Author Archives: admin


Study Recreates Functional Human Thymus From Stem Cells – The Healthcare Technology Report.

The thymus is a rarely discussed and therefore underappreciated organ positioned below the breastbone which plays a critical role in adaptive immune response by producing T cells. Given that it degrades with advancing age, reducing the human bodys ability to stave off infection, it is worth looking into if its breaking down can be mitigatedor if there is another alternative altogether. To this end, researchers from the University of Florida have devised a means to grow entirely functional thymus organoids from what has proved to be the basic building block of replication in biology: the human stem cell.

This work, now only in the proof-of-concept stage, and its resulting mini-organs will be harnessed to develop a series of patient-unique therapies for thymic dysfunction treatment.An experimental model system to interrogate the mechanisms of thymic insufficiency and function is necessary and could serve to further the development of cell-based therapies for thymic defects, said the corresponding studys senior author, Dr. Holger Russ.

Though animal models have for years been utilized to construct thymus organoids, the T cells derived from Russ and his teams research more closely matches the function of a real human thymus. As detailed in the paper published in Stem Cell Reports, the building of these organoids starts with the growing of thymic epithelial progenitor cells (TEPs) from human stem cells, and which are then combined with mesenchymal cells as well as stem cell-derived blood cell precursors.

Read this article:
Study Recreates Functional Human Thymus From Stem Cells - The Healthcare Technology Report.

Holloway Discusses Later-Line Treatment in Recurrent or Metastatic … – Targeted Oncology

Targeted OncologyTM: What is the recommended next-line systemic therapy for this patient with recurrent/metastatic endometrial cancer?

HOLLOWAY: The NCCN [National Comprehensive Cancer Network] guidelines preferred regimens for recurrent or metastatic endometrial cancer are carboplatin/paclitaxel or carboplatin/paclitaxel/trastuzumab. For patients with uterine serous carcinoma, there is a role for HER2 testing, IHC, [and] next-generation sequencing, and phase 3 data indicate an improved outcome with carboplatin, paclitaxel, and trastuzumab.1

Robert W. Holloway, MD

Medical Director,

Gynecologic Oncology Program

AdventHealth Cancer Institute

Orlando, FL

Other recommended options include carboplatin/ docetaxel, cisplatin/doxorubicin, and cisplatin/doxorubicin/paclitaxel, which [raises] the toxicity. There is carboplatin/paclitaxel/bevacizumab [Avastin]. My nurse practitioner told me they wouldnt approve these combinations. She said only single agent was [available], which surprised me. Now Ill have to circle back with her on that. Albumin-bound paclitaxel and topotecan [are also options]. Temsirolimus has been used with some limited success, and ifosfamide [has been used] for carcinosarcomas, which can be single agent or combined.

For biomarker-directed systemic therapy, there [are] lenvatinib [Lenvima] and pembrolizumab [Keytruda] as category 1 for nonMSI-H, non-MRD tumors and pembrolizumab for tumor mutational burdenhigh, MSI-H tumors as a single agent. Other regimens [such as] nivolumab [Opdivo] and dostarlimab [Jemperli] recently received the pan-tumor indication. For NTRK gene fusions, [you can use larotrectinib (Vitrakvi) or entrectinib (Rozlytrek)]. Avelumab [Bavencio] has been approved as a secondline option [for MRD/MSI-H tumors], and cabozantinib [Cabometyx] [has been approved] as well.

What data support the use of single-agent pembrolizumab as the next-line therapy in patients with recurrent or metastatic endometrial cancer?

The KEYNOTE-158 study [NCT02628067] is an ongoing, international, open-label, phase 2 study of patients with select solid tumors that have progressed on standard-ofcare therapy. Patients with previously [managed] MSI-H, MRD advanced endometrial cancers enrolled in cohorts D and K in the study. They had progression after a standard line of carboplatin plus paclitaxel and werent curable by other means. They received pembrolizumab once every 3 weeks. They were treated for 2 years or until progression of disease [PD] or intolerable toxicity, and then survival follow-up was done. The overall response rate [ORR] was the primary end point per RECIST version 1.1 [criteria]. The secondary end points were duration of response [DOR], progression-free survival [PFS], overall survival [OS], and safety. The median time from the first dose to data cutoff, which was January 2022, was 54.5 months, a good long-term follow-up in the study. The data are rather mature.2

The mean age in this endometrial [cancer] population was not surprising at 64 years. For ECOG PS, about 50% of them had PS of 1. Disease stage was M0 in 4% and M1 in 96%. For number of prior lines of therapy, about half of them had 1 line, but it was greater than 4 lines in about 10%. Prior adjuvant or neoadjuvant therapies were [used in] 27%, so it looks like the majority had not had neoadjuvant or adjuvant therapy. Prior radiation therapy was [noted] in 67% and prior surgery in 86%. So some of these patients did [have previous operations].

How have patients in KEYNOTE-158 responded to treatment so far?

All patients treated in the study had about a 50% response rate. Patients who had prior neoadjuvant and/or adjuvant therapy, only 10 patients, had a 40% response rate, so I dont know [whether] thats different. Patients who had 1 prior line of therapy had a 59% response rate. I think these numbers are relatively small to discriminate. Patients who had [more] than 1 prior line of therapy had a 44% response rate. Its all clustering in the 40% to 50% [range], so [its] an extraordinarily high response rate if a patient has MSI-H disease on checkpoint inhibitors, even though they had carboplatin, paclitaxel, and/or pelvic radiotherapy before in many cases. The complete response [CR] rate was 16%, partial response [PR] rate was 34%, and stable disease [SD] [rate] was 18%.2 Theres no difference in terms of survival between PR and SD. They both are benefiting.

The median DOR was 63.2 months. The DOR at 1 year was 87%, 2 years was 71%, 3 years was 66%, and 4 years was 66%. The duration and recurrence start to flatten out. If you make it to 3 years, youre going to have an ongoing response.

The PFS and OS plots plateau, which weve seen in other solid tumors [during] immunotherapy. A percentage of patients get a long-lasting DOR and benefit tremendously from the therapy. The median OS was 65.4 months [(95% CI, 29.5-not reached) and the median PFS was 13.1 months (95% CI, 4.3-25.7)].

Prior to pembrolizumab coming on the market, patients had a shortened and significantly toxic environment [for] survival. The treatment options were not good, and patients [experienced pain and died from] this disease in a short period once theyd had carboplatin, paclitaxel, and radiation. Doxorubicin was thrown in the mix there, which isnt a pleasant treatment. So this is a tremendous advance in endometrial cancer management.

Have you used dostarlimab as the next-line therapy in patients with recurrent or metastatic endometrial cancer?

I have used [dostarlimab] in a clinical trial with carboplatin and paclitaxel, and I can say anecdotallyno direct comparisonI dont think theres any significant difference in the AEs compared with any other checkpoint inhibitor. Ive treated a large number of patients on the clinical trial, which has been ongoing for over 2 years, and Ive seen some amazing responses in patients who I would have expected to [die] from their disease within a short time. So based on the OS and PFS curves, some patients do get a tremendous response.3,4

The GARNET study [NCT02715284] is the prospective study of dostarlimab, which received its first approval in endometrial cancer. It is a 2-part phase 1 trial. Part 1 is for dose finding, part 2A is for the fixed-dose and safety run-in, and part 2B is for expansion cohorts. Its another example of an early-phase study that presented data to the FDA, leading to a quick approval because of the significant response rates and benefits. The FDA did not require a large prospective phase 3 randomized trial. Pembrolizumab was already labeled in this setting, and the data points looked like the outcomes with other checkpoint inhibitors. So it probably helped lead to its approval, with no unusual signals of toxicity.

In this study, dostarlimab was dosed at 500 mg every 3 weeks for 4 cycles, then 1000 mg every 6 weeks until PD. The primary end points were the ORR and DOR per RECIST version 1.1 criteria by blinded independent central review assessment. The key inclusion criteria were progression during or after platinum doublet therapy and 2 or fewer prior lines of treatment for advanced or recurrent disease. The patients could have had hormonal therapy and carboplatin, paclitaxel or carboplatin, paclitaxel, or doxorubicin [and join] this trial. They had to have measurable disease. They had not received prior checkpoint inhibitors and had MRD or MSI-H disease by approved laboratory testing.

