Background-Patients with relapsed or refractory (R/R) high-risk chronic lymphocytic leukaemia (CLL) or mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) often do not derive durable benefit from ibrutinib monotherapy. We hypothesized that dual B-cell receptor pathway blockade would be tolerable and efficacious. We conducted a phase 1/1b, investigator-initiated, multicentre study of a

Programmed cell death-1 (PD-1)/programmed death ligand-1 blockade may potentially augment graft-vs-tumor effects following allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (alloHCT), but retrospective studies of anti–PD-1 therapy reported substantial toxicity from graft-versus-host-disease (GVHD). Here, we report the results of a prospective clinical trial of PD-1 blockade for relapsed hematologic malignancies (HMs) after alloHCT (NCT01822509). The primary objective in this phase 1 multicenter, investigator-initiated study was to determine maximum tolerated dose and safety. Secondary objectives were to assess efficacy and immunologic activity. Patients with relapsed HMs following alloHCT were eligible. Nivolumab was administered every 2 weeks until progression or unacceptable toxicity, starting with a 1-mg/kg cohort, with planned deescalation based on toxicity to a 0.5-mg/kg cohort. Twenty-eight patients were treated (n = 19 myeloid, n = 9 lymphoid). Median age was 57 years (range 27-76), and median time from alloHCT to enrollment was 21 months (range 5.6-108.5). Two of 6 patients treated at 1 mg/kg experienced dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) from immune-related adverse events (irAEs). Twenty-two patients were treated at 0.5 mg/kg, and 4 DLTs occurred, including 2 irAEs and 2 with fatal GVHD. The overall response rate in efficacy-evaluable patients was 32% (8/25). With a median follow-up of 11 months, the 1-year progression-free survival and overall survival were 23% and 56%, respectively. In this first prospective clinical trial of an anti–PD-1 antibody for post–alloHCT relapse, GVHD and irAEs occurred, requiring dose deescalation, with only modest antitumor activity. Further studies of anti–PD-1 therapy post–alloHCT may require specific toxicity mitigation strategies. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT 01822509.

We report a consecutive series of 59 patients with MDS who underwent reduced-intensity hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (RI-HSCT) with fludarabine/melphalan conditioning and tacrolimus/sirolimus-based GVHD prophylaxis. Two-year OS, EFS, and relapse incidences were 75.1%, 65.2%, and 20.9%, respectively. The cumulative incidence of non-relapse mortality at 100 days, 1 year, and 2 years was 3.4%, 8.5%, and 10.5%, respectively. The incidence of grade II-IV acute GVHD was 35.4%; grade III-IV was 18.6%. Forty of 55 evaluable patients developed chronic GVHD, 35 extensive grade. This RI-HSCT protocol produces encouraging outcomes in MDS patients, and tacrolimus/sirolimus-based GVHD prophylaxis may contribute to that promising result.

No abstract

We report on a prospective phase II trial of 32 patients who underwent unrelated donor hematopoietic cell transplantation, with a tacrolimus, sirolimus and rabbit anti-thymoctye globulin GVHD prophylactic regimen. The primary study endpoint was incidence of grades II-IV acute GVHD, with 80% power to detect a 30% decrease compared to institutional historical controls. Median age at transplant was 60 (19-71). Twenty-three patients (72%) received reduced-intensity conditioning, while the remainder received full-intensity regimens. Median follow up for surviving patients was 35 months (range: 21 - 49). The cumulative incidence of acute GVHD was 37.3% and the 2-year cumulative incidence of cGVHD was 63%. We observed TMA in seven patients (21.8%), one of whom also developed sinusoidal obstructive syndrome (SOS). Four patients of 32 (12.5%) failed to engraft, and three of these four died. As a result, enrollment to this trial was closed before the targeted accrual of 60 patients. Two-year overall survival was 65.5% and event-free survival was 61.3%. Two-year cumulative incidence of relapse was 12.5% and non-relapse mortality (NRM) was 15.6%. NRM and aGVHD rates were lower than historical rates; however, the unexpectedly high incidence of graft failure requires caution in the design of future studies with this regimen.

