Background: Talquetamab (JNJ-64407564) is a humanized IgG4 bispecific antibody that targets the CD3 receptor complex on T cells and G-protein-coupled receptor class 5 member D (GPRC5D) a transmembrane receptor protein overexpressed on malignant plasma cells in Multiple Myeloma. After 6.3 months of follow up in RRMM, talquetemab monotherapy at the recommended phase 2 dose yielded an overall response rate of 70%. Talquetemab was well tolerated and here we describe the presentation and management of dermatologic and oral adverse events (AEs) in 78 patients (pts) treated with talquetemab at a single center that is part of a multi-center, multi-national study. Methods: Eligible pts with RRMM were enrolled to the Phase 1, first in human, open-label dose escalation study (NCT03399799) at our site, and received talquetamab intravenously (IV; range 1.5µg/kg -1200µg/kg biweekly or weekly) or subcutaneously (SC; 5µg/kg to 800µg/kg weekly). AEs were graded using CTCAE v4.03. Results: As of July 2021, 78 pts received talquetamab, 53 (67.9%) by IV and 25 (32%) by SC route. Treatment emergent dermatologic AEs were observed in 20 (25.6%) pts. The most common AEs were palmar/plantar desquamation in 22 pts (28.2%, grade 1/2), nail disorders in 14 pts (17.9%, all grade 1), systemic rash in 11 patients (14%, grades 1-3), and injection site reaction in 7 pts (8.9%, all grade 1). Time of onset for dermatologic toxicities was generally within the first 30 days of therapy. In collaboration with dermatology consultation, the management of palmar/plantar desquamation, nail disorders, and injection site reaction has been ammonium lactate 12% cream, triamcinolone 0.1% cream, along with plain Vaseline and Vanicream products applied twice daily. Of the 11 pts with systemic rash, 10 were at or above a dose of 405 µg /kg. Five pts had grade 3 rash requiring dose hold and systemic steroids in conjunction with topical medications. All pts have resumed dosing without recurrence of grade 3 rash. Four of these pts were at a dose level of 800 µg/kg SC. Grade 1-2 rash did not require dose hold and was managed with early intervention of the 3 topical treatments applied to affected areas twice daily. In addition to the above described dermatologic AEs, treatment emergent oral AEs were observed in 38 (48.7%) pts, all grade 1-2. 42 pts developed dysgeusia (53.8%), 16 developed dry mouth (20.5%), and 17 developed dysphagia (21.8% ). Dysgeusia resulted in 3 pts requiring drug interruption. 1 pt requiring dose reduction, and 1 discontinued treatment. The average time to onset for dysgeusia was 26.5 days. Dry mouth resulted in no drug interruptions, reductions, or discontinuations, and had an average onset of 6.7 days. Dysphagia also ranged from grades 1-2, with 3 pts requiring drug interruption. There were no dose reductions or treatment discontinuation. The average time to onset was 41.5 days. Dry mouth, dysgeusia, and dysphagia were more prevalent with higher doses. Along with GI and nutrition consultation, oral AEs have been successfully managed with saliva substitute sprays and rinses. These supportive interventions are instituted promptly at time of onset of symptoms. The above-described treatments for dermatologic and oral AEs were not protocol mandated procedures. Discussion The dermatologic and oral AEs associated with talquetamab have unknown etiologies and are currently under investigation. These AEs are typically low grade, rarely require dose holds or modifications, and have been manageable with early and consistent supportive care. Only one patient to date at our center, has discontinued treatment due to an oral or dermatologic side effect. Talquetamab appears to have a have favorable risk/benefit profile in RRMM with durable responses and manageable toxicities. A standardized regimen of topical and oral supportive care appears to be beneficial in the management of dermatological and oral side effects. Disclosures Farrell: Regeneron: Current Employment. Florendo: Legend Biotech: Current Employment. Catamero: Celgene: Ended employment in the past 24 months, Honoraria; Legend: Honoraria; Oncopeptides: Speakers Bureau. Parekh: Foundation Medicine Inc: Consultancy; Amgen: Research Funding; PFIZER: Research Funding; CELGENE: Research Funding; Karyopharm Inv: Research Funding. Richter: Janssen: Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Speakers Bureau; Adaptive Biotechnologies: Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy; Karyopharm: Consultancy; Antengene: Consultancy; Sanofi: Consultancy; X4 Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Oncopeptides: Consultancy; Adaptive Biotechnologies: Consultancy; Secura Bio: Consultancy; Astra Zeneca: Consultancy. Chari: Janssen Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Takeda Pharmaceutical Company: Consultancy, Research Funding; Karyopharm: Consultancy; Sanofi Genzyme: Consultancy; Oncopeptides: Consultancy; Antegene: Consultancy; Glaxosmithkline: Consultancy; Secura Bio: Consultancy.