They had 2 scans demonstrating PD on their last systemic therapy, so they had [experienced progression]. These were not patients with stable disease. The median time from the first dose to data lock was 27.6 months. The efficacy and safety were assessed in all patients with measurable disease.

For the study characteristics, the median age was 65 to 66 years. Slightly less than half of these patients originally had stage I or stage II disease and then [experienced] relapse, and 56% to 62% had stage III or IV disease and then [experienced] relapse. Low-grade endometrioid carcinoma accounted for 64% of the MSI-H [disease] and only 23% of nonMSI-H [disease]. Serous carcinomas flipped the other way. A small percentage were MRD or MSI-H [disease], whereas a larger percentage were MR-proficient. Grade 3 carcinomas, clear cell, and other histology types had relatively small numbers after endometrioid carcinomas and serous carcinomas. All patients had prior anticancer therapy, and the majority had 1 prior line. About 70% of the patients had prior radiation therapy.

What was the efficacy demonstrated in the GARNET trial?

The ORR was 45.5%, very similar to the [ORR from] KEYNOTE158. The CR was also very similar to [the CR from] KEYNOTE158 at 16.1%. The PR was approximately double the CR at 29.4%, and SD was about 15%. Approximately one-third of patients [experienced progression]. The duration of the CR was 60.1%. Response was ongoing in 83%. The median DOR had not been reached. These data were reported without the longterm follow-up of the KEYNOTE-158 study, but the results were so similar at this point that it got FDA approval in this setting.

The estimated probability of maintaining response at 6 months was 97%, 12 months was 93%, and 24 months was 83%. What I see in these data is that if you see a patient whos getting a response, overwhelming odds are theyre going to continue to get a response. The question is, are they going to get a response? About one-third of patients will [experience progression]. Im not intimately familiar with all the research going on in immunotherapy for solid tumors, but it would be a key clinical question about whats different about these patients [with] MSI-H [disease who experience progression] on therapy. What do you do about it? Hopefully, well see more answers about that in the coming years.

As of November 2021, the data cutoff, the median duration of follow-up was about 28 months. The estimated PFS rate at 12 months was 46% and 40% at 24 months. So about 40% of the patients get a long-lasting benefit from checkpoint inhibition.

How do the KEYNOTE-158 and GARNET studies compare?

The KEYNOTE-158 study with 94 patients and GARNET [study] with 143 patients were phase 2 and phase 1 studies. They were done in patients with previously [managed] MRD recurrent or advanced endometrial cancer. The primary end points were ORR in both along with DOR in the GARNET study. The follow-up was longer with KEYNOTE-158 at 54.5 months vs 27.6 months for GARNET.2-4

The ORR was 50% in KEYNOTE-158 and 46% in GARNET. The median DOR was 63.2 months in KEYNOTE-158 and was not reached in GARNET. The 1-year DOR in GARNET was about 93% vs 87% in KEYNOTE-158 and 84% at 2 years vs 71%, respectively. So they were relatively similar, perhaps numerically slightly better in GARNET. But comparisons cannot be looked at in that manner because they are slightly different populations. The median PFS was 13.1 months in KEYNOTE-158 and 6 months in GARNET. Im not sure why there was the big difference in PFS between them because the DOR was similar. The median OS was over 65 months in KEYNOTE-158 and not reached in GARNET. The 1-year OS look[s] rather identical.2-4

I think therell be more follow-up reporting on GARNET as we get more data. My anticipation would be outcomes on these studies are going to be rather identical, and these checkpoints are probably interchangeable with the expected outcomes and AEs.

What is the safety profile of pembrolizumab and dostarlimab based on data from both studies?

For treatment-related AEs [TRAEs] in KEYNOTE-158, grade 3 and grade 4 AEs were a relatively small percentage at 12%, and treatment discontinuations were only 7%. Some AEs that were familiar with were pruritis, fatigue, diarrhea, arthralgia, nausea, hypothyroidism (which is not uncommon), rashes, decreased appetite, and myalgia. ASCO [American Society of Clinical Oncology] has covered it with detailed advice about managing AEs with checkpoint inhibitors.

When these drugs came out, we were all concerned about the AEs, but weve all seen in practice that theyre easily managed. Rarely do we get life-threatening AEs because we are monitoring these patients. So most of these things are manageable. But you do need to pay attention. The percentage of immune-related colitis was very small at 3%. For diabetes, hepatitis, [and] pneumonitis, you get down to 1%.

The GARNET safety data, compared with KEYNOTE-158 data, for AEs grade 3 or [above] had a [slightly] higher percentage. TRAEs of any grade [occurred in] 70% and grade 3 [occurred in] 17%. Treatment-related serious AEs were 11.8% in the population with MSI-H [disease] and 8.7% in the population with nonMSI-H [disease]. TRAEs leading to discontinuation were very similar at about 8%, and those leading to death were 0%. They were all managed appropriately, without toxicity or death.4 I didnt see anything unique in the safety summary of both studiesjust a small percentage of laboratory abnormalities with liver function tests, mild anemia, and low percentage of diarrhea overall.

Originally posted here:
Holloway Discusses Later-Line Treatment in Recurrent or Metastatic ... - Targeted Oncology

Mucopolysaccharidosis Treatment Market is projected to reach US … – Future Market Insights

The globalMucopolysaccharidosis Treatment Marketis estimated to be worth aroundUS$ 2.38 Bnin 2022. With increasing prevalence of mucopolysaccharidosis (MSP) worldwide, the overall market is projected to grow at a robust CAGR of5.9%between 2022 and 2029, reaching a valuation ofUS$ 3.37 Bnby 2029.

A market study presented by FMIMucopolysaccharidosis Treatment Market Global Industry Analysis 2014-2018 and Opportunity Assessment 2022-2029, explains the significant factors influencing the current market structure.

According to research, the mucopolysaccharidosis treatment is still emerging, and different geographies have implemented standard treatment options for the condition. However, there is no universally accepted treatment pattern for mucopolysaccharidosis. Mucopolysaccharidosis falls under rare diseases, which is a complex, diverse, constantly evolving field, and there is a significant shortage of medical and scientific data related to it. Mucopolysaccharidosis treatment and diagnosis involves complex managing requirements, which include long-term care, rehabilitation support, and a continuous treatment plan.

To remain ahead of your competitors, request for a sample @

https://www.futuremarketinsights.com/reports/sample/rep-gb-5880

Research Activities Uplift Stem Cell Therapy Application in MPS Treatment

In the present scenario, the drugs that are considered for mucopolysaccharidosis treatment, such as aldurazyme, naglazyme, vimizim, elaprase, mepsevii and hunterase, are the only regulated and recommended drugs present in the market. These drugs fall under enzyme replacement therapies, however, with present research initiatives for stem cell therapies, the latter is considered a prominent mucopolysaccharidosis treatment. Clinical research shows that stem cell transplantation covers a large area that is not covered with the more frequently recommended practice of enzyme replacement therapies, which changes the current market structure for mucopolysaccharidosis treatment, prioritising the latter.

Stem cell therapy is a therapeutic option for mucopolysaccharidosis patients suffering from a severe phenotype, as research shows the method can preserve neurocognition or can even help break the progressive neurodegeneration. The method is provided with strict selection criteria, which is followed by maintained regulations. Research shows that stem cell therapy as a treatment option is gaining popularity among healthcare professionals for mucopolysaccharidosis treatment, which can be attributed to the relation of its better reach towards a normal health condition for the patient.

