No abstract

Key Points• The overall response rate following 4 induction cycles of VTD prior to ASCT is higher than that of 4 cycles of VCD.The Intergroupe Francophone du Myélome conducted a randomized trial to compare bortezomib-thalidomide-dexamethasone (VTD) with bortezomib-cyclophosphamidedexamethasone (VCD) as induction before high-dose therapy and autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. Overall, a total of 340 patients were centrally randomly assigned to receive VTD or VCD. After 4 cycles, on an intent-to-treat basis, 66.3% of the patients in the VTD arm achieved at least a very good partial response (primary end point) vs 56.2% in the VCD arm (P 5 .05). In addition, the overall response rate was significantly higher in the VTD arm (92.3% vs 83.4% in the VCD arm; P 5 .01). Hematologic toxicity was higher in the VCD arm, with significantly increased rates of grade 3 and 4 anemia, thrombocytopenia, and neutropenia. On the other hand, the rate of peripheral neuropathy (PN) was significantly higher in the VTD arm. With the exception of hematologic adverse events and PN, other grade 3 or 4 toxicities were rare, with no significant differences between the VTD and VCD arms. Our data support the preferential use of VTD rather than VCD in preparation for ASCT.

Blastic plasmacytoid dendritic cell neoplasm (BPDCN) is a rare and aggressive leukemia for which we developed a nationwide network to collect data from new cases diagnosed in France. In a retrospective, observational study of 86 patients (2000-2013), we described clinical and biological data focusing on morphologies and immunophenotype. We found expression of markers associated with plasmacytoid dendritic cell origin (HLA-DRhigh, CD303+, CD304+, and cTCL1+) plus CD4 and CD56 and frequent expression of isolated markers from the myeloid, B-, and T-lymphoid lineages, whereas specific markers (myeloperoxidase, CD14, cCD3, CD19, and cCD22) were not expressed. Fifty-one percent of cytogenetic abnormalities impact chromosomes 13, 12, 9, and 15. Myelemia was associated with an adverse prognosis. We categorized chemotherapeutic regimens into 5 groups: acute myeloid leukemia (AML)–like, acute lymphoid leukemia (ALL)–like, lymphoma (cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone [CHOP])–like, high-dose methotrexate with asparaginase (Aspa-MTX) chemotherapies, and not otherwise specified (NOS) treatments. Thirty patients received allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (allo-HCT), and 4 patients received autologous hematopoietic cell transplantation. There was no difference in survival between patients receiving AML-like, ALL-like, or Aspa-MTX regimens; survival was longer in patients who received AML-like, ALL-like, or Aspa-MTX regimens than in those who received CHOP-like regimens or NOS. Eleven patients are in persistent complete remission after allo-HCT with a median survival of 49 months vs 8 for other patients. Our series confirms a high response rate with a lower toxicity profile with the Aspa-MTX regimen, offering the best chance of access to hematopoietic cell transplantation and a possible cure.

BackgroundSafety of rechallenge of immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) after grade ≥2 immune-related adverse events (irAEs) leading to ICI discontinuation remains unclear.MethodsAll adverse drug reactions involving at least one ICI reported up to December 31, 2019 were extracted from the French pharmacovigilance database. Patients were included if they experienced at least one grade ≥2 irAE resulting in ICI discontinuation, with subsequent ICI rechallenge. The primary outcome was the recurrence of at least one grade ≥2 irAE in these patients after ICI rechallenge.ResultsWe included 180 patients: 61.1% were men (median age of 66 years), 43.9% had melanoma and 78.9% were receiving anti-programmed cell death 1. First ICI discontinuation was related to 191 irAEs. After ICI rechallenge, 38.9% of the patients experienced at least one grade ≥2 irAE. Among them, 70.0% experienced the same irAE, 25.7% a distinct irAE, and 4.3% both the same and a distinct irAE. Lower recurrence rates of irAEs were associated with rechallenge with the same ICI treatment (p=0.02) or first endocrine irAEs (p=0.003). Gastrointestinal irAEs were more likely to recur (p=0.007). The median duration from ICI discontinuation to rechallenge and the severity of the initial irAE did not predict recurrent irAEs after ICI rechallenge (p=0.53 and p=0.40, respectively).ConclusionsIn this study, 61.1% of the patients who discontinued ICI treatment for grade ≥2 irAEs experienced no recurrent grade ≥2 irAEs after ICI rechallenge. Although ICI rechallenge appears to be safe under close monitoring, it should always be discussed balancing usefulness of rechallenge, patient comorbidities and risk of recurrence of first irAE(s). Due to inherent bias associated with pharmacovigilance studies, further prospective studies are needed to assess risk factors that may influence patient outcomes after ICI rechallenge.