Purpose: This study aimed to determine the benefit of early therapeutic intervention with the combination of elotuzumab, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone in patients with high-risk smoldering multiple myeloma (SMM). The overarching objective of this trial is to determine progression free survival to symptomatic myeloma (MM). Furthermore, the study examined the activity and safety of the combination therapy in patients with high-risk SMM. Patients & Methods: Patients enrolled on study met eligibility for high-risk SMM based on the newly defined criteria proposed by Rajkumar et al, Blood 2014. Patients were administered weekly elotuzumab (10 mg/kg) on days 1, 8, 15, and 22 for the first two 28-day cycles while receiving lenalidomide on days 1-21. An initial cohort of patients were randomized to a low dose dexamethasone treatment arm (Arm B) based on the following stratification factors: age >65 years and high-risk cytogenetics based on t(4:14), t(14:16), 17p deletion or p53 mutation, and +1q amplification. For cycles 3-8, patients on both treatment arms were administered elotuzumab infusions on days 1, 8, and 15. Patients on treatment Arm A received dexamethasone (40mg) on days 1, 8 and 15. After 8 cycles or best response, patients were given the option to mobilize with either cyclophosphamide or plerixafor and collect stem cells for future transplant. Patients on both treatment arms were then allowed to continue on maintenance therapy where they were administered elotuzumab (20 mg/kg) on day 1, in combination with lenalidomide days 1-21 of a 28 day cycle. After 11 patients were enrolled on each arm, arm B closed due to similar activity and toxicity to the high-dose dexamethasone arm based on published data demonstrating that high-dose dexamethasone, given once a week, does not have a detrimental effect on the immune system in patients with smoldering myeloma. Results: In total, 39 patients were enrolled on this study from January 2015 to date, with the participation of eight sites. The median age of patients enrolled was 62 years (range 26 to 75) with 15 males (38%) and 24 females (62%). The median number of cycles completed is 6 (range 1 to 19). Therapy related grade 3 toxicities included hypophosphatemia (23%), neutropenia (8%), infection (8%), anemia (3%), pulmonary embolism (3%), rash (3%), and diarrhea (3%). No related grade 4 or 5 toxicities have occurred thus far. Stem cell collection was successful in all patients collected to date. Unrelated toxicities include one instance of grade 4 prolonged QTc Interval. Of the 34 evaluable patients enrolled to both arms of the study, the clinical benefit rate is 97%. The overall response rate is 71%, including 9 very good partial responses (26%) and 15 partial responses (44%). The VGPR cases are currently under evaluation of possible complete responses due to the potential interference of elotuzumab with immunoelectrophoresis. Thus far, no patients have progressed to active multiple myeloma during, or after, protocol therapy. Conclusion:The combination of elotuzumab, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone is very well tolerated among patients with high-risk SMM. The high response rates among this patient population, who would otherwise remain untreated, is a promising starting point for the paradigm shift towards early therapeutic intervention in patients with high-risk SMM. Disclosures Ghobrial: Amgen: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; BMS: Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria; Noxxon: Honoraria. Matous:Seattle Genetics: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Takeda Pharmaceuticals International Co.: Speakers Bureau. Rosenblatt:Astex: Research Funding; BMS: Research Funding; DCPrime: Research Funding. Usmani:Sanofi: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Britsol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Millenium: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Skyline: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Onyx: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Array: Research Funding; Novartis: Speakers Bureau; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; BioPharma: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Munshi:OncoPep Inc.: Equity Ownership, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

Triple-negative breast cancer is defined by the lack of expression of estrogen-receptor, progesterone-receptor, and HER-2/neu. It primarily, but not exclusively, carries the basal-like molecular profile on gene expression arrays and is associated with BRCA-1 and p53 mutations. It has an aggressive behavior and predilection for visceral metastasis, therefore accounting for its poor prognosis. Despite lacking targeted therapies, it is sensitive to anthracyclines and taxanes. Increasing knowledge has generated a better understanding of its pathophysiology, therefore leading to the development of directed therapies, although their validation still needs further investigation. This review focuses on its biology, management, evolving concepts, and future directions.