Enzyme Replacement Therapy Remains Lucrative for Market Investors

As per further assessments of the mucopolysaccharidosis treatment market, it has been difficult to collect epidemiological data pertaining to rare diseases, especially mucopolysaccharidosis treatment, which is likely to impede the actual estimation of the economic burden associated with the condition. The cost estimation for each mucopolysaccharidosis treatment type is affecting and, in turn, creating a more vulnerable situation for the businesses and disrupting research & development activities for each company.

For any Queries Related with the Report, Ask an Analyst @

https://www.futuremarketinsights.com/ask-question/rep-gb-5880

Enzyme replacement therapy is the most attractive segment for investors, however, the unavailability of reimbursement plans and precise treatment plans is encouraging most patient in developing regions to opt for symptomatic treatments instead of enzyme replacement therapy, which is still considered to be the standard mucopolysaccharidosis treatment.

Key Players Focus on Clinical Research of Treatment Models

The report segments the mucopolysaccharidosis treatment market into seven regions to elaborate on the regional trends pertaining to the treatment plan. Major players are focusing on increasing their market share in the Asia Pacific market through strategic collaborations with regional research institutes. There is a lack of awareness about rare diseases among the general public as well as in medical healthcare facilities in several emerging economies. According to a survey and industry report, it takes patients in the US an average of 7.6 years and patients in the UK an average of 5.6 years to actually receive a proper diagnosis. Moreover, it involves a team of healthcare professionals to actually get the right mucopolysaccharidosis treatment and diagnosis pattern for reported cases.

Manufacturers are in the process of introducing a considerable number of mucopolysaccharidosis treatment options, which are currently under clinical trials. An estimated 160 and above clinical trials are being performed for mucopolysaccharidosis treatment. Thus, ensuring that the manufacturers take this mucopolysaccharidosis treatment market to be lucrative and potential rich in terms of revenue. Medical research institutes play an important role in this particular market. They are expected to be the bridge between treatment plans and economical solutions for manufacturers, thus leaving an explicable and lucrative model for mucopolysaccharidosis treatment.

The mucopolysaccharidosis treatment market includes companies such as BioMarin Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Limited, Sanofi S.A., and Ultragenyx Pharmaceutical Inc. BioMarin accounts for a significant value share in the present mucopolysaccharidosis treatment market. The currently existing promising drug types are expected to face competition from emerging candidates. In addition the mucopolysaccharidosis treatment products of other companies, such as Sangamo Therapeutics, Inc., REGENXBIO Inc., Sarepta Therapeutics, Abeona Therapeutics, Inc., and others, are also in the pipeline.

Report Customization available @

https://www.futuremarketinsights.com/customization-available/rep-gb-5880

Why Future Market Insights?

Ground breaking research and market player-centric solutions for the upcoming decade according to the present market scenario

About Future Market Insights (FMI)

Future Market Insights (ESOMAR certified market research organization and a member of the Greater New York Chamber of Commerce) provides in-depth insights into governing factors elevating the demand in the market. It discloses opportunities that will favour the market growth in various segments based on Source, Application, Sales Channel and End-Use over the next 10-years.

Contact:

Future Market Insights, Inc.

Christiana Corporate, 200 Continental Drive,

Suite 401, Newark, Delaware 19713, USA

T: +1-845-579-5705

For Sales Enquiries: sales@futuremarketinsights.com

Browse All Reports: https://www.futuremarketinsights.com/reports

LinkedIn|Twitter|Blogs

Read this article:
Mucopolysaccharidosis Treatment Market is projected to reach US ... - Future Market Insights

Impact of disease burden on clinical outcomes of AML patients … – Nature.com

Dhner H, Estey E, Grimwade D, Amadori S, Appelbaum FR, Bchner T, et al. Diagnosis and management of AML in adults: 2017 ELN recommendations from an international expert panel. Blood. 2017;129:42447. https://doi.org/10.1182/blood-2016-08-733196.

Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Heuser M, Freeman SD, Ossenkoppele GJ, Buccisano F, Hourigan CS, Ngai LL, et al. 2021 Update on MRD in acute myeloid leukemia: a consensus document from the European LeukemiaNet MRD Working Party. Blood. 2021;138:275367. https://doi.org/10.1182/blood.2021013626.

Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Schuurhuis GJ, Heuser M, Freeman S, Bene MC, Buccisano F, Cloos J, et al. Minimal/measurable residual disease in AML: a consensus document from the European LeukemiaNet MRD Working Party. Blood. 2018;131:127591. https://doi.org/10.1182/blood-2017-09-801498.

Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Nagler A, Baron F, Labopin M, Polge E, Esteve J, Bazarbachi A, et al. Measurable residual disease (MRD) testing for acute leukemia in EBMT transplant centers: a survey on behalf of the ALWP of the EBMT. Bone Marrow Transpl. 2021;56:21824. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41409-020-01005-y.

Article Google Scholar

Buckley SA, Wood BL, Othus M, Hourigan CS, Ustun C, Linden MA, et al. Minimal residual disease prior to allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation in acute myeloid leukemia: a meta-analysis. Haematologica. 2017;102:86573. https://doi.org/10.3324/haematol.2016.159343.

Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Walter RB, Gooley TA, Wood BL, Milano F, Fang M, Sorror ML, et al. Impact of pretransplantation minimal residual disease, as detected by multiparametric flow cytometry, on outcome of myeloablative hematopoietic cell transplantation for acute myeloid leukemia. J Clin Oncol. 2011;29:11907. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2010.31.8121.

Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Araki D, Wood BL, Othus M, Radich JP, Halpern AB, Zhou Y, et al. Allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation for acute myeloid leukemia: time to move toward a minimal residual disease-based definition of complete remission? J Clin Oncol. 2016;34:32936. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2015.63.3826.

Article PubMed Google Scholar

Zhou Y, Othus M, Araki D, Wood BL, Radich JP, Halpern AB, et al. Pre- and post-transplant quantification of measurable (minimal) residual disease via multiparameter flow cytometry in adult acute myeloid. Leuk Leuk. 2016;30:145664. https://doi.org/10.1038/leu.2016.46.

Article CAS Google Scholar

Ustun C, Courville EL, DeFor T, Dolan M, Randall N, Yohe S, et al. Myeloablative, but not reduced-intensity, conditioning overcomes the negative effect of flow-cytometric evidence of leukemia in acute myeloid leukemia. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant: J Am Soc Blood Marrow Transplant. 2016;22:66975. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbmt.2015.10.024.

Article Google Scholar

Morsink LM, Bezerra ED, Othus M, Wood BL, Fang M, Sandmaier BM, et al. Comparative analysis of total body irradiation (TBI)-based and non-TBI-based myeloablative conditioning for acute myeloid leukemia in remission with or without measurable residual disease. Leukemia. 2020;34:17015. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41375-019-0671-x.

Article PubMed Google Scholar

Morsink LM, Sandmaier BM, Othus M, Palmieri R, Granot N, Bezerra ED, et al. Conditioning intensity, pre-transplant flow cytometric measurable residual disease, and outcome in adults with acute myeloid leukemia undergoing allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation. Cancers. 2020;12:2339.

Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Gilleece MH, Labopin M, Yakoub-Agha I, Volin L, Soci G, Ljungman P, et al. Measurable residual disease, conditioning regimen intensity, and age predict outcome of allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation for acute myeloid leukemia in first remission: A registry analysis of 2292 patients by the Acute Leukemia Working Party. Eur Soc Blood Marrow Transplant Am J Hematol. 2018;93:114252. https://doi.org/10.1002/ajh.25211.

Article Google Scholar

Schlenk RF, Dhner K, Mack S, Stoppel M, Kirly F, Gtze K, et al. Prospective evaluation of allogeneic hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation from matched related and matched unrelated donors in younger adults with high-risk acute myeloid leukemia: German-Austrian trial AMLHD98A. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28:46428. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2010.28.6856.

Article PubMed Google Scholar

Duval M, Klein JP, He W, Cahn JY, Cairo M, Camitta BM, et al. Hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation for acute leukemia in relapse or primary induction failure. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28:37308. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2010.28.8852.

Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Le Bourgeois A, Labopin M, Marais A, de Latour RP, Blaise D, Chantepie S, et al. Sequential allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation for active refractory/relapsed myeloid malignancies: results of a reduced-intensity conditioning preceded by clofarabine and cytosine arabinoside, a retrospective study on behalf of the SFGM-TC. Ann Hematol. 2020;99:185562. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00277-020-04074-7.

Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar

Malard F, Labopin M, Stuhler G, Bittenbring J, Ganser A, Tischer J, et al. Sequential intensified conditioning regimen allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation in adult patients with intermediate- or high-risk acute myeloid leukemia in complete remission: a study from the Acute Leukemia Working Party of the European Group for Blood and Marrow Transplantation. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant: J Am Soc Blood Marrow Transplant. 2017;23:27884. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbmt.2016.11.002.

Article Google Scholar

Schmid C, Schleuning M, Ledderose G, Tischer J, Kolb HJ. Sequential regimen of chemotherapy, reduced-intensity conditioning for allogeneic stem-cell transplantation, and prophylactic donor lymphocyte transfusion in high-risk acute myeloid leukemia and myelodysplastic syndrome. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23:567587. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2005.07.061.

Article PubMed Google Scholar

Pfrepper C, Klink A, Behre G, Schenk T, Franke GN, Jentzsch M, et al. Risk factors for outcome in refractory acute myeloid leukemia patients treated with a combination of fludarabine, cytarabine, and amsacrine followed by a reduced-intensity conditioning and allogeneic stem cell transplantation. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol. 2016;142:31724. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00432-015-2050-y.

Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar

Kebriaei P, Kline J, Stock W, Kasza K, Le Beau MM, Larson RA, et al. Impact of disease burden at time of allogeneic stem cell transplantation in adults with acute myeloid leukemia and myelodysplastic syndromes. Bone Marrow Transpl. 2005;35:96570. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bmt.1704938.

Article CAS Google Scholar

Thol F, Gabdoulline R, Liebich A, Klement P, Schiller J, Kandziora C, et al. Measurable residual disease monitoring by NGS before allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation in AML. Blood. 2018;132:170313. https://doi.org/10.1182/blood-2018-02-829911. e-pub ahead of print 2018/09/08.

Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar

Jentzsch M, Grimm J, Bill M, Brauer D, Backhaus D, Schulz J, et al. Prognostic relevance of remission and measurable residual disease status in AML patients prior to reduced intensity or non-myeloablative allogeneic stem cell transplantation. Blood Cancer J. 2021;11:80 https://doi.org/10.1038/s41408-021-00471-x.

Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Lachowiez CA, Atluri H, DiNardo CD. Advancing the standard: venetoclax combined with intensive induction and consolidation therapy for acute myeloid leukemia. Ther Adv Hematol. 2022;13:20406207221093964 https://doi.org/10.1177/20406207221093964.

Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Stelljes M, Middeke JM, Bug G, Wagner E-M, Mueller LP, Christoph S, et al. In patients with relapsed/refractory AML sequential conditioning and immediate allogeneic stem cell transplantation (allo-HCT) results in similar overall and leukemia-free survival compared to intensive remission induction chemotherapy followed by Allo-HCT: results from the randomized phase III ASAP trial. Blood. 2022;140:911. https://doi.org/10.1182/blood-2022-159962.

Article Google Scholar

Bazarbachi A, Bug G, Baron F, Brissot E, Ciceri F, Dalle IA, et al. Clinical practice recommendation on hematopoietic stem cell transplantation for acute myeloid leukemia patients with FLT3-internal tandem duplication: a position statement from the Acute Leukemia Working Party of the European Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation. Haematologica. 2020;105:150716. https://doi.org/10.3324/haematol.2019.243410.

Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Bazarbachi A, Labopin M, Battipaglia G, Djabali A, Passweg J, Soci G, et al. Sorafenib improves survival of FLT3-mutated acute myeloid leukemia in relapse after allogeneic stem cell transplantation: a report of the EBMT Acute Leukemia Working Party. Haematologica. 2019;104:e398e401. https://doi.org/10.3324/haematol.2018.211615.

Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Abou Dalle I, El Cheikh J, Bazarbachi A. Pharmacologic strategies for post-transplant maintenance in acute myeloid leukemia: it is time to consider! Cancers. 2022; 14. https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers14061490.

Read this article:
Impact of disease burden on clinical outcomes of AML patients ... - Nature.com

CancerVAX CEO Ryan Davies Discusses Cancer Research with Leading Pediatric Hematologic Oncologist – Yahoo Finance

Dr. Satiro De Oliveira, a principal investigator in the Companys cancer research program at UCLA, comments about the importance of cancer immunotherapy

LEHI, Utah, April 12, 2023 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- CancerVAX, Inc., developer of a breakthrough universal cancer vaccine that will use the bodys immune system to fight cancer, reported that CEO Ryan Davies spoke about the importance of cancer immunotherapy with Dr. Satiro De Oliveira, a principal investigator in the Companys cancer research program at UCLA.

Dr. De Oliveira is a board-certified pediatrician and board-certified pediatric hematology/oncologist. He received his medical degree in Brazil and completed his pediatric residency at Woodhull Medical and Mental Health Center in New York and his pediatric hematology/oncology fellowship at the Childrens Hospital Lost Angeles. His clinical focus is on pediatric oncology and gene therapies and his research focus is on cancer immunotherapy and biology of stem cell transplantation.

In addition to his impressive educational background, Dr. De Oliveira has received numerous awards, including the Certificate of Congressional Recognition, the STOP CANCER Research Career Development Award, and the American Society of Hematology Scholar Award. Outside of clinical practice, Dr. De Oliveira conducts clinical research on gene therapies in the fields of adoptive immunotherapy, pediatric hematopoietic stem cell transplantation, and pediatric red blood cell hematology, to name a few.

As a pediatric oncology specialist, Dr. De Oliveiras work impacts patients lives in real time. During the conversation, Dr. De Oliveira emphasized the impact of recent clinical research strides on his patients, As I meet the families, I say, Listen, 10 years ago, this disease wouldve killed this child. And now, this patient is a miracle, Were really building the history of medicine.

CancerVax CEO Ryan Davies commented, It was a pleasure speaking with Dr. De Oliveira. His thought about creating the history of medicine is a beautiful thing.

Story continues

This Podcast can be viewed athttps://youtu.be/DcFor_Vo4MU

For more information about CancerVax, please visithttp://www.cancervax.com/.

About Us

CancerVAX, Inc. is a pre-clinical biotechnology company developing a breakthrough universal cancer vaccine that will use the bodys immune system to fight cancer. Working with a team of experienced cancer researchers and physicians at UCLA, we intend to create a Universal Cancer Vaccine that will detect, mark, and destroy only the diseased cells with an incredibly high level of precision. Much like the COVID-19 vaccines that train the body to recognize and destroy the coronavirus, our cancer vaccine will leverage the bodys own immune system to destroy cancer cells. As we develop our universal cancer vaccine, we are also working with UCLA to develop single-disease cancer treatments targeting Ewing sarcoma, a rare but deadly bone and soft tissue cancer that primarily affects children and young adults. We look forward to the day when treating cancer will be as simple as getting a flu shot.

Forward-Looking Statements

This press release may contain forward-looking statements within the meaning of the safe harbor provisions of the U.S. Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Forward-looking statements are neither historical facts nor assurances of future performance. Instead, they are based only on our current beliefs, expectations and assumptions regarding the future of our business, future plans and strategies, projections, anticipated events and trends, the economy and other future conditions. Because forward-looking statements relate to the future, they are subject to inherent uncertainties, risks and changes in circumstances that are difficult to predict and many of which are outside of our control. Our actual results and financial condition may differ materially from those indicated in the forward-looking statements. Therefore, you should not rely on any of these forward-looking statements. Any forward-looking statement made by us in this release is based only on information currently available to us and speaks only as of the date on which it is made. We undertake no obligation to publicly update any forward-looking statement, whether written or oral, that may be made from time to time, whether as a result of new information, future developments or otherwise.df

Press Contact:CancerVAX, Inc.Tel: (805) 356-1810communications@CancerVAX.com

See the original post:
CancerVAX CEO Ryan Davies Discusses Cancer Research with Leading Pediatric Hematologic Oncologist - Yahoo Finance

EW GROUP SHINES AT 12TH A4M SYMPOSIUM 2023 & "ALL-ON … – PR Newswire

BANGKOK, April 11, 2023 /PRNewswire/ -- European Wellness Biomedical Group (EW Group) made a successful showing at an exclusive event, the 12th A4M Symposium 2023, which was held in Centara, Bangkok, 16th-19th February 2023.

