No abstract

Bortezomib-based regimens are widely used as induction therapy for multiple myeloma (MM). Unlike lenalidomide, the role of bortezomib in consolidation and maintenance therapy for MM is less clear. We performed a meta-analysis to evaluate the impact of bortezomib-based consolidation and maintenance therapy on survival outcomes and adverse events. PubMed, Web of Science, Embase databases, and major conference proceedings were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of bortezomib-based regimens as consolidation or maintenance therapy for MM. Ten RCTs enrolling 3147 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Bortezomib-based regimens were compared with regimens without bortezomib or observation. The meta-analysis suggested that bortezomib-based maintenance therapy improved progression-free survival (PFS; hazard ratio [HR] = 0.72, 95% CI 0.55-0.95, P = 0.02) and overall survival (OS; HR = 0.71, 95% CI 0.58-0.87, P = 0.001). Bortezomib-based consolidation therapy improved PFS (HR = 0.77, 95% CI 0.68-0.88, P < 0.001) but not OS (HR = 0.98, 95% CI 0.78-1.24, P = 0.87). Bortezomib-based consolidation/ maintenance therapy led to a trend toward increased risk of grade ≥ 3 neurologic symptoms, gastrointestinal symptoms, and fatigue. More research is warranted to further assess the role of bortezomib-based consolidation and maintenance therapy for multiple myeloma.

BackgroundIn solid tumours, antibiotic use during immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) treatment is associated with shorter survival. Following allogeneic haematopoietic cell transplantation (allo-HCT), antibiotic-induced gut microbiome alterations are associated with risk of relapse and mortality. These findings suggest that the gut microbiota can modulate antitumour immune response across tumour types, though it is not clear if the impact on outcomes is specific to immune therapy. An important limitation of previous studies is that the analysis combined all antibiotic exposures irrespective of the antibiotic spectrum of activity. Whether antibiotic exposure during induction chemotherapy in acute myeloid leukaemia (AML) affects risk of relapse is also unknown.Patients and methodsWe performed a single-centred retrospective analysis of antibiotic exposures in metastatic/advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and renal cell cancer (RCC) receiving ICI and newly diagnosed AML patients receiving induction chemotherapy achieving a complete remission 1. Antibiotic use within 4 weeks before and 6 weeks after the ICI initiation were included. In AML patients, antibiotic exposures between days 1 and 28 of induction were collected. Antibiotics were a priori stratified based on spectrum of activity. Primary outcomes of interest were progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) in NSCLC and RCC and relapse-free survival (RFS) in AML.Results140 patients with NSCLC, 55 with RCC and 143 with AML were included. In multivariable analysis, PFS and OS were shorter in NSCLC patients who received broad-spectrum anti-anaerobes (PFS, HR=3.2, 95% CI 1.6 to 6.2, p<0.01; OS, HR=1.7, 95% CI 0.8 to 3.6, p=0.19) or ‘other’ antibiotics (vancomycin-predominant) (PFS, HR=2.4, 95% CI 1.3 to 4.6, p<0.01; OS, HR=2.4, 95% CI 1.2 to 4.7, p=0.01). In RCC, patients who received penicillins/penicillin-class/early-generation cephalosporins had shorter PFS (HR=3.6, 95% CI 1.7 to 7.6, p<0.01) but similar OS (p=0.37). In the AML cohort, none of the exposures were associated with RFS.ConclusionIn contrast to AML, antibiotic exposures in solid tumours affected clinical outcomes. The presence of an allogeneic effect (allo-HCT) or an augmented immune system (checkpoint blockade) may be necessary for microbiota mediation of relapse risk.

Background Excess body weight has been associated with worsening breast cancer survival. While bariatric surgery has been associated with less incident of breast cancer, the role that bariatric surgery plays after breast cancer diagnosis in terms of both feasibility and in preventing breast cancer recurrence is unclear. Methods We report the outcomes of 13 individuals who underwent bariatric surgery after definitive breast cancer treatment at a single institution. Results Thirteen females diagnosed with breast cancer (69.2% stage I, 23.1% stage II) at a median age of 42 years received bariatric surgery between 2001 and 2017. The median age of bariatric surgery was 52 years. Of the 13 patients, 46.2% underwent laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass and 38.5% laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy. The median time from breast cancer treatment to bariatric surgery was 3 years. The procedures were well tolerated. One female developed an abdominal wall hematoma. The average weight loss after 1 year and 2 years was 28.1% and 28.2%, respectively. There was a single breast cancer recurrence with a median follow-up of 11.7 years after breast cancer diagnosis and 5.3 years after bariatric surgery. Conclusions Bariatric surgery after breast cancer treatment is feasible and well tolerated. Prospective trials evaluating bariatric surgery in obese breast cancer survivors should be considered.

