0.48 to 7.35; p=0.085). Differences in secondary clinical outcomes, including patient-reported symptom scores, weight and need for additional antibiotics, did not significantly differ. Among the 29 azithromycin and 35 placebo participants providing paired sputum samples, the 6-week change in P. aeruginosa density differed in favour of the placebo group (difference: 0.75 log 10 CFU/mL; 95% CI: 0.03 to 1.47; p=0.043)., Conclusions: Despite having greater reduction in P. aeruginosa density in participants able to provide sputum samples, participants randomised to placebo with inhaled tobramycin did not experience significantly greater improvements in lung function or other clinical outcomes compared with those randomised to azithromycin with tobramycin., Competing Interests: Competing interests: DN and NM-H, as part of their roles at the Cystic Fibrosis (CF) Foundation Therapeutics Development Network Coordinating Centre, provide consulting to industry sponsors who are developing new drug therapies for cystic fibrosis. Some of these sponsors are working to develop antimicrobial agents. PS and DN report grants from Vertex and Gilead Sciences outside of the published work. RG and GR-B report grants from Vertex outside of the published work. LS reports grants from Merck Co and Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation outside of the published work and payments for Data Safety Monitoring Board or Advisory Boards from Merck Co. Multiple authors have grant support or payments from the CF Foundation., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)