Prognostic relevance of concordant expression CD69 and CD56 in response to bortezomib combination therapy in multiple myeloma patients

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-15
Author(s):  
Nadia El Menshawy ◽  
Nora Abo ezz ◽  
Doaa Attia ◽  
Nashwa Abousamra ◽  
Doaa Shahin ◽  
...  
Antibodies ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 34 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ahmad Iftikhar ◽  
Hamza Hassan ◽  
Nimra Iftikhar ◽  
Adeela Mushtaq ◽  
Atif Sohail ◽  
...  

Background: Immunotherapy for multiple myeloma (MM) has been the focus in recent years due to its myeloma-specific immune responses. We reviewed the literature on non-Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) to highlight future perspectives. We searched PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, Cochrane Library and ClinicalTrials.gov to include phase I/II clinical trials. Data from 39 studies (1906 patients) were included. Of all the agents, Isatuximab (Isa, anti-CD38) and F50067 (anti-CXCR4) were the only mAbs to produce encouraging results as monotherapy with overall response rates (ORRs) of 66.7% and 32% respectively. Isa showed activity when used in combination with lenalidomide (Len) and dexamethasone (Dex), producing a clinical benefit rate (CBR) of 83%. Additionally, Isa used in combination with pomalidomide (Pom) and Dex resulted in a CBR of 73%. Indatuximab Ravtansine (anti-CD138 antibody-drug conjugate) produced an ORR of 78% and 79% when used in combination with Len-Dex and Pom-Dex, respectively. Conclusions: Combination therapy using mAbs such as indatuximab, pembrolizumab, lorvotuzumab, siltuximab or dacetuzumab with chemotherapy agents produced better outcomes as compared to monotherapies. Further clinical trials investigating mAbs targeting CD38 used in combination therapy are warranted.


Blood ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 1844-1844
Author(s):  
John Richards ◽  
Myriam N Bouchlaka ◽  
Robyn J Puro ◽  
Ben J Capoccia ◽  
Ronald R Hiebsch ◽  
...  

AO-176 is a highly differentiated, humanized anti-CD47 IgG2 antibody that is unique among agents in this class of checkpoint inhibitors. AO-176 works by blocking the "don't eat me" signal, the standard mechanism of anti-CD47 antibodies, but also by directly killing tumor cells. Importantly, AO-176 binds preferentially to tumor cells, compared to normal cells, and binds even more potently to tumors in their acidic microenvironment (low pH). Hematological neoplasms are the fourth most frequently diagnosed cancers in both men and women and account for approximately 10% of all cancers. Here we describe AO-176, a highly differentiated anti-CD47 antibody that potently targets hematologic cancers in vitro and in vivo. As a single agent, AO-176 not only promotes phagocytosis (15-45%, EC50 = 0.33-4.1 µg/ml) of hematologic tumor cell lines (acute myeloid leukemia, non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, multiple myeloma, and T cell leukemia) but also directly targets and kills tumor cells (18-46% Annexin V positivity, EC50 = 0.63-10 µg/ml) in a non-ADCC manner. In combination with agents targeting CD20 (rituximab) or CD38 (daratumumab), AO-176 mediates enhanced phagocytosis of lymphoma and multiple myeloma cell lines, respectively. In vivo, AO-176 mediates potent monotherapy tumor growth inhibition of hematologic tumors including Raji B cell lymphoma and RPMI-8226 multiple myeloma xenograft models in a dose-dependent manner. Concomitant with tumor growth inhibition, immune cell infiltrates were observed with elevated numbers of macrophage and dendritic cells, along with increased pro-inflammatory cytokine levels in AO-176 treated animals. When combined with bortezomib, AO-176 was able to elicit complete tumor regression (100% CR in 10/10 animals treated with either 10 or 25 mg/kg AO-176 + 1 mg/kg bortezomib) with no detectable tumor out to 100 days at study termination. Overall survival was also greatly improved following combination therapy compared to animals treated with bortezomib or AO-176 alone. These data show that AO-176 exhibits promising monotherapy and combination therapy activity, both in vitro and in vivo, against hematologic cancers. These findings also add to the previously reported anti-tumor efficacy exhibited by AO-176 in solid tumor xenografts representing ovarian, gastric and breast cancer. With AO-176's highly differentiated MOA and binding characteristics, it may have the potential to improve upon the safety and efficacy profiles relative to other agents in this class. AO-176 is currently being evaluated in a Phase 1 clinical trial (NCT03834948) for the treatment of patients with select solid tumors. Disclosures Richards: Arch Oncology Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership, Other: Salary. Bouchlaka:Arch Oncology Inc.: Consultancy, Equity Ownership. Puro:Arch Oncology Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Capoccia:Arch Oncology Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Hiebsch:Arch Oncology Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Donio:Arch Oncology Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Wilson:Arch Oncology Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Chakraborty:Arch Oncology Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Sung:Arch Oncology Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Pereira:Arch Oncology Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership.