The two-day A4M Symposium, commenced with a welcome ceremony featuring Dr. Manus Potaporn (Deputy Director General of Medical Services Department, Thailand) as a Guest of Honour, hosted by Prof. Dr. Mike Chan (A4M Thailand President), Dr. Jakkriss Bumisawasdi (A4M Thailand Honorary President), and Dr. Robert Goldman (A4M Founder).

On February 19, European Wellness Academie (EWA), a non-profitable educational arm of EW Group, brought an exclusive workshop, "All-On Bioregen Optimization," to explore the world of anti-aging and regenerative medicine, featured some of the world's leading anti-aging experts.

Prof. Dr. Mike Chan, presented his two topics, "The Application of Regenerative Precursor Stem Cells, Peptides & Exosomes in Precision Medicine" and "Phyto-Myco-based Nano Organo Peptides: A New Trend in Precision Medicine."

"Precision Medicine in Age Reversal," which brought together the anti-aging and wellness industries on a single platform to achieve Precision Medicine's goals, which are patient-centred, may divide patients into subgroups based on their illness vulnerability, prognosis, or response to a specific treatment. It is devised and administered after comprehensive diagnostics utilizing Panomic Analysis and System Biology to analyse the patient's state at a molecular level and apply targeted therapies to address illness progression.

Anti-aging medicine aims to improve human ageing and maximize physical and mental well-being. Scientific data and medical journals supported the model's focus on Advanced Clinical Preventive and Regenerative Medicine.

The involvement of the healthcare and wellness industries will have a significant influence on the anti-aging sector for many years to come. Yet, by fact these sectors worked together to improve the quality of life for individuals and will contribute to defining the very future of modern medicine.

European Wellness Biomedical Group

An award-winning European group, most renowned for its pioneering development in organ-specific precursor (progenitor) stem cell therapeutics, biological and synthetic peptides, biological regenerative medicine, immunotherapies, and nutraceutical and cosmeceuticals.

EW Group's multinational business divisions include research and developments, bio-manufacturing, biomedical academies, hospital and wellness centres and nutraceutical product distribution across 80 countries worldwide. EW Group also owns and operates a growing network of internationally accredited Hospital and Medical Centres specializing in Regenerative Bio-Medicine and luxury Wellness Centres globally. EW Group is headquartered in Germany and Malaysia (Asia Pacific) with research vested in Germany, Switzerland, Czech Republic and United Kingdom.

Home

Media Contact:Ferellica Anne Martin+6088 448 989 (Ext: 337)[emailprotected]

SOURCE European Wellness Biomedical Group

Follow this link:
EW GROUP SHINES AT 12TH A4M SYMPOSIUM 2023 & "ALL-ON ... - PR Newswire

care team inspires hope for cancer patient | UT Health East Texas – UT Health East Texas

Jim Jordan returned from a golfing trip in August knowing something wasnt quite right with his health. After undergoing bloodwork, which had been perfect at a visit in March, he was told he needed to go to the emergency room immediately. He and his wife, Becky, arrived at UT Health Tyler, not knowing what exactly was wrong or what to expect.

Dr. Lance Mandell, who specializes in oncology and hematology at UT Health East Texas HOPE Cancer Center, soon told them that Jim, 64, had myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS), which can transition to acute myeloid leukemia.

We didnt know anybody, thank God he was on call. We were blessed to get Dr. Mandell, Becky said. From the time he sat down with us that first night, we were scared. He talked to us 20 or 30 minutes, sitting on the end of the bed. Hes been the best.

Despite their shock, the Jordans said Dr. Mandell provided them comfort and hope that first night.

From Day 1 he said, Weve got this, Jim said of that first meeting with Dr. Mandell. He said, Not only are we going to get this, were going to cure this.

Jim started outpatient chemotherapy at HOPE Cancer Center, but his MDS did turn into leukemia and he eventually was admitted to UT Health Tyler to help him fight off infection while he underwent additional treatments.

That feeling of hope and comfort the Jordans felt the first night of Jims diagnosis continued with hospital staff for the six weeks he spent in the hospital.

This is the best group of nurses weve ever been around, and weve been around, Becky said. Every single one of them. Ive never seen anything like it, its totally remarkable.

Becky stayed with Jim almost every night he was in the hospital, heading to their Henderson home only to do laundry and check on their two Shih Tzus.

The nurses just took such good care of him. I didnt worry a minute. And thats not me, I worry all the time about him, she said. I have never seen anything like this group here. They are on the ball, and they explain and tell us in detail what theyre doing and why with a smile on their face. They are so on the ball here, they are heaven.

Alex McComas, RN, said the entire nursing staff formed a bond with Jim, playfully fighting over who got to care for him each day.

There were days when he was really sick, and you could tell he didnt feel good but wanted to have a good attitude, she said. It makes you appreciative of all the things you can do to take care of him and to encourage him to keep going.

In turn, Alex said, Jim often encouraged those who were caring for him.

Hes been so encouraging to us despite the position hes in. He doesnt have to encourage the nursing, staff but he does, she said. Thats been the biggest gift to see and be a part of. Its been the biggest honor to take care of him and learn from him.

Dr. Mandell said that attitude can make a difference. Hes been the perfect patient. Attitude makes a huge, huge difference and hes had the most positive attitude I think Ive ever seen, he said.

Because of that attitude and the bond he developed with all of his caregivers, the staff decided to present Jim with a blanket crocheted by the mother-in-law of David Warren, a cancer survivor who works at UT Health East Texas in the facilities department.

She wanted someone that really was deserving of it, someone that was going through a hard time, Warren said.

His mother-in-law, Connie French, said she made the blanket as a remembrance to her husband, who she lost to cancer in 2007.

Cancer took my husband. Ive got to fight it somehow, so Im doing what I can, French said. Its from the heart. Ive got to do something. I cant do it any other way, so thats what I do, I crochet.

Jim teared up as he accepted the blanket, presented by his team of caregivers the day he was discharged.

Its been scary and something you never want to go through, but theyve just been so good, he said. Theres not one thing I would change. Every day they were my motivation. They saved my life.

Now in remission, Jim will face a stem cell transplant at UT Health Southwestern in hopes of keeping the cancer from ever returning. He plans to keep in touch with his UT Health East Texas care team, who became such a part of his life, and throw them a party when he returns.

All the people here have been nothing but good, they helped me every day through it, Jim said. The whole floor has been unbelievable and helpful, they got us through it.

Originally posted here:
care team inspires hope for cancer patient | UT Health East Texas - UT Health East Texas

Roundtable Discussion: Ziari Assesses Therapy Sequencing in … – Targeted Oncology

Mohammadbagher Ziari, MD

Assistant Clinical Professor

Department of Medical Oncology & Therapeutics Research

City of Hope

Corona, CA

CASE SUMMARY

A 70-year-old woman received a diagnosis of stage I multiple myeloma. She had a medical history of stage 3 chronic kidney disease and moderate renal impairment, and fluorescence in situ hybridization testing showed deletion 17p. The patient declined autologous stem cell transplantation and received lenalidomide (Revlimid), bortezomib (Velcade), and dexamethasone (RVd). Her best response was a very good partial response (VGPR), and lenalidomide maintenance continued.