PURPOSEAgarose macrobeads containing mouse renal adenocarcinoma cells (RMBs) release factors, suppressing the growth of cancer cells and prolonging survival in spontaneous or induced tumor animals, mediated, in part, by increased levels of myocyte-enhancing factor (MEF2D) via EGFR-and AKT-signaling pathways. The primary objective of this study was to determine the safety of RMBs in advanced, treatment-resistant metastatic cancers, and then its efficacy (survival), which is the secondary objective.METHODSThirty-one patients underwent up to four intraperitoneal implantations of RMBs (8 or 16 macrobeads/kg) via laparoscopy in this single-arm trial (FDA BB-IND 10091; NCT 00283075). Serial physical examinations, laboratory testing, and PET-CT imaging were performed before and three months after each implant.RESULTSRMBs were well tolerated at both dose levels (mean 660.9 per implant). AEs were (Grade 1/2) with no treatment-related SAEs.CONCLUSIONThe data support the safety of RMB therapy in advanced-malignancy patients, and the preliminary evidence for their potential efficacy is encouraging. A Phase 2 efficacy trial is ongoing.
Multiple myeloma treatments, including selinexor, exacerbate symptoms of the disease and induce additional adverse effects. Supportive care is therefore essential. Using post hoc analysis we tested the effect of earlier aggressive supportive care on selinexor's efficacy. Star ting suppor tive care administration from the first days of treatment and using multiple agents to mitigate specific adverse effects, increases selinexor tolerability and efficacy. Background: Supportive care improves outcomes in many cancers. In the pivotal STORM study selinexor, a first-inclass, oral, selective exportin 1 inhibitor, and low-dose dexamethasone proved to be an effective treatment for patients with triple-class refractory myeloma. We conducted a post-hoc analysis to test the hypothesis that increased utilization of supportive care measures in a sub-cohort of the STORM study prolonged treatment duration with-and improved efficacy of-selinexor. Materials and Methods: The STORM protocol included specific recommendations for dose modifications and supportive care to mitigate selinexor most common adverse events (AEs) including nausea, fatigue, and thrombocytopenia. The Tisch Cancer Center at Mount Sinai School of Medicine (MSSM) incorporated additional supportive care strategies within the framework of the STORM protocol. Results: Of 123 patients enrolled in STORM, 28 were enrolled at MSSM. The overall response rate was 26.2% in the overall STORM population and 53.6% in the MSSM cohort. Moreover, duration of response, progression free survival, and overall survival were longer in the MSSM cohort. AEs and dose modification events were similar in the 2 groups. The MSSM cohort had more dose reductions (67.9% vs. 50.5%), and higher use of multiple antiemetic agents (71.4% vs. 50.1%) and romiplostim (32.1% vs. 6.3%), but less discontinuations due to treatment-related AEs (3.6% vs. 25.3%). Conclusion: These results suggests that in addition to more frequent dose reductions, prompter and more aggressive supportive care may have contributed to the low discontinuation rate, longer duration therapy, and greater efficacy rates observed in the MSSM cohort. (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02336815).
The correlations of the tumor marker, tumor volume and SUV changes on PET-CT, and LDH levels themselves, and with OS, support the concept of a biological response to RMB implantation and the validity of the biological-systems approach to mCRC. A phase III clinical trial is planned.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.