2012 ◽  
Vol 61 (3) ◽  
pp. 89-92
Author(s):  
Masafumi MATSUGUMA ◽  
Toru TAKAHASHI ◽  
Hiroyuki NAKAMURA ◽  
Sumie HIRAMATSU ◽  
Takashi YAMAGUCHI ◽  
...  

Blood ◽  
2005 ◽  
Vol 106 (11) ◽  
pp. 5125-5125 ◽  
Author(s):  
Axel Glasmacher ◽  
Corinna Hahn ◽  
Florian Hoffmann ◽  
Kerstin Furkert ◽  
Marie von Lilienfeld-Toal ◽  
...  

Abstract The activity of thalidomide monotherapy in relapsed or refractory disease is widely accepted but many haematologists have observed better response rates with combination therapies. This communication aims to give an overview on the efficacy of these alternatives. Methods: Our group has performed two systematic reviews (thalidomide monotherapy: Glasmacher et al., Brit. J. Haematol., 2005; 129 suppl 1: 24; thalidomide and dexamethasone combination therapy: submitted to ASH 2005). Furthermore a search of trials combining thalidomide, cyclophosphamide and dexamethasone (with or without further drugs) was performed. Only trials that included patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma could be evaluated. Response was defined as a reduction of the monoclonal component by more than 50% in the absence of any sign of disease progression. Proportions and 95% confidence intervals were reported (Confidence Interval Analysis, Version 2.1.1, Southampton, UK, 2000). Results: Thalidomide monotherapy was administered in doses between 50–600 mg/d (median doses). Thalidomide in combination with dexamethasone was given in doses of 100–400 mg/d (median doses), dexamethasone was given 40 mg/d d1–4 every 3–4 weeks in 7 of 8 trials. Thalidomide dosage and combination therapy of trials adding Cy to thalidomide and dexamethasone are shown in Table 1. The response rates of the three different thalidomide applications are demonstrated Table 2. Conclusion: This compilation of data from phase II trials cannot replace a randomized trial and may be biased. With this limitation it seems that thalidomide combined with dexamethasone (response rate 51%) is more effective than monotherapy (response rate 29%) as the 95% confidence intervals for the response rates do not overlap. Whether a combination of thalidomide, dexamethasone and cyclophosphamide is more effective than thalidomide and dexamethasone alone cannot be decided from the current data. Table 1: Studies with thalidomide and combination chemotherapy Study Intervention No. of pts. Response (95%CI) Abb.: Cy, cyclophosphamide; Eto, etoposide; T, thalidomide; Dex, dexamethasone; Ida, idarubicin. Values are mg/m2 per course for Cy, Eto, Ida; mg per course for Dex, mg/d for T. Moehler et al. 2003 Cy 1600, Eto 160, T 400, Dex 160 119 55% (46–65) Kropff et al., 2003 Cy 1800, T 400, Dex 240 60 70% (57–81) Dimopoulos et al. 2003 Cy 1500, T 400, Dex 160 43 67% (51–81) Gracia-Sanz et al. 2004 Cy 50 daily, T 800, Dex 160 71 57% (45–67) Glasmacher et al. 2005 Cy 800, Ida 40, T 400, Dex 320 39 57% (41–73) Table 2: Response of different thalidomide combinations Intervention No. of trials No. of pts. Response (95%CI) Abb.: see Table 1 T monotherapy 42 1629 29% (27–32) T + Dex 8 283 51% (45–57) T + Cy + Dex 5 332 60% (55–65)


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document