Background: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have changed the treatment paradigm of advanced-stage non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and small-cell lung cancer (SCLC). The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness and tolerance of ICIs in a real-world patient population and to investigate the predictive factors associated with survival outcomes. Methods: Medical records of patients with advanced lung cancer who started ICI monotherapy were reviewed for data collection. Treatment outcomes included objective response rate, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). Immune-related adverse events (irAEs) were assessed. Multiple Cox regression models were fit to investigate the predictive factors for survival outcomes. Results: We included 220 patients (median 66.5 years). Seventy-nine (35.9%) patients had Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance-status (PS) score ⩾2. Median follow-up was 11.4 months. In NSCLC, median PFS was 3.8 months (4.7 months for first line and 3.7 months for subsequent line). Median OS was 12.4 months (15.6 months for first line therapy and 11.5 months for subsequent line). In SCLC, median PFS was 1.8 months, and median OS was 4.6 months. A quarter of patients developed irAEs. There was 1 disease flare among 17 patients with pre-existing autoimmune diseases. ECOG PS of 0 to 1 and body mass index (BMI) ⩾ 25 kg/m2 (but not occurrence of irAE) were independently associated with improved OS in NSCLC, with a hazard ratio of 0.41 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.29-0.59) and 0.62 (95% CI, 0.44-0.87), respectively. Conclusions: The clinical benefit of ICIs appears to persist in a real-world population of relatively older age, including those with poor PS and pre-existing autoimmune diseases. ECOG PS of 0 to 1 and BMI ⩾ 25 kg/m2 were independently associated with improved OS.

e20600 Background: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have changed the treatment paradigm of advanced NSCLC and SCLC. The populations in clinical trials generally were composed of patients (pts) with excellent performance status (PS), a minimal number of prior lines of therapy, and no history of (h/o) autoimmune disease (AD). The aim of this retrospective study was to investigate the predictors of survival in less fit and more heavily pretreated lung cancer pts at our institution. Methods: Medical records of lung cancer pts who started single-agent ICI from 2015 to 2018 were reviewed for data collection. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were compared by age, PS, smoking, PD-L1 expression, brain metastasis, prior lines of systemic therapy, h/o AD, and immune-related adverse events (irAE). Results: We included 150 pts who received at least 1 dose of nivolumab, pembrolizumab, or atezolizumab (median age 66, range 36-92, 56% female, 89% NSCLC, 97% stage 4, 13% never smoker, 34% ECOG ≥ 2, 37% ≥ 2 prior lines of therapy, 29% developed irAE). The overall response rate was 30% and clinical benefit rate 51% (3% CR, 27% PR, 21% SD). The median PFS was 3.7 months (m) overall and 12.3 m for those with ≥ 4 cycles of therapy. The median OS was 12.4 m overall and 26.0 m for those with ≥ 4 cycles. The median PFS and OS were not significantly different by age, PS, smoking, PD-L1, brain metastasis, prior lines of therapy, or h/o AD. The median OS was longer for pts with ECOG 0-1 than those ≥ 2 (14.6 vs 7.5 m, p < .001). The median PFS and OS for pts with irAE were longer compared to those without irAE (12.3 vs 2.6 m, p < .001 for PFS and 28.9 vs 9.1 m, p = .001 for OS). Multiple Cox regression analysis identified ECOG 0-1 (HR 0.54, p = .007) and irAE (HR 0.48, p = .003) to be independently associated with improved OS. 27 pts (18%) required steroids for irAE. There were no treatment-related deaths. Of 11 pts with h/o AD, only 1 experienced disease flare. Conclusions: The clinical benefit of ICIs persists in older or heavily pretreated pts. ECOG 0-1 and incident irAE predicted for improved survival. Survival for pts with ECOG ≥ 2 is very limited, suggesting ICIs should be used judiciously in this group. Therapy was well tolerated, with a low risk for flare of previous autoimmune disease.