BACKGROUND: Patients (pts) with relapsed hematologic malignancies (HM) after alloHCT are a unique population, given the potential to harness a dormant graft-vs.-tumor effect therapeutically. We previously reported that CTLA-4 blockade with ipilimumab was feasible and active in this population (Davids et al., N Eng J Med, 2016). In retrospective studies, anti-PD1 antibodies were active in pts with relapsed lymphoid malignancies after alloHCT, though with substantial toxcity due to GVHD (Herbaux et al. and Haverkos et al., Blood, 2017). Here, we report on the first prospective clinical trial of PD1 blockade in pts with relapsed HM after alloHCT. METHODS: The primary objectives in this ph I/Ib, multicenter, investigator-initiated, CTEP-sponsored study (CTEP 9204) were to determine MTD and evaluate safety of nivolumab (nivo). Secondary objectives were to assess efficacy and immunologic correlates. Pts with any HM with relapse or persistent disease after alloHCT were eligible. Nivo was initially given to a 1 mg/kg cohort, with planned escalation to a 3 mg/kg cohort or de-escalation to a 0.5 mg/kg cohort depending on toxicities. Nivo was dosed q2 wks until progression or unacceptable toxicity, and disease-specific response evaluations were q4 cycles. RESULTS: A total of 28 pts with relapsed HM after alloHCT were treated. Median age was 57 (range 27-76), and pts had the following HM: AML (n=11), MDS (n=7), Hodgkin lymphoma (HL, n=5), non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL, n=3), MPD and CLL (n=1 each). Median number of prior therapies was 2 (range 1-9), and 18/28 (64%) had progressed after at least 1 prior therapy for relapse post alloHCT. The median time from alloHCT to study enrollment was 21 mo. (range 5.7-174 mo.). Six pts were treated initially with nivo 1 mg/kg. Two immune-related adverse events (irAEs) resulted in DLTs, including one pt with sepsis and fatal ARDS, and one pt with new anti-phospholipid antibodies and a fatal thrombotic cerebral vascular accident. Other irAEs included gr3 pneumonitis and transaminitis (n=1 each). One pt had cGVHD (NIH mild). Response was observed in 3/6 pts, including 1 CR (PMBCL) and 2 PR (HL and CMML). Due to the toxicities at 1 mg/kg, a cohort of 8 pts was then treated with nivo 0.5 mg/kg, which was generally well-tolerated, with no DLTs. A phase Ib expansion cohort then accrued 14 more pts at 0.5 mg/kg. Accrual was terminated after 14 pts were treated due to meeting the protocol-defined stopping rule of ≥4 DLTs in the first 15 pts in this cohort. These DLTs included 2 cases of grade III acute GVHD (liver and gut) as well as gr3 elevated bilirubin (n=1) and gr3 transaminitis (n=1) which did not recover to ≤gr1 within 4 wks. The 2 pts with liver dysfunction without histological evidence of GVHD eventually improved, but both pts with GVHD died due to complications from GVHD. Other toxicities included gr4 lipase elevation, gr3 rash, gr3 transaminitis, gr3 orthostatic hypotension, and gr2 seizure in a pt with a known seizure disorder (n=1 each). In the 22 pts treated at nivo 0.5 mg/kg, 10 pts (45%) had new onset or worsening of GVHD, including 1 with aGVHD only, 7 with cGVHD only (3 of whom had baseline cGVHD), and 2 with both acute and cGVHD. Shorter time from alloHCT was significantly associated with higher risk of developing GVHD (p=0.019). The overall response rate in the 19 evaluable pts treated at nivo 0.5 mg/kg was 16%, including 1 pt with HL with CR and 1 pt each with HL and AML achieving PR. Nine pts had stable disease for at least 1 response evaluation, and 7 pts had progressive disease as best response. Studywide, the overall response rate was 24% (6/25), the median number of cycles received was 3 (range 1-25), and 12/28 (43%) had at least 1 dose delay due to toxicity. With a median follow-up of 3.9 mo. (range 1.4-20.9 mo.), the 6 mo. PFS and OS were 39% and 61%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In this first prospective clinical trial of an anti-PD1 antibody for relapsed HM post-alloHCT, severe GVHD and irAEs occurred, even at the lower dose of nivo 0.5 mg/kg, leading to early closure due to toxicity. Modest anti-tumor activity was observed mainly in lymphoid malignancies known already to be responsive to anti-PD1 therapy, which may justify further exploration of anti-PD1 therapy in those populations in trials with strategies to mitigate toxicity; however, given the more favorable safety and efficacy profile of anti-CTLA-4 therapy in other HM, our future studies focus on combining ipilimumab with novel partners to improve outcomes. Disclosures Davids: Celgene: Consultancy; MEI Pharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; Verastem: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Astra-Zeneca: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Roche/Genentech: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Merck: Consultancy; BMS: Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; AbbVie, Inc: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Surface Oncology: Research Funding. Costello:Celgene: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy; Poseida Therapeutics, Inc.: Research Funding. Herrera:Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Merck, Inc.: Consultancy, Research Funding; KiTE Pharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; Immune Design: Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy, Research Funding; Gilead Sciences: Research Funding. Locke:Novartis Pharmaceuticals: Other: Scientific Advisor; Cellular BioMedicine Group Inc.: Consultancy; Kite Pharma: Other: Scientific Advisor. Chen:Incyte: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Magenta Therapeutics: Consultancy; REGiMMUNE: Consultancy; Takeda Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy. Nikiforow:Kite Pharma: Consultancy. Ho:Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy. Wu:Neon Therapeutics: Equity Ownership. Soiffer:Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.