Two years later she had her first relapse while on lenalidomide maintenance. On routine follow-up, the patient reported having mild fatigue, but continued to work full time. Her bone marrow plasma cells, light chains, and M protein were rising while her kidney function was worsening, and she now has stage IV chronic kidney disease. The patient received daratumumab (Darzalex) plus pomalidomide (Pomalyst) with a best response of VGPR. One year later a second relapse was discovered, and her kidney function continued to decline.

DISCUSSION QUESTIONS

ZIARI: Based on the NCCN [National Comprehensive Cancer Network] guidelines, there are preferred regimens for [patients with] early relapses with 1 to 3 prior treatments. If the patient has a relapse after more than 6 months, the regimen used primarily can be repeated. Patients who are still sensitive to bortezomib and lenalidomide have options that include ixazomib [Ninlaro], lenalidomide, and dexamethasone, which is a category 1 recommendation, and then RVd.

For bortezomib-refractory patients, one can use any of the regimens that have lenalidomide or a combination of daratumumab, carfilzomib [Kyprolis], and dexamethasone. For patients with lenalidomide-refractory disease, you can do daratumumab, carfilzomib, and dexamethasone; or daratumumab, bortezomib, and dexamethasone; or isatuximab [Sarclisa], carfilzomib, and dexamethasone.1

CHALLAGALLA: Most of them are exposed in my practice already. So in this patient, if shes still not going to go to stem cell transplant or CAR [chimeric antigen receptor] T-cell therapy, I think I would go with isatuximab, carfilzomib, and dexamethasone.

SOLANKI: Theres still selinexor [Xpovio] and other drugs. This has become such a chronic disease.

ZIARI: RightI mean, now that your patient has relapsed with Dara-Pd. We have used the anti-CD38, the IMiD, and the PI. The unmet need seems to be a new agent, probably with a different mechanism of action.

BHANDARI: I think this is when we start getting into either sending the patient for some trials at a tertiary center or sending the patient maybe for evaluation for CAR T-cell therapy or another BCMA [B-cell maturation antigen] type of therapy.

DISCUSSION QUESTION

ZIARI: What do you consider? Is there any other MOA that you think we need to address?

ARJUNAN: Yes, I think thats always a thought in my mind when were switching therapies. In this patient, I think you certainly would be looking at switching MOA, so you kind of think about selinexor, elotuzumab [Empliciti], and some of those other drugs out there. The big concern I have, regardless of the MOA, is the tolerance issue. It becomes worrisome trying to get these patients who are a little bit beat up on their first line of therapies onto some of these other ones.

ZIARI: You touched a great point, exactly. We have other regimens that are recommended like bortezomib, liposomal doxorubicin, and dexamethasone or carfilzomib and dexamethasone. There is CyBorD [cyclophosphamide (Cytoxan), bortezomib, dexamethasone]; carfilzomib, cyclophosphamide, and dexamethasone; or ixazomib, cyclophosphamide, and dexamethasone. Also, [we have] selinexor, bortezomib, and dexamethasone, or other selinexor-based regimens such as daratumumab and dexamethasone.

We also have venetoclax (Venclexta) and dexamethasone only in [patients with] t(11;14). Elotuzumab, pomalidomide, and dexamethasone is another option for a patient who had an IMiD [immunomodulatory drug] and PI [proteasome inhibitor] and progressed within 60 days of completion of last treatment. Pomalidomide and dexamethasone is category 1, and selinexor, pomalidomide, and dexamethasone is another option. There are other older regimens like DCEP [dexamethasone, cyclophosphamide, etoposide (Toposar), cisplatin (Platinol)].1 I dont know if any of you have used it recently, but I know that a long time ago I used it, but not anymore.

DISCUSSION QUESTIONS

ZIARI: You have used RVd and the patient was on maintenance lenalidomide and then progressed in 2021 [after 2 years]. After the first relapse, the patient was on Dara-Pd and now that you have utilized those MOAs that we talked about, it comes to the second relapse. Now you have options like an XPO1 inhibitor and CAR T-cell therapy, an anti-BCMA, or others. We have used a PI, anti-CD38, and IMiD.

MAZHARUDDIN: Well one thought that comes to mind is that the patient seems to have been off the bortezomib when they progressed. So it kind of opens the potential of reintroducing a proteasome inhibitor.

CHALLAGALLA: I agree with that. I think I would use carfilzomib, selinexor, and dexamethasone.

ZIARI: Would you do selinexor, bortezomib, and dexamethasone?

CHALLAGALLA: [This patient] doesnt have any history of cardiomyopathy or CHF [congestive heart failure]. Id like to avoid neuropathy. I would still try to push her toward stem cell transplant or CAR T-cell therapy because she does not seem to be refractory but is just relapsing.

SOLANKI: In the BOSTON trial [NCT03110562], most of the patients had been exposed to multiple agents. But they reintroduced bortezomib in those patients, and some of them got it within the last 6 to 9 months or less than 1 year, and they still showed a response. In fact, in the [bortezomib and dexamethasone] arm of the study, there was a response to bortezomib.2 So if [this patient] is otherwise suitableI dont know what her creatinine clearance is, was it good enough for CAR T-cell therapy?

ZIARI: Yes, youre correct.

DISCUSSION QUESTION

ZIARI: There is the genetic risk, like deletion 17p. Also, patient comorbidities like renal impairment and hypertension, or prior toxicities such as neuropathy. Is neuropathy something that you see in your patient after you use triple regimen for 2 lines of therapy? Is it something that you see despite using subcutaneous proteasome inhibitors? Is this something that is a challenge in your practice?

KANNAN: Its concerning. I think it affects their quality of life because its a chronic disease. Most of my patients develop it with bortezomib-based therapy at first-line therapy, so it tends to be a major problem.

ZIARI: What do you think, Dr Kannan, about the regimen that you would choose for your patient who had 2 lines of triple treatment in the past and now youre going to third-line therapy? What would you use?

KANNAN: Sometimes Ive done carfilzomib-based therapy because theyve had RVd followed by Dara-Pd. Ive tried selinexor. I push them toward CAR T-cell therapy, obviously if they are not refractory, but I still dont understand why this patient did not have a bone marrow transplant. Or did they have a transplant in between? If they have not had a transplant, they should be considered for transplant with the option of CAR T-cell therapy for the future, but I would collaborate with my [transplant physician] for them.

ZIARI: How far [away] is the transplant or CAR T-cell therapy center?

KANNAN: 20 miles.

ZIARI: I see; not bad, not bad at all. The MOA is important, too, if your patient has progressed on a treatment. If you use something new, think of the safety, exactly as you mentioned about neuropathy and different safety issues. We want to just use something that will not only keep the longevity but also the quality of life the same as much as we can. Always consider cost to the patient too: how much is out of their pocket and the distance theyre dealing with. I dont know how much geography is a problem when it comes to using oral regimen vs not oral regimen. Is it something concerning if the patient lives far away from you?

KANNAN: I dont think distance is a problem, but cost can be a major problem in our patient population, which is a little bit lower socioeconomically, and that affects [adherence].

ZIARI: That is true in every single practice, and you feel it more in the community practice.

CASE UPDATE

The patient was started on selinexor plus Vd based on her worsening renal impairment, deletion 17p status, and prior therapies. She achieved a VGPR.

DISCUSSION QUESTIONS

ARJUNAN: Ive used it once. We ran out of options for the patient. I was working in conjunction with [The University of Texas] MD Anderson [Cancer Center]. It was tough. A lot of fatigue, diarrhea as well, and it was quite a lot of monitoring.

ZIARI: Did you use it after multiple lines orin combination with bortezomib or anything else?

ARJUNAN: I used it after multiple lines.

ZIARI: You used it as a doublet treatment with dexamethasone or with bortezomib?

ARJUNAN: Yes, a doublet treatment with dexamethasone.

CHALLAGALLA: Ive used it as a doublet treatment, too, in an elderly person with terrible neuropathy. The indication was triplet therapy with bortezomib, but there was no way I could use bortezomib, so I did the 80-mg selinexor with dexamethasone.

I mean, its a different mechanism, except you must watch out for hyponatremia in this older population from the nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea, and I think we are all pretty good with the hematologic toxicities. We are pretty good at treating them. I think its the neurologic toxicity and the hyponatremia that we need to be careful of.

ZIARI: I have the same experience that you both had before. Just the hyponatremia is something to monitor closely, and fatigue too.

ZIARI: The BOSTON study data showed the efficacy and the adverse effects [AEs] of selinexor. Some of you have experience with it and some of you dont. But based on the data, how would you discuss this with your patient?

BHANDARI: Were there any patients on dialysis on that study?

ZIARI: They included patients who had kidney function less than 40%,2 so patients on dialysis [were] included.

ARJUNAN: Yes, so I think its a discussion about the data, to some extent. What concerns me about these data is that [the study] used, in my opinion, kind of a comparator arm that was questionable. About 70% of the patients had prior exposure to bortezomib already and then theyre using that as a comparator arm, so its kind of like youre expecting that comparator arm to fail, basically. I dont see what the data show me beyond telling the patient, Hey, maybe let us add selinexor, which has a different mechanism of action. It might help you. But I think when were looking at the data, its hard to use that as a convincing reason.

I dont know if there was, perhaps, a better comparator arm that could have been used in this trial instead of Vd alone. But otherwise, its about discussing the AEs and just counseling [the patients] through that. It is kind of difficult because with the other options you might have other toxicities. [As with] belantamab [Blenrep], you have the ophthalmic toxicity. So its weighing what the patient would be tolerant to.

ZIARI: I think there are data that we have also that compared pomalidomide, bortezomib, and dexamethasone with Vd. Also, they did a similar [study] but with Dara-Vd vs Vd and looked at the PFS [progression-free survival] difference too. I guess for the data that we have, the control arm was the old regimen that in the past had been a standard. Thats the reason that they always have something in addition to the doublet, with a different MOA to see if it is better than the standard.

DISCUSSION QUESTIONS

CHALLAGALLA: We always dose reduce. Nausea/vomiting is easily controlled, but we dose reduce if there [will] be AEs.

ZIARI: For the dose that we reduce to, there are data about that dose, so that you dont lose the efficacy. Have you used olanzapine [as an antiemetic]?

CHALLAGALLA: Thats the problem I have with all these drugs. There is no drop in efficacy by dose reduction, so why do we have to use the full dose and make the patient suffer?

ZIARI: In the BOSTON study, most patients had [dose modifications] eventually. You can always lower the dose too. This is what weve learnedthat maybe a lower dose is not a problem. I mean, again, in the BOSTON study, eventually they had most patients on the 80-mg dose.

SOLANKI: This question came up way back when panobinostat [Farydak] was introduced. It clearly disappeared mainly because it had severe GI [gastrointestinal] toxicity, mainly diarrhea. This has been a recurring problem with drugs, like now with selinexor. What Dr Challagalla pointed out is a recurring theme. We say, Oh well, 70% of the patients had to have dose reductions. Well, how did we come up with this dose in the first place?

The same thing happened with bortezomib way back. We used to use much higher doses, and then we went to weekly dosing. It turns out that the total dose of bortezomib we give is considerably less than what was originally used, and we still see wonderful responses. So theres a significant issue with the starting dose that is used in trials. Nobody seems to report what was the delivered dosehow much did the patient get, not what was planned.

ZIARI: In the BOSTON study they did. The majority [of patients received] 80 mg.

SOLANKI: I think what happened with the BOSTON [From the Data2] trial was because of the design, it became a once-a-week regimen of selinexor, and that considerably decreased the GI toxicity. Still, there was considerable dose reduction in those patients. So its still a pretty tough drug, although I was surprised how effective the combination was in patients who were penta refractory. Even in the Vd arm, there was a response rate of about 35% or 30% which is remarkable, so it was an interesting study, but not an easy one on the patients.

ZIARI: I have patients on this and I have been dose reducing, even down to 40 mg and they still have a response to it. I have 2 patients currently on it and down to 40 mg once a week, and I see the efficacy. I had to dose reduce to different things. But one other thing I do is olanzapine on day 1 of the treatment, and then I do it for 3 days in a row. I ask the patient how they feel after 3 days. If theyre fine, then I just ask them to use it as needed. If you do it days 1 to 3, and 1 hour before the starting day, then continue for 3 days or use a different cocktail plus hydration, it pretty much gets easier. Typically, after the first 2 months, the patient tolerates it and the AEs get less and less.3

DISCUSSION QUESTION

CHALLAGALLA: My choice would depend on the comorbidities of the patient. If the patient has severe neuropathy, bortezomib is out. Cardiomyopathy, carfilzomib is out, or kidney disease too. If theyve been exposed to daratumumab, I dont think I would use any anti-CD38 drug again because I dont believe that reusing it is going to be helpful. I dont know whats the right answer. It depends on the patient. In my practice, if I have used RVd and then daratumumab, etc, then XKd [selinexor, carfilzomib, and dexamethasone] seems most reasonable because if the same patient had kidney disease, I would have probably used pomalidomide before.

ZIARI: I see. So if you want to use a combination with selinexor, where do you think it fits in your line of treatment?

CHALLAGALLA: One can use selinexor and dexamethasone. One could use anything. We have so many choices right now, and we must weigh the AEs and patients comorbidities, then choose. Thats the way I would think.

ZIARI: Thats correct. We have great choices available now, but youre talking about a different MOA when you use selinexor. Weve pretty much run out of many other MOAs, and we were thinking about something new.

REFERENCES

NCCN. Clinical Practice Guideline in Oncology. Multiple Myeloma, version 1.2023. Accessed February 22, 2023. https://bit.ly/3KqmxUF

Grosicki S, Simonova M, Spicka I, et al. Once-per-week selinexor, bortezomib, and dexamethasone versus twice-per-week bortezomib and dexamethasone in patients with multiple myeloma (BOSTON): a randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial. Lancet. 2020;396(10262):1563-1573. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(20)32292-3

Xpovio. Prescribing information. Karyopharm Therapeutics Inc; 2020. Accessed February 22, 2023. https://bit.ly/3eG0OqV

Continued here:
Roundtable Discussion: Ziari Assesses Therapy Sequencing in ... - Targeted Oncology

Available Therapies for US Patients With R/R B-Cell Lymphoma – Targeted Oncology

Tycel Phillips, MD, associate professor, Division of Lymphoma, Department of Hematology & Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation, discusses treatment options for diffuse large B-cell lymphoma in the Unites States [US].

0:08 | At the current moment, if we look at patients with relapsed refractory diffuse large B cell lymphoma, which is the most common non-Hodgkin lymphoma in the US in that setting, we had several approved agents in the last several years. So, there was an oral medication lenalidomide [Revlimid] given together with an antibody called tafasitamab, and that is approved for patients [in] second-line or beyond, especially those in second-line who are unable to tolerate more traditional treatments. In that second-line space, we have historically had salvage chemotherapy, and the complications that we know come with that, followed by autologous stem cell transplantation. For a large number of patients, salvage chemo and autologous transplant was not a great option because these patients had intrinsic resistance to chemotherapy.

1:00 | More recently, we had the approval of 2 chimeric antigen receptor therapy treatments, or CAR T treatment. CAR T, as much as we advocate for it, is also available in the third-line is underutilized here in the US with only about a third of patients who are eligible for CAR T, or making it to CAR T. So, there's a large number of patients who cannot get to this treatment either because they do not live near a CAR T center or they don't want to travel to a CAR T center, or they can't keep their disease under control enough to get to CAR T.

1:29 | As of right now, CAR T is probably the only treatment that has durable responses in this patient population. So, with those other treatments that I didn't mention, there's probably a minority of those patients who will have a durable response. But the vast majority of those patients will likely relapse and die from the cancer, and if they can't get the CAR Tt that does leave a large number of patients who are at need, which prompts the need for more treatments in his patient population. Because even with CAR T, as much as I have advocated for have in this you know earlier in this conversation, about half of those patients, if not a little bit more, will fail to respond to CAR T or relapse after treatment with CAR T, and those patients have very poor outcomes as well.

The rest is here:
Available Therapies for US Patients With R/R B-Cell Lymphoma - Targeted Oncology

Immunology Center of Georgia recruits reflect expertise from … – Jagwire Augusta

Immune cells that can smell the metabolites of a high-fat Western diet and may produce inflammation and ultimately heart disease as a result, just what our longer RNAs are doing in our bodies and the role of immune cells called neutrophils in both cancer and heart disease are some areas of pursuit of the first five scientists recruited to the new Immunology Center of Georgia at the Medical College of Georgiaat Augusta University.

The new IMMCG, codirected by Georgia Research Alliance Eminent Scholars Catherine Lynn Hedrick, PhD, and Klaus Ley, MD, who joined the MCG at Augusta University faculty late last summer, focuses on better understanding the immune systems seemingly diametric roles in enabling good health and in contributing to major killers like cancer and heart disease.

The first recruits bring to MCG more immunological strength in major areas of research and clinical expertise of the medical school, says Hedrick.

Already onboard is Kunzhe Dong, PhD, a vascular immunologist with expertise in long noncoding RNA, literally long RNAs which regulate gene activity both up and down. He was first author on a 2022 study showing that a long noncoding RNA called CARMN is found in abundance in the healthy smooth muscle cells that give our blood vessels strength and flexibility and is significantly decreased in atherosclerosis. The finding provided more insight into how blood vessel disease happens as it pointed toward new ways to treat it. He also has studied autophagy, a fundamental the immune system uses to eliminate invading microorganisms and cell debris by ingesting them, and novel methods for protecting against destructive inflammation prompted by infection and by vascular disease.

Dong earned his PhD in animal genetics, breeding and reproduction from the Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences in Beijing, came to MCG in 2017 as a postdoctoral fellow studying with Vascular Biologist Jiliang Zhou, PhD, in the Department of Pharmacology and Toxicology, and was promoted to senior postdoctoral fellow in 2021. He received an American Heart Association Career Development Award in 2022, which runs through 2025, as well as an AHA Postdoctoral Fellowship during his training. Dong also received a 2022 travel grant for early career investigators from the AHA journal Arteriosclerosis, Thrombosis and Vascular Biology.

Marco Orecchioni, PhD, an immunologist and cellular biologist, who studied with Ley at the La Jolla Institute for Immunology in California, will be joining the IMMCG faculty May 1. The Italy native earned his PhD from the University of Sassari, before moving to La Jolla as a postdoctoral fellow in 2017. He was promoted to instructor in 2022.

Orecchionis work includes elucidating the role of olfactory (smell) receptors on macrophages, immune cells that can turn inflammation both up and down and can also consume cellular debris. He is working to better understand how these receptors, which seem to be more common in disease states like arteriosclerosis, affect immune cells, including driving inflammation, and whether they provide an unexplored connection between diet and the progression of heart disease and other metabolic problems. His research in collaboration with Ley and Hedrick has been published in top-tier journals including Science. A focus has been the simple chemical octanal which is detected by the olfactory receptors, and their connection prompts production of proinflammatory factors. The scientists have found levels of octanal in human and mouse blood sufficient to activate the respective receptors. When they boost octanal levels, they have found it increases characteristic plaque in blood vessels, and when they genetically delete the receptor it reduces disease, findings that point toward the smell receptor as both a sound prevention and treatment target. They also are exploring the possibility that octanal has effects in other diseases like cancer. Hedrick notes that despite the common ground of inflammation in the major killers of cancer and cardiovascular disease, they have two different environments with different inflammation types.

Orecchioni received an AHA Career Development Award in 2022 that continues today and received the Conrad Prebys Foundation Award in 2021. The foundation supports arts, medical research, health care and youth success in the San Diego community. He also received an AHA postdoctoral fellowship in 2018 and is associate editor of Frontiers in Immunology.

Also starting May 1 is Yanfang Peipei Zhu, PhD, a cancer immunologist coming to MCG and the IMMCG from the University of California San Diego. Zhu completed her postdoctoral fellowship at the La Jolla Institute for Immunology with Hedrick and was named an instructor at the institution before moving to the UCSD in 2020. Her research focus is neutrophils, short-lived immune cells that are early arrivers when we get a bacterial or viral infection. Their levels can shrink in response to problems like stress, as well as congenital or later problems that affect their production in the bone marrow. Zhus lab identified a progenitor cell called NeP that just makes neutrophils and a similar one called hNeP, in both mouse and human bone marrow. They also found that when cancer is present, these progenitor cells go right to the site of the tumor to support its growth. Now they are looking to better categorize which neutrophils and NePs support a healthy immune response versus cancer with the goal of identifying new biomarkers and treatment targets. Zhu also is exploring the cells potential role in atherosclerosis. Additionally, she is an expert in next-generation sequencing technologies that enable high throughput examination of the fine details of the genome.

Zhu earned her PhD from the University of Louisville School of Medicine in Kentucky before going to the Hedrick lab for her postdoc work, where she received a National Cancer Institute scholarship. She is academic editor for the Journal of Cellular Immunology and an editor for The Journal of Immunology and Microbiology.

Rafael S. Czepielewski, PhD, joins IMMCG July 1 from Washington University Medical School in Saint Louis, Missouri, one of the nations top immunology programs. The mucosal immunologists research focus is better understanding inflammatory bowel disease, or IBD, and changes to the lymphatic system during the course of the disease. The lymphatic system is part of the immune system defined as the tissues and organs that produce, store and carry white blood cells throughout the body where they patrol for infections and other invaders. IBD, which includes Crohns disease and ulcerative colitis, are both risk factors for colon cancer. Last year, Czepielewski received a Career Development Award from the Crohns & Colitis Foundation for his work on how crosstalk between the lymphatic vessels, microvessels throughout the body that carry lymph (fluid) away from tissues, and immune cells control IBD. His discoveries include little nests of immune cells along the lymphatic system in IBD, and now he and his new colleagues want to answer questions like how they got there and what they are doing.

Czepielewski received a Young Investigator Award from the 2021 Lymphatic Forum , a biennial event where researchers worldwide present and discuss studies of lymphatics in health and disease. Additionally, he is a fantastic microscopist, Hedrick says, in his case, that includes expertise in intravital microscopy, where you can look at more than one biological process at a time in living research animals, like transparent roundworms called C. elegans.

He earned his PhD from Brazils Pontificia Universidade Catlica do Rio Grande do Sul and joined the faculty as an instructor in 2021. During his PhD work he completed an international PhD fellowship at the Immunology Institute of the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai in New York City.

Adil Rasheed, PhD, a postdoctoral fellow completing his studies in vascular immunology at the University of Ottawa Heart Institute in Ontario, will start at IMMCG Sept. 11. At the Heart Institute, Rasheed has been honored for his leadership in postdoctoral studies and as the Ottawa Regions Cardiovascular Trainee of the Year. He is a member of the American Heart Association journal Arteriosclerosis, Thrombosis and Vascular Biology Early Career Editorial Board. He was a founding member of the online community Trainees in Metabolism, which hosted seminars and workshops on a range of relevant topics like effective mentorship and scientific communication.

Rasheed will bring with him studies of the protein MLKL, a protein known to play a key role in programmed cell death and which at high levels is associated with inflammatory bowel disease in children. He is finding MLKLs role in cell death appears to be a factor in accumulation of lipid and other substances inside blood vessels in atherosclerosis, and the protein has a significant role as an immune regulator in blood vessel and possibly other metabolic diseases. Rasheed also has an interest in the development of immune cells in the bone marrow, called hematopoiesis. He is the 2022 recipient of the Young Investigator Award from the journal STEM CELLS Translational Medicine for his pioneering research in heart disease while still working on his PhD at the University of Toronto.

LikeLoveHahaWowSadAngry

See original here:
Immunology Center of Georgia recruits reflect expertise from ... - Jagwire Augusta