PURPOSE: The prognosis of elderly patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) is worse than that of young patients. An attenuated dose of chemotherapy—cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone plus rituximab (R-miniCHOP)—is a good compromise between efficacy and safety in very elderly patients. In combination with R-CHOP (R2-CHOP), lenalidomide has an acceptable level of toxicity and may mitigate the negative prognosis of the non–germinal center B-cell–like phenotype. The Lymphoma Study association conducted a multicentric, phase III, open-label, randomized trial to compare R-miniCHOP and R2-miniCHOP. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients of age 80 years or older with untreated DLBCL were randomly assigned into the R-miniCHOP21 group or the R2-miniCHOP21 group for six cycles and stratified according to CD10 expression and age. The first cycle of rituximab was delivered by IV on D1 after a prephase and then delivered subcutaneously on D1 of cycles 2-6. Lenalidomide was delivered at a dose of 10 mg once daily on D1-D14 of each cycle. The primary end point was overall survival (OS). RESULTS: A total of 249 patients with new DLBCL were randomly assigned (127 R-miniCHOP and 122 R2-miniCHOP). The median age was 83 years (range, 80-96), and 55% of the patients were classified as non-GCB. The delivered dose for each R-miniCHOP compound was similar in both arms. Over a median follow-up of 25.1 months, the intention-to-treat analysis revealed that R2-miniCHOP did not improve OS (2-year OS 66% in R-miniCHOP and 65.7% in R2-miniCHOP arm, P = .98) in the overall population or in the non-GCB population. Grade 3-4 adverse events occurred in 53% of patients with R-miniCHOP and in 81% of patients with R2-miniCHOP. CONCLUSION: The addition of lenalidomide to R-miniCHOP does not improve OS. Rituximab delivered subcutaneously was safe in this population.

The survival rate of multiple myeloma (MM) patients has drastically increased recently as a result of the wide treatment options now available. Younger patients truly benefit from these innovations as they can support more intensive treatment, such as autologous stem cell transplant or multiple drug association (triplet, quadruplet). The emergence of immunotherapy allowed new combinations principally based on monoclonal anti-CD38 antibodies for these patients. Still, the optimal induction treatment has not been found yet. While consolidation is still debated, maintenance treatment is now well acknowledged to prolong survival. Lenalidomide monotherapy is the only drug approved in that setting, but many innovations are expected. Older patients, now logically named not transplant-eligible, also took advantage of these breakthrough innovations as most of the recent drugs have a more acceptable safety profile than previous cytotoxic agents. For this heterogenous subgroup, geriatric assessment has become an essential tool to identify frail patients and provide tailored strategies. At relapse, options are now numerous, especially for patients who were not treated with lenalidomide, or not refractory at least. Concerning lenalidomide refractory patients, approved combinations are lacking, but many trials are ongoing to fill that space. Moreover, innovative therapeutics are increasingly being developed with modern immunotherapy, such as chimeric antigen receptor T-cells (CAR-T cells), bispecific antibodies, or antibody–drug conjugates. For now, these treatments are usually reserved to heavily pre-treated patients with a poor outcome. MM drug classes have tremendously extended from historical alkylating agents to current dominant associations with proteasome inhibitors, immunomodulatory agents, and monoclonal anti-CD38/anti SLAMF7 antibodies. Plus, in only a couple of years, several new classes will enter the MM armamentarium, such as cereblon E3 ligase modulators (CELMoDs), selective inhibitors of nuclear export, and peptide–drug conjugates. Among the questions that will need to be answered in the years to come is the position of these new treatments in the therapeutic strategy, as well as the role of minimal residual disease-driven strategies which will be a key issue to elucidate. Through this review, we chose to enumerate and comment on the most recent advances in MM therapeutics which have undergone major transformations over the past decade.

No abstract

No abstract