No abstract

Background: A regimen of escalating doses of thalidomide, in combination with bortezomib and high dose melphalan (Mel/Vel/Thal) was evaluated as a conditioning regimen for autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) in patients (pts) with multiple myeloma (MM) in a phase I/II study. Methods: Patients received Mel/Vel/Thal as a second of tandem ASCT if they achieved <CR to their first ASCT (tandem), or as conditioning for a salvage ASCT (salvage). Exclusion criteria were dose-intense therapy within 56 days, uncontrolled infections, severe organ dysfunction, Karnofsky score <70%, or painful grade 2 or greater peripheral neuropathy. Conditioning consisted of Vel 1.6 mg/m2 intravenously on days -4 and -1 with Mel 200 mg/m2 on day -2. Thal was given on days -5 through -1 and was administered in a planned step-wise dose escalation of 600, 800 and 1000 mg (in cohorts of 3 pts). Dexamethasone (Dex) 10-20 mg was given prior to Vel and Mel. All pts received G-CSF every other day starting day +3 until engraftment. Serious adverse events (SAEs) were graded according to CTCAE version 3. Results: Twenty-nine pts were enrolled: 9 in the phase 1 dose-escalation phase and an additional 20 pts in phase 2. In the phase I portion, all pts experienced somnolence, with grade 3 occurring in 1 pt at the 800 mg/day dose. Subsequently, Dex 40 mg was given with first dose of Thal at the 1000 mg level with decreased severity of somnolence. No dose limiting toxicities defined as ≥ grade 4 non-hematological SAEs occurred in the phase I portion, allowing full dose escalation with 9 pts enrolled. The maximum tolerated dose for Thal was not reached and the 1000 mg dose was chosen for the phase 2 dose expansion. No regimen related mortality occurred in either phase I or phase II portion of the study. All SAEs except lethargy and dizziness occurred after ASCT and were not attributed to Thal. The most common grade 1 and 2 non-hematologic toxicities included nausea (65.5%), mucositis (51.7%), diarrhea (48.3%), somnolence (48.3%), lethargy (27.6%), and vomiting (17.2%). The most common grade 3 non-hematologic adverse events (AEs) were neutropenic fever (58.6%), mucositis (6.9%), and somnolence (13.8%), which increased risk of falls. SAEs included somnolence (13.8%), tumor lysis syndrome (3.4%), and engraftment syndrome (3.4%). All transplant-related SAEs resolved by day +28 after ASCT. All pts achieved prompt hematological recovery with the median time to ANC >500/uL 10 days (range, 8-14 days), and platelet >20,000 12 days (range 9-26 days). All pts received at least one ASCT prior to enrolling on the study. Seventeen pts (59%) had interim salvage chemotherapy between their upfront and Mel/Vel/Thal ASCT (i.e. received a salvage ASCT), with median time from first to salvage ASCT 29 months. The remaining 12 (41%) went directly from an upfront ASCT Mel-based ASCT to the Mel/Vel/Thal ASCT (tandem ASCT) within 6 months of the first ASCT. Twenty-seven (93%) were Durie-Salmon stage III, and 13 (44%) had >2 prior lines of therapy. Of those who had Mel/Vel/Thal as a salvage ASCT, 70% had ≥3 prior lines of therapy. The overall response rate (ORR) was 69% with 38% complete remission. ORR for Mel/Vel/Thal compared to upfront Mel ASCT was 69% versus 62% with 11 patients achieving CR with Mel/Vel/Thal compared to 5 patients with Mel alone (Figure 1). Ten of 27 evaluable patients (37%) had an upgrade in response in the Mel/Vel/Thal salvage ASCT compared to their upfront ASCT: 2 pts (7%) went from PD to PR, 1 (4%) from SD to CR, 1 (4%) from PR to VGPR; 3 (11%) from PR to CR and 2 (7%) from VGPR to CR. Median PFS and OS were 9.3 and 65.4 months, respectively, with a median follow-up of 17.8 months. Of those who underwent tandem Mel followed by Mel/Vel/Thal ASCT the median PFS was 14.9 months with a median OS not yet reached at time of analysis. For the 17 patients who received a salvage Mel/Vel/Thal ASCT, median PFS from their upfront ASCT was 11.9 months, compared to 9.1 months with the salvage Mel/Vel/Thal ASCT. Conclusions: High-dose Thal up to 1000 mg daily for 5 days can be safely combined with Vel and dose-intense Mel as an ASCT conditioning regimen with acceptable toxicities. Confirmation of potential synergistic effects of this combination regimen will require an appropriately designed phase III study. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Biran: BMS: Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Skarbnik:Seattle Genetics: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Abbvie: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Pharmacyclics: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Gilead Sciences: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Genentech: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Siegel:Novartis: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Merck: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Karyopharm: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau.