Clinical Edge Journal Scan

One therapy that has transformed the management of this disease is anti-CD19 chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy. Currently there are three FDA-approved options for patients with relapsed/refractory large B-cell lymphoma (LBCL) who have received at least two prior lines of therapy.^[1-3] More recently, axicabtagene ciloleucel (axi-cel) and lisocabtagene maraleucel (liso-cel) have also been approved for second-line therapy on the basis of results of the ZUMA-7 and TRANSFORM studies, respectively.^[4,5] The primary analysis of the TRANSFORM study, which included patients with primary refractory or early relapse of large B-cell lymphoma, is now available. In this study, 184 patients were randomly assigned to receive liso-cel or three cycles of the standard of care (high-dose chemotherapy and autologous stem cell transplantation). After a 17.5-month median follow-up, the liso-cel vs standard-of-care group had significantly improved median event-free survival (hazard ratio [HR] 0.356; 95% CI 0.243-0.522), median progression-free survival (HR 0.400; P < .0001), and complete response rate (74% vs 43%; P < .0001), along with low rates of grade 3 cytokine release syndrome (1%) and neurologic events (4%). This confirms the role of liso-cel in the second-line setting for high-risk patients.

Another promising treatment approach across lymphoma subtypes, including DLBCL, are CD20/CD3 bispecific monoclonal antibodies. The results of the phase 2 trial of glofitamab for patients with relapsed/refractory DLBCL were published recently. This study included 155 patients with relapsed/refractory DLBCL after at least two prior lines of therapy. Approximately one third of patients had received prior CAR T-cell therapy. Patients were treated for a fixed duration of 12 cycles. At a median follow-up of 12.6 months, 39% (95% CI 32%-48%) and 52% (95% CI 43%-60%) of patients achieved complete and objective responses, respectively. Seventy-eight percent of patients with a complete response continued to be in remission at 12 months. Grade 3 or higher cytokine release syndrome was rare and occurred in less than 5% of patients.

Bispecific antibodies have many advantages, including off-the-shelf access and favorable toxicity profiles. Longer follow-up, however, will be required to determine the durability of response beyond 1 year. As bispecific antibodies become available, many questions will emerge, including how best to sequence with CAR T-cell therapy and whether to combine them with other regimens. Additional studies of bispecific antibodies in combination with chemoimmunotherapy and other treatment approaches are underway.

Additional References

1.         Neelapu SS, Locke FL, Bartlett NL, et al. Axicabtagene ciloleucel CAR T-cell therapy in refractory large B-cell lymphoma. N Engl J Med. 2017;377:2531-2544. Doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1707447

2.         Schuster SJ, Bishop MR, Tam CS, et al. Tisagenlecleucel in adult relapsed or refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma. N Engl J Med. 2019;380:45-56. Doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1804980

3.         Abramson JS, Palomba ML, Gordon LI, et al. Lisocabtagene maraleucel for patients with relapsed or refractory large B-cell lymphomas (TRANSCEND NHL 001): A multicentre seamless design study. Lancet. 2020;396:839-852. Doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(20)31366-0

4.         Locke FL, Miklos DB, Jacobson CA, et al. Axicabtagene ciloleucel as second-line therapy for large B-cell lymphoma. N Engl J Med. 2022;386:640-654. Doi:10.1056/NEJMoa2116133

5.         Kamdar M, Solomon SR, Arnason J, et al. Lisocabtagene maraleucel versus standard of care with salvage chemotherapy followed by autologous stem cell transplantation as second-line treatment in patients with relapsed or refractory large B-cell lymphoma (TRANSFORM): Results from an interim analysis of an open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial. Lancet. 2022;399:2294-2308. Doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(22)00662-6

One therapy that has transformed the management of this disease is anti-CD19 chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy. Currently there are three FDA-approved options for patients with relapsed/refractory large B-cell lymphoma (LBCL) who have received at least two prior lines of therapy.^[1-3] More recently, axicabtagene ciloleucel (axi-cel) and lisocabtagene maraleucel (liso-cel) have also been approved for second-line therapy on the basis of results of the ZUMA-7 and TRANSFORM studies, respectively.^[4,5] The primary analysis of the TRANSFORM study, which included patients with primary refractory or early relapse of large B-cell lymphoma, is now available. In this study, 184 patients were randomly assigned to receive liso-cel or three cycles of the standard of care (high-dose chemotherapy and autologous stem cell transplantation). After a 17.5-month median follow-up, the liso-cel vs standard-of-care group had significantly improved median event-free survival (hazard ratio [HR] 0.356; 95% CI 0.243-0.522), median progression-free survival (HR 0.400; P < .0001), and complete response rate (74% vs 43%; P < .0001), along with low rates of grade 3 cytokine release syndrome (1%) and neurologic events (4%). This confirms the role of liso-cel in the second-line setting for high-risk patients.

Another promising treatment approach across lymphoma subtypes, including DLBCL, are CD20/CD3 bispecific monoclonal antibodies. The results of the phase 2 trial of glofitamab for patients with relapsed/refractory DLBCL were published recently. This study included 155 patients with relapsed/refractory DLBCL after at least two prior lines of therapy. Approximately one third of patients had received prior CAR T-cell therapy. Patients were treated for a fixed duration of 12 cycles. At a median follow-up of 12.6 months, 39% (95% CI 32%-48%) and 52% (95% CI 43%-60%) of patients achieved complete and objective responses, respectively. Seventy-eight percent of patients with a complete response continued to be in remission at 12 months. Grade 3 or higher cytokine release syndrome was rare and occurred in less than 5% of patients.

Bispecific antibodies have many advantages, including off-the-shelf access and favorable toxicity profiles. Longer follow-up, however, will be required to determine the durability of response beyond 1 year. As bispecific antibodies become available, many questions will emerge, including how best to sequence with CAR T-cell therapy and whether to combine them with other regimens. Additional studies of bispecific antibodies in combination with chemoimmunotherapy and other treatment approaches are underway.

Additional References

1.         Neelapu SS, Locke FL, Bartlett NL, et al. Axicabtagene ciloleucel CAR T-cell therapy in refractory large B-cell lymphoma. N Engl J Med. 2017;377:2531-2544. Doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1707447

2.         Schuster SJ, Bishop MR, Tam CS, et al. Tisagenlecleucel in adult relapsed or refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma. N Engl J Med. 2019;380:45-56. Doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1804980

3.         Abramson JS, Palomba ML, Gordon LI, et al. Lisocabtagene maraleucel for patients with relapsed or refractory large B-cell lymphomas (TRANSCEND NHL 001): A multicentre seamless design study. Lancet. 2020;396:839-852. Doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(20)31366-0

4.         Locke FL, Miklos DB, Jacobson CA, et al. Axicabtagene ciloleucel as second-line therapy for large B-cell lymphoma. N Engl J Med. 2022;386:640-654. Doi:10.1056/NEJMoa2116133

5.         Kamdar M, Solomon SR, Arnason J, et al. Lisocabtagene maraleucel versus standard of care with salvage chemotherapy followed by autologous stem cell transplantation as second-line treatment in patients with relapsed or refractory large B-cell lymphoma (TRANSFORM): Results from an interim analysis of an open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial. Lancet. 2022;399:2294-2308. Doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(22)00662-6

One therapy that has transformed the management of this disease is anti-CD19 chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy. Currently there are three FDA-approved options for patients with relapsed/refractory large B-cell lymphoma (LBCL) who have received at least two prior lines of therapy.^[1-3] More recently, axicabtagene ciloleucel (axi-cel) and lisocabtagene maraleucel (liso-cel) have also been approved for second-line therapy on the basis of results of the ZUMA-7 and TRANSFORM studies, respectively.^[4,5] The primary analysis of the TRANSFORM study, which included patients with primary refractory or early relapse of large B-cell lymphoma, is now available. In this study, 184 patients were randomly assigned to receive liso-cel or three cycles of the standard of care (high-dose chemotherapy and autologous stem cell transplantation). After a 17.5-month median follow-up, the liso-cel vs standard-of-care group had significantly improved median event-free survival (hazard ratio [HR] 0.356; 95% CI 0.243-0.522), median progression-free survival (HR 0.400; P < .0001), and complete response rate (74% vs 43%; P < .0001), along with low rates of grade 3 cytokine release syndrome (1%) and neurologic events (4%). This confirms the role of liso-cel in the second-line setting for high-risk patients.

Another promising treatment approach across lymphoma subtypes, including DLBCL, are CD20/CD3 bispecific monoclonal antibodies. The results of the phase 2 trial of glofitamab for patients with relapsed/refractory DLBCL were published recently. This study included 155 patients with relapsed/refractory DLBCL after at least two prior lines of therapy. Approximately one third of patients had received prior CAR T-cell therapy. Patients were treated for a fixed duration of 12 cycles. At a median follow-up of 12.6 months, 39% (95% CI 32%-48%) and 52% (95% CI 43%-60%) of patients achieved complete and objective responses, respectively. Seventy-eight percent of patients with a complete response continued to be in remission at 12 months. Grade 3 or higher cytokine release syndrome was rare and occurred in less than 5% of patients.

Bispecific antibodies have many advantages, including off-the-shelf access and favorable toxicity profiles. Longer follow-up, however, will be required to determine the durability of response beyond 1 year. As bispecific antibodies become available, many questions will emerge, including how best to sequence with CAR T-cell therapy and whether to combine them with other regimens. Additional studies of bispecific antibodies in combination with chemoimmunotherapy and other treatment approaches are underway.

Additional References

1.         Neelapu SS, Locke FL, Bartlett NL, et al. Axicabtagene ciloleucel CAR T-cell therapy in refractory large B-cell lymphoma. N Engl J Med. 2017;377:2531-2544. Doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1707447

2.         Schuster SJ, Bishop MR, Tam CS, et al. Tisagenlecleucel in adult relapsed or refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma. N Engl J Med. 2019;380:45-56. Doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1804980

3.         Abramson JS, Palomba ML, Gordon LI, et al. Lisocabtagene maraleucel for patients with relapsed or refractory large B-cell lymphomas (TRANSCEND NHL 001): A multicentre seamless design study. Lancet. 2020;396:839-852. Doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(20)31366-0

4.         Locke FL, Miklos DB, Jacobson CA, et al. Axicabtagene ciloleucel as second-line therapy for large B-cell lymphoma. N Engl J Med. 2022;386:640-654. Doi:10.1056/NEJMoa2116133

5.         Kamdar M, Solomon SR, Arnason J, et al. Lisocabtagene maraleucel versus standard of care with salvage chemotherapy followed by autologous stem cell transplantation as second-line treatment in patients with relapsed or refractory large B-cell lymphoma (TRANSFORM): Results from an interim analysis of an open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial. Lancet. 2022;399:2294-2308. Doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(22)00662-6

A post hoc analysis of the ShortHER trial, including 784 patients with hormone-positive (HR+) and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2–positive (HER2+) early breast cancer who received adjuvant trastuzumab plus chemotherapy, showed that adjuvant endocrine therapy (ET) with an aromatase inhibitor (AI) was associated with better outcomes than tamoxifen (TAM) or TAM and AI (TAM-AI) in this population. Disease-free survival rates at 8 years were 86.4% for AI vs 79.7% for the TAM/TAM-AI groups, with an absolute difference of 6.7% (log-rank P = .013). This effect was seen independently of menopausal status in a multivariate analysis.

In the exploratory analysis focusing on the premenopausal patients, the addition of gonadotropin-releasing hormone to ET was associated with a significantly better disease-free survival. This was also noted in an exploratory subgroup analysis of the SOFT trial,^[1] which showed greater benefit from the addition of ovarian suppression to TAM, as compared with TAM alone, among women with HER2+ disease (hazard ratio 0.41; 95% CI 0.22-0.75).

It is important to note that not all patients in the ShortHER trial received the standard-of-care duration of adjuvant trastuzumab; half of them received only 9-week treatment as opposed to the standard 12 months of adjuvant therapy. It is unclear whether this difference in adjuvant therapy could have affected the results, although the disease-free survival multivariate analysis showed no significant effect of the treatment arm on the role of ET. More studies are needed to verify the optimal adjuvant ET for patients with HR+/HER2+ breast cancer, especially in premenopausal patients.

Contralateral Prophylactic Mastectomy Offers No Survival Advantage in Triple-Negative Breast Cancer

There is insufficient evidence that contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM) improves survival in patients with unilateral triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC). A multi-institutional database study, including 796 patients with TNBC, of which 15.5% underwent CPM, showed that CPM did not offer survival benefit to patients with unilateral TNBC. Women who underwent CPM were more likely to be White (P < .001), younger (P < .001), and had had genetic testing performed (P < .001). While there was a borderline improvement in 5-year unadjusted overall survival for patients undergoing CPM compared with no CPM overall (95.1% vs 85.0%; P = .05), no significant improvement was observed for local recurrence-free survival (P = .40) or distant recurrence-free survival (P = .37). Very few (n = 15/673, 2.2%) of the no-CPM patients developed a new primary breast cancer; 3 of the 15 patients were known BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation carriers. Among the genetic mutation carriers, 5-year overall survival was 97.2% for CPM vs 84.1% for no CPM (P = .35). This study did not demonstrate any statistically significant survival difference between CPM compared with no CPM, regardless of the presence of a BRCA mutation, although prior studies have shown improved outcomes for CPM in BRCA mutation carriers.^[2] Larger prospective studies are needed to evaluate the potential benefit of CPM among patients with TNBC, especially patients with BRCA1/2 mutations.

Adding Endocrine Therapy to Dual Anti-HER2 Targeted Therapy Beneficial in HER2+/HR+ Metastatic Breast Cancer

The current first-line standard of care for HER2+ metastatic breast cancer is dual anti-HER2 targeted therapy plus chemotherapy, with consideration for maintenance treatment with anti-HER2 therapy and ET for patients with HR+ and HER2+ metastatic breast cancer. The potential benefit of adding ET for patients with HR+/HER2+ metastatic breast cancer has been reported previously, but data overall are limited. This study analyzed the real-world data of 147 patients with HR+/HER2+ metastatic breast cancer from a prospective registry and who received first-line chemotherapy plus trastuzumab and pertuzumab with (n = 91) or without (n = 56) concurrent ET. The findings showed that adding ET resulted in a significant improvement in 5-year progression-free survival (PFS) (hazard ratio 0.59; P = .031) and overall survival (hazard ratio 0.52; P = .018) compared with not adding ET. No new safety concerns were identified when combining HER2+ targeted therapy and ET. While this is a small retrospective analysis, results are certainly encouraging and support the addition of ET to dual anti-HER2 therapy as maintenance therapy post chemotherapy in this subset of patients.

High PD-L2 Levels May Predict Worse Clinical Outcomes in ER+ Breast Cancer

Programmed cell death-1 ligand-2 (PD-L2) is a second ligand for programmed cell death-1 (PD-1) and inhibits T-cell activation. A retrospective study including patients with estrogen receptor–positive (ER+) breast cancer looked at PD-L2 protein levels in cancer cells and stromal cells of therapy-naive, locoregional ER+ breast cancer in the main study cohort (n = 684) and in an independent validation cohort (n = 273), and correlated findings with PFS. High levels of PD-L2 protein were present in up to one third (33%) of ER+ tumors and were associated with shorter PFS in the entire cohort of patients with ER+ breast cancer (hazard ratio 2.0; P < .001) and in the subgroup of patients treated with adjuvant chemotherapy (hazard ratio 3.4; P < .001). A multivariable analysis showed that high levels of PD-L2 were an independent prognostic marker in ER+ patients. These findings suggest that high PD-L2 is associated with unfavorable prognosis in ER+ breast cancer and may be a potential biomarker of response to checkpoint inhibitors.

Additional References

1. Francis PA, Pagani O, Fleming GF, et al for the SOFT and TEXT Investigators and the International Breast Cancer Study Group. Tailoring adjuvant endocrine therapy for premenopausal breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2018;379:122-137. Doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1803164
2. Li X, You R, Wang X, et al. Effectiveness of prophylactic surgeries in BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation carriers: A meta-analysis and systematic review. Clin Cancer Res. 2016;22:3971-3981. Doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-15-1465

A post hoc analysis of the ShortHER trial, including 784 patients with hormone-positive (HR+) and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2–positive (HER2+) early breast cancer who received adjuvant trastuzumab plus chemotherapy, showed that adjuvant endocrine therapy (ET) with an aromatase inhibitor (AI) was associated with better outcomes than tamoxifen (TAM) or TAM and AI (TAM-AI) in this population. Disease-free survival rates at 8 years were 86.4% for AI vs 79.7% for the TAM/TAM-AI groups, with an absolute difference of 6.7% (log-rank P = .013). This effect was seen independently of menopausal status in a multivariate analysis.

In the exploratory analysis focusing on the premenopausal patients, the addition of gonadotropin-releasing hormone to ET was associated with a significantly better disease-free survival. This was also noted in an exploratory subgroup analysis of the SOFT trial,^[1] which showed greater benefit from the addition of ovarian suppression to TAM, as compared with TAM alone, among women with HER2+ disease (hazard ratio 0.41; 95% CI 0.22-0.75).

It is important to note that not all patients in the ShortHER trial received the standard-of-care duration of adjuvant trastuzumab; half of them received only 9-week treatment as opposed to the standard 12 months of adjuvant therapy. It is unclear whether this difference in adjuvant therapy could have affected the results, although the disease-free survival multivariate analysis showed no significant effect of the treatment arm on the role of ET. More studies are needed to verify the optimal adjuvant ET for patients with HR+/HER2+ breast cancer, especially in premenopausal patients.

Contralateral Prophylactic Mastectomy Offers No Survival Advantage in Triple-Negative Breast Cancer

There is insufficient evidence that contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM) improves survival in patients with unilateral triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC). A multi-institutional database study, including 796 patients with TNBC, of which 15.5% underwent CPM, showed that CPM did not offer survival benefit to patients with unilateral TNBC. Women who underwent CPM were more likely to be White (P < .001), younger (P < .001), and had had genetic testing performed (P < .001). While there was a borderline improvement in 5-year unadjusted overall survival for patients undergoing CPM compared with no CPM overall (95.1% vs 85.0%; P = .05), no significant improvement was observed for local recurrence-free survival (P = .40) or distant recurrence-free survival (P = .37). Very few (n = 15/673, 2.2%) of the no-CPM patients developed a new primary breast cancer; 3 of the 15 patients were known BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation carriers. Among the genetic mutation carriers, 5-year overall survival was 97.2% for CPM vs 84.1% for no CPM (P = .35). This study did not demonstrate any statistically significant survival difference between CPM compared with no CPM, regardless of the presence of a BRCA mutation, although prior studies have shown improved outcomes for CPM in BRCA mutation carriers.^[2] Larger prospective studies are needed to evaluate the potential benefit of CPM among patients with TNBC, especially patients with BRCA1/2 mutations.

Adding Endocrine Therapy to Dual Anti-HER2 Targeted Therapy Beneficial in HER2+/HR+ Metastatic Breast Cancer

The current first-line standard of care for HER2+ metastatic breast cancer is dual anti-HER2 targeted therapy plus chemotherapy, with consideration for maintenance treatment with anti-HER2 therapy and ET for patients with HR+ and HER2+ metastatic breast cancer. The potential benefit of adding ET for patients with HR+/HER2+ metastatic breast cancer has been reported previously, but data overall are limited. This study analyzed the real-world data of 147 patients with HR+/HER2+ metastatic breast cancer from a prospective registry and who received first-line chemotherapy plus trastuzumab and pertuzumab with (n = 91) or without (n = 56) concurrent ET. The findings showed that adding ET resulted in a significant improvement in 5-year progression-free survival (PFS) (hazard ratio 0.59; P = .031) and overall survival (hazard ratio 0.52; P = .018) compared with not adding ET. No new safety concerns were identified when combining HER2+ targeted therapy and ET. While this is a small retrospective analysis, results are certainly encouraging and support the addition of ET to dual anti-HER2 therapy as maintenance therapy post chemotherapy in this subset of patients.

High PD-L2 Levels May Predict Worse Clinical Outcomes in ER+ Breast Cancer

Programmed cell death-1 ligand-2 (PD-L2) is a second ligand for programmed cell death-1 (PD-1) and inhibits T-cell activation. A retrospective study including patients with estrogen receptor–positive (ER+) breast cancer looked at PD-L2 protein levels in cancer cells and stromal cells of therapy-naive, locoregional ER+ breast cancer in the main study cohort (n = 684) and in an independent validation cohort (n = 273), and correlated findings with PFS. High levels of PD-L2 protein were present in up to one third (33%) of ER+ tumors and were associated with shorter PFS in the entire cohort of patients with ER+ breast cancer (hazard ratio 2.0; P < .001) and in the subgroup of patients treated with adjuvant chemotherapy (hazard ratio 3.4; P < .001). A multivariable analysis showed that high levels of PD-L2 were an independent prognostic marker in ER+ patients. These findings suggest that high PD-L2 is associated with unfavorable prognosis in ER+ breast cancer and may be a potential biomarker of response to checkpoint inhibitors.

Additional References

1. Francis PA, Pagani O, Fleming GF, et al for the SOFT and TEXT Investigators and the International Breast Cancer Study Group. Tailoring adjuvant endocrine therapy for premenopausal breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2018;379:122-137. Doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1803164
2. Li X, You R, Wang X, et al. Effectiveness of prophylactic surgeries in BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation carriers: A meta-analysis and systematic review. Clin Cancer Res. 2016;22:3971-3981. Doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-15-1465

A post hoc analysis of the ShortHER trial, including 784 patients with hormone-positive (HR+) and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2–positive (HER2+) early breast cancer who received adjuvant trastuzumab plus chemotherapy, showed that adjuvant endocrine therapy (ET) with an aromatase inhibitor (AI) was associated with better outcomes than tamoxifen (TAM) or TAM and AI (TAM-AI) in this population. Disease-free survival rates at 8 years were 86.4% for AI vs 79.7% for the TAM/TAM-AI groups, with an absolute difference of 6.7% (log-rank P = .013). This effect was seen independently of menopausal status in a multivariate analysis.

In the exploratory analysis focusing on the premenopausal patients, the addition of gonadotropin-releasing hormone to ET was associated with a significantly better disease-free survival. This was also noted in an exploratory subgroup analysis of the SOFT trial,^[1] which showed greater benefit from the addition of ovarian suppression to TAM, as compared with TAM alone, among women with HER2+ disease (hazard ratio 0.41; 95% CI 0.22-0.75).

It is important to note that not all patients in the ShortHER trial received the standard-of-care duration of adjuvant trastuzumab; half of them received only 9-week treatment as opposed to the standard 12 months of adjuvant therapy. It is unclear whether this difference in adjuvant therapy could have affected the results, although the disease-free survival multivariate analysis showed no significant effect of the treatment arm on the role of ET. More studies are needed to verify the optimal adjuvant ET for patients with HR+/HER2+ breast cancer, especially in premenopausal patients.

Contralateral Prophylactic Mastectomy Offers No Survival Advantage in Triple-Negative Breast Cancer

There is insufficient evidence that contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM) improves survival in patients with unilateral triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC). A multi-institutional database study, including 796 patients with TNBC, of which 15.5% underwent CPM, showed that CPM did not offer survival benefit to patients with unilateral TNBC. Women who underwent CPM were more likely to be White (P < .001), younger (P < .001), and had had genetic testing performed (P < .001). While there was a borderline improvement in 5-year unadjusted overall survival for patients undergoing CPM compared with no CPM overall (95.1% vs 85.0%; P = .05), no significant improvement was observed for local recurrence-free survival (P = .40) or distant recurrence-free survival (P = .37). Very few (n = 15/673, 2.2%) of the no-CPM patients developed a new primary breast cancer; 3 of the 15 patients were known BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation carriers. Among the genetic mutation carriers, 5-year overall survival was 97.2% for CPM vs 84.1% for no CPM (P = .35). This study did not demonstrate any statistically significant survival difference between CPM compared with no CPM, regardless of the presence of a BRCA mutation, although prior studies have shown improved outcomes for CPM in BRCA mutation carriers.^[2] Larger prospective studies are needed to evaluate the potential benefit of CPM among patients with TNBC, especially patients with BRCA1/2 mutations.

Adding Endocrine Therapy to Dual Anti-HER2 Targeted Therapy Beneficial in HER2+/HR+ Metastatic Breast Cancer

The current first-line standard of care for HER2+ metastatic breast cancer is dual anti-HER2 targeted therapy plus chemotherapy, with consideration for maintenance treatment with anti-HER2 therapy and ET for patients with HR+ and HER2+ metastatic breast cancer. The potential benefit of adding ET for patients with HR+/HER2+ metastatic breast cancer has been reported previously, but data overall are limited. This study analyzed the real-world data of 147 patients with HR+/HER2+ metastatic breast cancer from a prospective registry and who received first-line chemotherapy plus trastuzumab and pertuzumab with (n = 91) or without (n = 56) concurrent ET. The findings showed that adding ET resulted in a significant improvement in 5-year progression-free survival (PFS) (hazard ratio 0.59; P = .031) and overall survival (hazard ratio 0.52; P = .018) compared with not adding ET. No new safety concerns were identified when combining HER2+ targeted therapy and ET. While this is a small retrospective analysis, results are certainly encouraging and support the addition of ET to dual anti-HER2 therapy as maintenance therapy post chemotherapy in this subset of patients.

High PD-L2 Levels May Predict Worse Clinical Outcomes in ER+ Breast Cancer

Programmed cell death-1 ligand-2 (PD-L2) is a second ligand for programmed cell death-1 (PD-1) and inhibits T-cell activation. A retrospective study including patients with estrogen receptor–positive (ER+) breast cancer looked at PD-L2 protein levels in cancer cells and stromal cells of therapy-naive, locoregional ER+ breast cancer in the main study cohort (n = 684) and in an independent validation cohort (n = 273), and correlated findings with PFS. High levels of PD-L2 protein were present in up to one third (33%) of ER+ tumors and were associated with shorter PFS in the entire cohort of patients with ER+ breast cancer (hazard ratio 2.0; P < .001) and in the subgroup of patients treated with adjuvant chemotherapy (hazard ratio 3.4; P < .001). A multivariable analysis showed that high levels of PD-L2 were an independent prognostic marker in ER+ patients. These findings suggest that high PD-L2 is associated with unfavorable prognosis in ER+ breast cancer and may be a potential biomarker of response to checkpoint inhibitors.

Additional References

1. Francis PA, Pagani O, Fleming GF, et al for the SOFT and TEXT Investigators and the International Breast Cancer Study Group. Tailoring adjuvant endocrine therapy for premenopausal breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2018;379:122-137. Doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1803164
2. Li X, You R, Wang X, et al. Effectiveness of prophylactic surgeries in BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation carriers: A meta-analysis and systematic review. Clin Cancer Res. 2016;22:3971-3981. Doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-15-1465

Treatment strategies designed to improve or maintain efficacy while minimizing toxicity are desired by both patients and healthcare providers. Neoadjuvant endocrine therapy (NET) represents a therapeutic option for certain patients with luminal breast cancers who may not be candidates for chemotherapy because of comorbidities or preferences to avoid certain treatments. Furthermore, studies have demonstrated tumor or nodal downstaging with NET, as well as the ability of genomic assays to predict clinical response to NET and its association with breast-conserving therapy (BCT).^[4,5] The phase 2 ACOSOG Z1031 trial reported outcomes among 509 women with clinical stage II or III estrogen receptor (ER)–positive breast cancer who received an aromatase inhibitor (AI; exemestane, letrozole, or anastrozole) for 16-18 weeks before surgery. A total of 67.2% of patients had BCT, and of the patients thought to require mastectomy or have inoperable breast cancer at presentation (N = 226), 50.4% were able to have BCT. The pCR rate was low (1%); however, the 5-year cumulative incidence rate for local-regional recurrence was estimated at 1.53% (Hunt et al). This study supports the consideration of NET for select patients, demonstrating a favorable impact on surgery and local-regional recurrence rates. It is also thought-provoking in terms of identifying predictors of response to NET and other novel therapies that can be combined with endocrine therapy in the neoadjuvant space.

The CLEOPATRA trial has established a regimen of docetaxel/trastuzumab/pertuzumab as standard first-line treatment for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive metastatic breast cancer with superior progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) compared with a docetaxel/trastuzumab regimen. Crosstalk between HER2 and ER signaling pathways has been implicated in resistance to anti-HER2 and endocrine therapies. Real-world data have shown that the addition of endocrine therapy to first-line dual anti-HER2-targeted therapy post chemotherapy in HER+/hormone receptor positive (HR+) metastatic breast cancer was associated with benefits in PFS and OS.^[6] The phase 2 PERTAIN trial randomly assigned 258 patients with HER2+/HR+ metastatic breast cancer to receive pertuzumab/trastuzumab plus an AI or trastuzumab/AI, with induction chemotherapy given at the investigator’s discretion. At a median follow-up of > 6 years, the PFS benefit seen with the addition of pertuzumab was maintained (20.6 vs 15.8 months in the trastuzumab/AI arm; stratified hazard ratio 0.67; P = .006). Although there was not a statistically significant difference in median OS (60.2 months in the pertuzumab/trastuzumab/AI arm vs 57.2 months in the trastuzumab/AI arm; stratified hazard ratio 1.05; P = .78), the effect of pertuzumab was potentially amplified in those without induction chemotherapy (26.6 vs 12.5 months) (Arpino et al). These data provide further support for the addition of pertuzumab to trastuzumab in the first-line treatment setting for HER2+ metastatic breast cancer and suggest that some patients may benefit from dual HER2 blockade with endocrine therapy (without chemotherapy).

Additional References

1. Schmid P, Cortes J, Pusztai L, et al, for the KEYNOTE-522 Investigators. Pembrolizumab for early triple-negative breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2020;382:810-821. Doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1910549
2. Schmid P, Cortes J, Dent R, et al, for the KEYNOTE-522 Investigators. Event-free survival with pembrolizumab in early triple-negative breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2022;386:556-567. Doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa2112651
3. Loibl S, Untch M, Burchardi N, et al. A randomised phase II study investigating durvalumab in addition to an anthracycline taxane-based neoadjuvant therapy in early triple-negative breast cancer: Clinical results and biomarker analysis of GeparNuevo study. Ann Oncol. 2019;30:1279-1288. Doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdz158
4. Cao L, Sugumar K, Keller E, et al. Neoadjuvant endocrine therapy as an alternative to neoadjuvant chemotherapy among hormone receptor-positive breast cancer patients: Pathologic and surgical outcomes. Ann Surg Oncol. 2021;28:5730-5741. Doi: 10.1245/s10434-021-10459-3
5. Iwata H, Masuda N, Yamamoto Y, et al. Validation of the 21-gene test as a predictor of clinical response to neoadjuvant hormonal therapy for ER+, HER2-negative breast cancer: The TransNEOS study. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2019;173:123-133. Doi: 10.1007/s10549-018-4964-y
6. Loft M, Lok SW, De Boer R, et al. Addition of endocrine therapy to dual anti-HER2 targeted therapy in initial treatment of HER2+/HR+ metastatic breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2023;198:67-74. Doi: 10.1007/s10549-022-06856-1

Treatment strategies designed to improve or maintain efficacy while minimizing toxicity are desired by both patients and healthcare providers. Neoadjuvant endocrine therapy (NET) represents a therapeutic option for certain patients with luminal breast cancers who may not be candidates for chemotherapy because of comorbidities or preferences to avoid certain treatments. Furthermore, studies have demonstrated tumor or nodal downstaging with NET, as well as the ability of genomic assays to predict clinical response to NET and its association with breast-conserving therapy (BCT).^[4,5] The phase 2 ACOSOG Z1031 trial reported outcomes among 509 women with clinical stage II or III estrogen receptor (ER)–positive breast cancer who received an aromatase inhibitor (AI; exemestane, letrozole, or anastrozole) for 16-18 weeks before surgery. A total of 67.2% of patients had BCT, and of the patients thought to require mastectomy or have inoperable breast cancer at presentation (N = 226), 50.4% were able to have BCT. The pCR rate was low (1%); however, the 5-year cumulative incidence rate for local-regional recurrence was estimated at 1.53% (Hunt et al). This study supports the consideration of NET for select patients, demonstrating a favorable impact on surgery and local-regional recurrence rates. It is also thought-provoking in terms of identifying predictors of response to NET and other novel therapies that can be combined with endocrine therapy in the neoadjuvant space.

The CLEOPATRA trial has established a regimen of docetaxel/trastuzumab/pertuzumab as standard first-line treatment for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive metastatic breast cancer with superior progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) compared with a docetaxel/trastuzumab regimen. Crosstalk between HER2 and ER signaling pathways has been implicated in resistance to anti-HER2 and endocrine therapies. Real-world data have shown that the addition of endocrine therapy to first-line dual anti-HER2-targeted therapy post chemotherapy in HER+/hormone receptor positive (HR+) metastatic breast cancer was associated with benefits in PFS and OS.^[6] The phase 2 PERTAIN trial randomly assigned 258 patients with HER2+/HR+ metastatic breast cancer to receive pertuzumab/trastuzumab plus an AI or trastuzumab/AI, with induction chemotherapy given at the investigator’s discretion. At a median follow-up of > 6 years, the PFS benefit seen with the addition of pertuzumab was maintained (20.6 vs 15.8 months in the trastuzumab/AI arm; stratified hazard ratio 0.67; P = .006). Although there was not a statistically significant difference in median OS (60.2 months in the pertuzumab/trastuzumab/AI arm vs 57.2 months in the trastuzumab/AI arm; stratified hazard ratio 1.05; P = .78), the effect of pertuzumab was potentially amplified in those without induction chemotherapy (26.6 vs 12.5 months) (Arpino et al). These data provide further support for the addition of pertuzumab to trastuzumab in the first-line treatment setting for HER2+ metastatic breast cancer and suggest that some patients may benefit from dual HER2 blockade with endocrine therapy (without chemotherapy).

Additional References

1. Schmid P, Cortes J, Pusztai L, et al, for the KEYNOTE-522 Investigators. Pembrolizumab for early triple-negative breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2020;382:810-821. Doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1910549
2. Schmid P, Cortes J, Dent R, et al, for the KEYNOTE-522 Investigators. Event-free survival with pembrolizumab in early triple-negative breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2022;386:556-567. Doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa2112651
3. Loibl S, Untch M, Burchardi N, et al. A randomised phase II study investigating durvalumab in addition to an anthracycline taxane-based neoadjuvant therapy in early triple-negative breast cancer: Clinical results and biomarker analysis of GeparNuevo study. Ann Oncol. 2019;30:1279-1288. Doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdz158
4. Cao L, Sugumar K, Keller E, et al. Neoadjuvant endocrine therapy as an alternative to neoadjuvant chemotherapy among hormone receptor-positive breast cancer patients: Pathologic and surgical outcomes. Ann Surg Oncol. 2021;28:5730-5741. Doi: 10.1245/s10434-021-10459-3
5. Iwata H, Masuda N, Yamamoto Y, et al. Validation of the 21-gene test as a predictor of clinical response to neoadjuvant hormonal therapy for ER+, HER2-negative breast cancer: The TransNEOS study. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2019;173:123-133. Doi: 10.1007/s10549-018-4964-y
6. Loft M, Lok SW, De Boer R, et al. Addition of endocrine therapy to dual anti-HER2 targeted therapy in initial treatment of HER2+/HR+ metastatic breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2023;198:67-74. Doi: 10.1007/s10549-022-06856-1

Treatment strategies designed to improve or maintain efficacy while minimizing toxicity are desired by both patients and healthcare providers. Neoadjuvant endocrine therapy (NET) represents a therapeutic option for certain patients with luminal breast cancers who may not be candidates for chemotherapy because of comorbidities or preferences to avoid certain treatments. Furthermore, studies have demonstrated tumor or nodal downstaging with NET, as well as the ability of genomic assays to predict clinical response to NET and its association with breast-conserving therapy (BCT).^[4,5] The phase 2 ACOSOG Z1031 trial reported outcomes among 509 women with clinical stage II or III estrogen receptor (ER)–positive breast cancer who received an aromatase inhibitor (AI; exemestane, letrozole, or anastrozole) for 16-18 weeks before surgery. A total of 67.2% of patients had BCT, and of the patients thought to require mastectomy or have inoperable breast cancer at presentation (N = 226), 50.4% were able to have BCT. The pCR rate was low (1%); however, the 5-year cumulative incidence rate for local-regional recurrence was estimated at 1.53% (Hunt et al). This study supports the consideration of NET for select patients, demonstrating a favorable impact on surgery and local-regional recurrence rates. It is also thought-provoking in terms of identifying predictors of response to NET and other novel therapies that can be combined with endocrine therapy in the neoadjuvant space.

The CLEOPATRA trial has established a regimen of docetaxel/trastuzumab/pertuzumab as standard first-line treatment for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive metastatic breast cancer with superior progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) compared with a docetaxel/trastuzumab regimen. Crosstalk between HER2 and ER signaling pathways has been implicated in resistance to anti-HER2 and endocrine therapies. Real-world data have shown that the addition of endocrine therapy to first-line dual anti-HER2-targeted therapy post chemotherapy in HER+/hormone receptor positive (HR+) metastatic breast cancer was associated with benefits in PFS and OS.^[6] The phase 2 PERTAIN trial randomly assigned 258 patients with HER2+/HR+ metastatic breast cancer to receive pertuzumab/trastuzumab plus an AI or trastuzumab/AI, with induction chemotherapy given at the investigator’s discretion. At a median follow-up of > 6 years, the PFS benefit seen with the addition of pertuzumab was maintained (20.6 vs 15.8 months in the trastuzumab/AI arm; stratified hazard ratio 0.67; P = .006). Although there was not a statistically significant difference in median OS (60.2 months in the pertuzumab/trastuzumab/AI arm vs 57.2 months in the trastuzumab/AI arm; stratified hazard ratio 1.05; P = .78), the effect of pertuzumab was potentially amplified in those without induction chemotherapy (26.6 vs 12.5 months) (Arpino et al). These data provide further support for the addition of pertuzumab to trastuzumab in the first-line treatment setting for HER2+ metastatic breast cancer and suggest that some patients may benefit from dual HER2 blockade with endocrine therapy (without chemotherapy).

Additional References

1. Schmid P, Cortes J, Pusztai L, et al, for the KEYNOTE-522 Investigators. Pembrolizumab for early triple-negative breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2020;382:810-821. Doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1910549
2. Schmid P, Cortes J, Dent R, et al, for the KEYNOTE-522 Investigators. Event-free survival with pembrolizumab in early triple-negative breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2022;386:556-567. Doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa2112651
3. Loibl S, Untch M, Burchardi N, et al. A randomised phase II study investigating durvalumab in addition to an anthracycline taxane-based neoadjuvant therapy in early triple-negative breast cancer: Clinical results and biomarker analysis of GeparNuevo study. Ann Oncol. 2019;30:1279-1288. Doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdz158
4. Cao L, Sugumar K, Keller E, et al. Neoadjuvant endocrine therapy as an alternative to neoadjuvant chemotherapy among hormone receptor-positive breast cancer patients: Pathologic and surgical outcomes. Ann Surg Oncol. 2021;28:5730-5741. Doi: 10.1245/s10434-021-10459-3
5. Iwata H, Masuda N, Yamamoto Y, et al. Validation of the 21-gene test as a predictor of clinical response to neoadjuvant hormonal therapy for ER+, HER2-negative breast cancer: The TransNEOS study. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2019;173:123-133. Doi: 10.1007/s10549-018-4964-y
6. Loft M, Lok SW, De Boer R, et al. Addition of endocrine therapy to dual anti-HER2 targeted therapy in initial treatment of HER2+/HR+ metastatic breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2023;198:67-74. Doi: 10.1007/s10549-022-06856-1

Another study caught my attention this month for having presented a lot of information with no clinically important conclusions. In "Mode of Delivery and Offspring Atopic Dermatitis in a Swedish Nationwide Study," Mubanga and colleagues studied 1.4 million children! With that many participants, they were almost certain to find associations that were statistically significant and clinically irrelevant. They reported that children born by instrumental vaginal delivery, emergency caesarean section, and elective caesarean section were at a higher risk for AD compared with those born by uncomplicated vaginal delivery. They failed to report the absolute magnitude of the associations, which were undoubtedly so small as to be clinically meaningless. Even if the observed association were not due to some hidden bias, the association is not anything that would change treatment in any way.

On the other hand, the small, open label registry analysis, "Experiences From Daily Practice of Upadacitinib Treatment on Atopic Dermatitis With a Focus on Hand Eczema: Results From the BioDay Registry," published by Kamphuis and colleagues, is of much greater value, reporting the effectiveness and safety of upadacitinib on hand eczema. Not surprisingly, there were large improvements in the investigators' assessments of the dermatitis and in patients' quality of life. This small study is informative about efficacy; it is too small, though, to evaluate how frequently rare severe adverse events occur.

The use of probiotics to safely improve skin disease is such an appealing concept, yet it sounds a lot like hocus-pocus to me. Feíto-Rodríguez and colleagues report in the journal Clinical and Experimental Dermatology that a probiotic mixture of Bifidobacterium lactis, Bifidobacterium longum, and Lactobacillus casei improved atopic dermatitis more than did placebo. The findings are not compelling. Differences were small. Rates of being clear or almost clear weren't reported. We can get atopic dermatitis to clear up in a few days with topical triamcinolone (if we can get patients to use it); so far, the effects of probiotics on the presumed gut-immune system-skin axis seem very much underwhelming.

Another study caught my attention this month for having presented a lot of information with no clinically important conclusions. In "Mode of Delivery and Offspring Atopic Dermatitis in a Swedish Nationwide Study," Mubanga and colleagues studied 1.4 million children! With that many participants, they were almost certain to find associations that were statistically significant and clinically irrelevant. They reported that children born by instrumental vaginal delivery, emergency caesarean section, and elective caesarean section were at a higher risk for AD compared with those born by uncomplicated vaginal delivery. They failed to report the absolute magnitude of the associations, which were undoubtedly so small as to be clinically meaningless. Even if the observed association were not due to some hidden bias, the association is not anything that would change treatment in any way.

On the other hand, the small, open label registry analysis, "Experiences From Daily Practice of Upadacitinib Treatment on Atopic Dermatitis With a Focus on Hand Eczema: Results From the BioDay Registry," published by Kamphuis and colleagues, is of much greater value, reporting the effectiveness and safety of upadacitinib on hand eczema. Not surprisingly, there were large improvements in the investigators' assessments of the dermatitis and in patients' quality of life. This small study is informative about efficacy; it is too small, though, to evaluate how frequently rare severe adverse events occur.

The use of probiotics to safely improve skin disease is such an appealing concept, yet it sounds a lot like hocus-pocus to me. Feíto-Rodríguez and colleagues report in the journal Clinical and Experimental Dermatology that a probiotic mixture of Bifidobacterium lactis, Bifidobacterium longum, and Lactobacillus casei improved atopic dermatitis more than did placebo. The findings are not compelling. Differences were small. Rates of being clear or almost clear weren't reported. We can get atopic dermatitis to clear up in a few days with topical triamcinolone (if we can get patients to use it); so far, the effects of probiotics on the presumed gut-immune system-skin axis seem very much underwhelming.

Another study caught my attention this month for having presented a lot of information with no clinically important conclusions. In "Mode of Delivery and Offspring Atopic Dermatitis in a Swedish Nationwide Study," Mubanga and colleagues studied 1.4 million children! With that many participants, they were almost certain to find associations that were statistically significant and clinically irrelevant. They reported that children born by instrumental vaginal delivery, emergency caesarean section, and elective caesarean section were at a higher risk for AD compared with those born by uncomplicated vaginal delivery. They failed to report the absolute magnitude of the associations, which were undoubtedly so small as to be clinically meaningless. Even if the observed association were not due to some hidden bias, the association is not anything that would change treatment in any way.

On the other hand, the small, open label registry analysis, "Experiences From Daily Practice of Upadacitinib Treatment on Atopic Dermatitis With a Focus on Hand Eczema: Results From the BioDay Registry," published by Kamphuis and colleagues, is of much greater value, reporting the effectiveness and safety of upadacitinib on hand eczema. Not surprisingly, there were large improvements in the investigators' assessments of the dermatitis and in patients' quality of life. This small study is informative about efficacy; it is too small, though, to evaluate how frequently rare severe adverse events occur.

The use of probiotics to safely improve skin disease is such an appealing concept, yet it sounds a lot like hocus-pocus to me. Feíto-Rodríguez and colleagues report in the journal Clinical and Experimental Dermatology that a probiotic mixture of Bifidobacterium lactis, Bifidobacterium longum, and Lactobacillus casei improved atopic dermatitis more than did placebo. The findings are not compelling. Differences were small. Rates of being clear or almost clear weren't reported. We can get atopic dermatitis to clear up in a few days with topical triamcinolone (if we can get patients to use it); so far, the effects of probiotics on the presumed gut-immune system-skin axis seem very much underwhelming.

With regard to advanced targeted therapies, there is concern about the side effects of Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors, especially in patients with comorbidities. To address safety concerns with upadacitinib, a selective JAK1 inhibitor, Burmester and colleagues conducted an integrated safety analysis of 12 phase 3 trials that included 6991 patients (PsA n = 907; rheumatoid arthritis [RA] n = 3209; ankylosing spondylitis n = 182; and atopic dermatitis n = 2693) who received upadacitinib (15 or 30 mg once daily). Some trials included active comparators; therefore, safety among 1008 patients (RA n = 579; PsA n = 429) who received 40-mg adalimumab every other week and 314 patients with RA who received methotrexate were compared with those treated with upadacitinib. Overall, patients with PsA receiving 15-mg upadacitinib once daily had acceptable rates of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAE; 244.8/100 patient-years [PY]), serious TEAE (11.1/100 PY), TEAE leading to discontinuation (5.4/100 PY), and death (0.8/100 PY). Patients with PsA treated with upadacitinib had higher rates of herpes zoster, nonmelanoma skin cancer, and elevations in creatine phosphokinase when compared with patients treated with adalimumab. Although these results are reassuring to clinicians treating PsA, continued surveillance regarding the risks for venous thrombosis, cardiovascular events, and cancer are required.

In a post hoc analysis of 10 clinical trials that included patients with PsA (n = 783) and psoriasis (n = 3663) who received tofacitinib, Kristensen and colleagues reported that the risk for major adverse cardiac events was higher among patients with PsA and a high 10-year atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) risk vs patients with a low ASCVD risk. The incidence of cancer was highest in patients with PsA and an intermediate 10-year ASCVD risk. Although these studies are reassuring, the assessment and risk stratification of adverse events with JAK inhibitors and therapies in PsA will require longer-term comparative clinical trials as well as an evaluation of observational data from disease registries.

Comorbidities also have an impact on treatment persistence in PsA. Tillett and colleagues conducted a retrospective study including 9057 patients with plaque psoriasis alone or with concomitant PsA who received either ustekinumab or conventional systemic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs. They demonstrated that among patients receiving ustekinumab, those with concomitant PsA had a higher comorbidity burden, including diabetes, hypertension, and obesity, and a shorter time to ustekinumab discontinuation when compared with those with psoriasis alone. Secondary failure of advanced therapies is increasingly noted in the management of psoriatic disease. Female sex, depression, previous exposure to biologics, and the presence of comorbidities are important risk factors. Comprehensive management of psoriatic disease should include appropriate management of comorbidities for better long-term treatment persistence and outcomes.

With regard to advanced targeted therapies, there is concern about the side effects of Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors, especially in patients with comorbidities. To address safety concerns with upadacitinib, a selective JAK1 inhibitor, Burmester and colleagues conducted an integrated safety analysis of 12 phase 3 trials that included 6991 patients (PsA n = 907; rheumatoid arthritis [RA] n = 3209; ankylosing spondylitis n = 182; and atopic dermatitis n = 2693) who received upadacitinib (15 or 30 mg once daily). Some trials included active comparators; therefore, safety among 1008 patients (RA n = 579; PsA n = 429) who received 40-mg adalimumab every other week and 314 patients with RA who received methotrexate were compared with those treated with upadacitinib. Overall, patients with PsA receiving 15-mg upadacitinib once daily had acceptable rates of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAE; 244.8/100 patient-years [PY]), serious TEAE (11.1/100 PY), TEAE leading to discontinuation (5.4/100 PY), and death (0.8/100 PY). Patients with PsA treated with upadacitinib had higher rates of herpes zoster, nonmelanoma skin cancer, and elevations in creatine phosphokinase when compared with patients treated with adalimumab. Although these results are reassuring to clinicians treating PsA, continued surveillance regarding the risks for venous thrombosis, cardiovascular events, and cancer are required.

In a post hoc analysis of 10 clinical trials that included patients with PsA (n = 783) and psoriasis (n = 3663) who received tofacitinib, Kristensen and colleagues reported that the risk for major adverse cardiac events was higher among patients with PsA and a high 10-year atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) risk vs patients with a low ASCVD risk. The incidence of cancer was highest in patients with PsA and an intermediate 10-year ASCVD risk. Although these studies are reassuring, the assessment and risk stratification of adverse events with JAK inhibitors and therapies in PsA will require longer-term comparative clinical trials as well as an evaluation of observational data from disease registries.

Comorbidities also have an impact on treatment persistence in PsA. Tillett and colleagues conducted a retrospective study including 9057 patients with plaque psoriasis alone or with concomitant PsA who received either ustekinumab or conventional systemic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs. They demonstrated that among patients receiving ustekinumab, those with concomitant PsA had a higher comorbidity burden, including diabetes, hypertension, and obesity, and a shorter time to ustekinumab discontinuation when compared with those with psoriasis alone. Secondary failure of advanced therapies is increasingly noted in the management of psoriatic disease. Female sex, depression, previous exposure to biologics, and the presence of comorbidities are important risk factors. Comprehensive management of psoriatic disease should include appropriate management of comorbidities for better long-term treatment persistence and outcomes.

With regard to advanced targeted therapies, there is concern about the side effects of Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors, especially in patients with comorbidities. To address safety concerns with upadacitinib, a selective JAK1 inhibitor, Burmester and colleagues conducted an integrated safety analysis of 12 phase 3 trials that included 6991 patients (PsA n = 907; rheumatoid arthritis [RA] n = 3209; ankylosing spondylitis n = 182; and atopic dermatitis n = 2693) who received upadacitinib (15 or 30 mg once daily). Some trials included active comparators; therefore, safety among 1008 patients (RA n = 579; PsA n = 429) who received 40-mg adalimumab every other week and 314 patients with RA who received methotrexate were compared with those treated with upadacitinib. Overall, patients with PsA receiving 15-mg upadacitinib once daily had acceptable rates of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAE; 244.8/100 patient-years [PY]), serious TEAE (11.1/100 PY), TEAE leading to discontinuation (5.4/100 PY), and death (0.8/100 PY). Patients with PsA treated with upadacitinib had higher rates of herpes zoster, nonmelanoma skin cancer, and elevations in creatine phosphokinase when compared with patients treated with adalimumab. Although these results are reassuring to clinicians treating PsA, continued surveillance regarding the risks for venous thrombosis, cardiovascular events, and cancer are required.

In a post hoc analysis of 10 clinical trials that included patients with PsA (n = 783) and psoriasis (n = 3663) who received tofacitinib, Kristensen and colleagues reported that the risk for major adverse cardiac events was higher among patients with PsA and a high 10-year atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) risk vs patients with a low ASCVD risk. The incidence of cancer was highest in patients with PsA and an intermediate 10-year ASCVD risk. Although these studies are reassuring, the assessment and risk stratification of adverse events with JAK inhibitors and therapies in PsA will require longer-term comparative clinical trials as well as an evaluation of observational data from disease registries.

Comorbidities also have an impact on treatment persistence in PsA. Tillett and colleagues conducted a retrospective study including 9057 patients with plaque psoriasis alone or with concomitant PsA who received either ustekinumab or conventional systemic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs. They demonstrated that among patients receiving ustekinumab, those with concomitant PsA had a higher comorbidity burden, including diabetes, hypertension, and obesity, and a shorter time to ustekinumab discontinuation when compared with those with psoriasis alone. Secondary failure of advanced therapies is increasingly noted in the management of psoriatic disease. Female sex, depression, previous exposure to biologics, and the presence of comorbidities are important risk factors. Comprehensive management of psoriatic disease should include appropriate management of comorbidities for better long-term treatment persistence and outcomes.

Key clinical point: Diagnosis to treatment interval (DTI; time in days from the diagnosis date to therapy initiation) is strongly associated with poor survival outcomes in patients with newly diagnosed mantle cell lymphoma (MCL).

Major finding: Patients with a short vs long DTI had significantly shorter median overall (7.8 vs 11.8 years) and progression-free (2.5 vs 4.8 years) survival (both log-rank P < .0001). A short vs long DTI was associated with significantly poorer overall (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 1.57) and progression-free (aHR 1.50) survival (both P < .001).

Study details: This pooled analysis of three large datasets included 1097 patients with newly diagnosed MCL and available DTI data, of which 300 had a short (0-14 days) and 797 had a long (15-60 days) DTI.

Disclosures: One of the datasets, Molecular Epidemiology Resource, was supported by grants from the US National Cancer Institute. Some authors reported ties with various organizations.

Source: Epperla N et al. Impact of diagnosis to treatment interval in patients with newly diagnosed mantle cell lymphoma. Blood Adv. 2022 (Dec 14). Doi: 10.1182/bloodadvances.2022009225

Key clinical point: Diagnosis to treatment interval (DTI; time in days from the diagnosis date to therapy initiation) is strongly associated with poor survival outcomes in patients with newly diagnosed mantle cell lymphoma (MCL).

Major finding: Patients with a short vs long DTI had significantly shorter median overall (7.8 vs 11.8 years) and progression-free (2.5 vs 4.8 years) survival (both log-rank P < .0001). A short vs long DTI was associated with significantly poorer overall (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 1.57) and progression-free (aHR 1.50) survival (both P < .001).

Study details: This pooled analysis of three large datasets included 1097 patients with newly diagnosed MCL and available DTI data, of which 300 had a short (0-14 days) and 797 had a long (15-60 days) DTI.

Disclosures: One of the datasets, Molecular Epidemiology Resource, was supported by grants from the US National Cancer Institute. Some authors reported ties with various organizations.

Source: Epperla N et al. Impact of diagnosis to treatment interval in patients with newly diagnosed mantle cell lymphoma. Blood Adv. 2022 (Dec 14). Doi: 10.1182/bloodadvances.2022009225

Key clinical point: Diagnosis to treatment interval (DTI; time in days from the diagnosis date to therapy initiation) is strongly associated with poor survival outcomes in patients with newly diagnosed mantle cell lymphoma (MCL).

Major finding: Patients with a short vs long DTI had significantly shorter median overall (7.8 vs 11.8 years) and progression-free (2.5 vs 4.8 years) survival (both log-rank P < .0001). A short vs long DTI was associated with significantly poorer overall (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 1.57) and progression-free (aHR 1.50) survival (both P < .001).

Study details: This pooled analysis of three large datasets included 1097 patients with newly diagnosed MCL and available DTI data, of which 300 had a short (0-14 days) and 797 had a long (15-60 days) DTI.

Disclosures: One of the datasets, Molecular Epidemiology Resource, was supported by grants from the US National Cancer Institute. Some authors reported ties with various organizations.

Source: Epperla N et al. Impact of diagnosis to treatment interval in patients with newly diagnosed mantle cell lymphoma. Blood Adv. 2022 (Dec 14). Doi: 10.1182/bloodadvances.2022009225

Key clinical point: Low natural killer (NK) cell counts (NKCC; <100 cells/μL) at diagnosis predict poor outcomes in patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), and lenalidomide maintenance therapy has no impact on this unfavorable prognosis.

Major finding: Low baseline NKCC were associated with shorter progression-free (hazard ratio [HR] 2.2) and overall (HR 2.8) survival (both P < .001), independently of age-adjusted International Prognostic Index scores, and with a higher risk for progression or relapse (P = .0025). Lenalidomide maintenance therapy did not affect the prognostic value of low NKCC at diagnosis or random assignment (P = .6349).

Study details: This prospective ancillary study of the REMARC trial included 335 elderly patients with DLBCL treated with rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone who underwent flow cytometric peripheral blood lymphocyte analysis at diagnosis, at random assignment to the lenalidomide or placebo arm, or at 6 months after random assignment.

Disclosures: This study was funded by Celgene. Some authors reported ties with various organizations, including Celgene.

Source: Beldi-Ferchiou A et al. Lenalidomide maintenance fails to overcome the unfavourable prognosis of low NK-cell counts in rituximab–chemotherapy responsive elderly DLBCL patients: A LYSA group study. Br J Haematol. 2023 (Feb 6). Doi: 10.1111/bjh.18642

Key clinical point: Low natural killer (NK) cell counts (NKCC; <100 cells/μL) at diagnosis predict poor outcomes in patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), and lenalidomide maintenance therapy has no impact on this unfavorable prognosis.

Major finding: Low baseline NKCC were associated with shorter progression-free (hazard ratio [HR] 2.2) and overall (HR 2.8) survival (both P < .001), independently of age-adjusted International Prognostic Index scores, and with a higher risk for progression or relapse (P = .0025). Lenalidomide maintenance therapy did not affect the prognostic value of low NKCC at diagnosis or random assignment (P = .6349).

Study details: This prospective ancillary study of the REMARC trial included 335 elderly patients with DLBCL treated with rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone who underwent flow cytometric peripheral blood lymphocyte analysis at diagnosis, at random assignment to the lenalidomide or placebo arm, or at 6 months after random assignment.

Disclosures: This study was funded by Celgene. Some authors reported ties with various organizations, including Celgene.

Source: Beldi-Ferchiou A et al. Lenalidomide maintenance fails to overcome the unfavourable prognosis of low NK-cell counts in rituximab–chemotherapy responsive elderly DLBCL patients: A LYSA group study. Br J Haematol. 2023 (Feb 6). Doi: 10.1111/bjh.18642

Key clinical point: Low natural killer (NK) cell counts (NKCC; <100 cells/μL) at diagnosis predict poor outcomes in patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), and lenalidomide maintenance therapy has no impact on this unfavorable prognosis.

Major finding: Low baseline NKCC were associated with shorter progression-free (hazard ratio [HR] 2.2) and overall (HR 2.8) survival (both P < .001), independently of age-adjusted International Prognostic Index scores, and with a higher risk for progression or relapse (P = .0025). Lenalidomide maintenance therapy did not affect the prognostic value of low NKCC at diagnosis or random assignment (P = .6349).

Study details: This prospective ancillary study of the REMARC trial included 335 elderly patients with DLBCL treated with rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone who underwent flow cytometric peripheral blood lymphocyte analysis at diagnosis, at random assignment to the lenalidomide or placebo arm, or at 6 months after random assignment.

Disclosures: This study was funded by Celgene. Some authors reported ties with various organizations, including Celgene.

Source: Beldi-Ferchiou A et al. Lenalidomide maintenance fails to overcome the unfavourable prognosis of low NK-cell counts in rituximab–chemotherapy responsive elderly DLBCL patients: A LYSA group study. Br J Haematol. 2023 (Feb 6). Doi: 10.1111/bjh.18642

Key clinical point: Ibrutinib continued to benefit most treatment-naive patients (58%) with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) or small lymphocytic lymphoma (SLL) in the RESONATE-2 study for ≥5 years, irrespective of baseline characteristics.

Major finding: At a median follow-up of 89.2 months, the median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were not reached; the 7-year PFS and OS rates were 82% and 94%, respectively. Complete response rates increased from 10% at 1 year to 42% at 5 years and 46% at 7 years. No new safety signals were observed.

Study details: This study analyzed the data of 79 treatment-naive patients aged ≥65 years with CLL or SLL who were randomly assigned to receive ibrutinib in the phase 3 RESONATE-2 trial and its extension study and had continued the treatment for ≥5 years.

Disclosures: This study was sponsored by Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company. Some authors reported ties with various organizations, including Pharmacyclics. Two authors declared being employees of, holding stocks in, or having other ownership interests in Pharmacyclics/AbbVie.

Source: Woyach JA et al. Characteristics and clinical outcomes of patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia/small lymphocytic lymphoma receiving ibrutinib for ≥5 years in the RESONATE-2 study. Cancers (Basel). 2023;15(2):507 (Jan 13). Doi: 10.3390/cancers15020507

Key clinical point: Ibrutinib continued to benefit most treatment-naive patients (58%) with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) or small lymphocytic lymphoma (SLL) in the RESONATE-2 study for ≥5 years, irrespective of baseline characteristics.

Major finding: At a median follow-up of 89.2 months, the median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were not reached; the 7-year PFS and OS rates were 82% and 94%, respectively. Complete response rates increased from 10% at 1 year to 42% at 5 years and 46% at 7 years. No new safety signals were observed.

Study details: This study analyzed the data of 79 treatment-naive patients aged ≥65 years with CLL or SLL who were randomly assigned to receive ibrutinib in the phase 3 RESONATE-2 trial and its extension study and had continued the treatment for ≥5 years.

Disclosures: This study was sponsored by Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company. Some authors reported ties with various organizations, including Pharmacyclics. Two authors declared being employees of, holding stocks in, or having other ownership interests in Pharmacyclics/AbbVie.

Source: Woyach JA et al. Characteristics and clinical outcomes of patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia/small lymphocytic lymphoma receiving ibrutinib for ≥5 years in the RESONATE-2 study. Cancers (Basel). 2023;15(2):507 (Jan 13). Doi: 10.3390/cancers15020507

Key clinical point: Ibrutinib continued to benefit most treatment-naive patients (58%) with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) or small lymphocytic lymphoma (SLL) in the RESONATE-2 study for ≥5 years, irrespective of baseline characteristics.

Major finding: At a median follow-up of 89.2 months, the median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were not reached; the 7-year PFS and OS rates were 82% and 94%, respectively. Complete response rates increased from 10% at 1 year to 42% at 5 years and 46% at 7 years. No new safety signals were observed.

Study details: This study analyzed the data of 79 treatment-naive patients aged ≥65 years with CLL or SLL who were randomly assigned to receive ibrutinib in the phase 3 RESONATE-2 trial and its extension study and had continued the treatment for ≥5 years.

Disclosures: This study was sponsored by Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company. Some authors reported ties with various organizations, including Pharmacyclics. Two authors declared being employees of, holding stocks in, or having other ownership interests in Pharmacyclics/AbbVie.

Source: Woyach JA et al. Characteristics and clinical outcomes of patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia/small lymphocytic lymphoma receiving ibrutinib for ≥5 years in the RESONATE-2 study. Cancers (Basel). 2023;15(2):507 (Jan 13). Doi: 10.3390/cancers15020507

Key clinical point: Autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) leads to high durable remission rates in patients with relapsed follicular lymphoma (FL), with the functional cure rate elucidated by long-term follow-up being >50%.

Major finding: At a median follow-up of 12.5 years, the 12-year time-to-progression (TTP), time-to-next-treatment, progression-free survival, and overall survival rates were 57% (95% CI 49%-65%), 61% (95% CI 52%-69%), 51% (95% CI 42%-59%), and 69% (95% CI 60%-76%), respectively. The TTP curve achieved a plateau at 57% starting 9 years after ASCT with no relapses after this timepoint; 10 patients remained alive without recurrence for ≥20 years after ASCT.

Study details: This retrospective multicenter study included 162 adult patients with relapsed FL who underwent ASCT.

Disclosures: This study did not receive any funding. Some authors declared receiving honoraria from various sources.

Source: Puckrin R et al. Long-term follow-up demonstrates curative potential of autologous stem cell transplantation for relapsed follicular lymphoma. Br J Haematol. 2023 (Jan 10). Doi: 10.1111/bjh.18640

Key clinical point: Autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) leads to high durable remission rates in patients with relapsed follicular lymphoma (FL), with the functional cure rate elucidated by long-term follow-up being >50%.

Major finding: At a median follow-up of 12.5 years, the 12-year time-to-progression (TTP), time-to-next-treatment, progression-free survival, and overall survival rates were 57% (95% CI 49%-65%), 61% (95% CI 52%-69%), 51% (95% CI 42%-59%), and 69% (95% CI 60%-76%), respectively. The TTP curve achieved a plateau at 57% starting 9 years after ASCT with no relapses after this timepoint; 10 patients remained alive without recurrence for ≥20 years after ASCT.

Study details: This retrospective multicenter study included 162 adult patients with relapsed FL who underwent ASCT.

Disclosures: This study did not receive any funding. Some authors declared receiving honoraria from various sources.

Source: Puckrin R et al. Long-term follow-up demonstrates curative potential of autologous stem cell transplantation for relapsed follicular lymphoma. Br J Haematol. 2023 (Jan 10). Doi: 10.1111/bjh.18640

Key clinical point: Autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) leads to high durable remission rates in patients with relapsed follicular lymphoma (FL), with the functional cure rate elucidated by long-term follow-up being >50%.

Major finding: At a median follow-up of 12.5 years, the 12-year time-to-progression (TTP), time-to-next-treatment, progression-free survival, and overall survival rates were 57% (95% CI 49%-65%), 61% (95% CI 52%-69%), 51% (95% CI 42%-59%), and 69% (95% CI 60%-76%), respectively. The TTP curve achieved a plateau at 57% starting 9 years after ASCT with no relapses after this timepoint; 10 patients remained alive without recurrence for ≥20 years after ASCT.

Study details: This retrospective multicenter study included 162 adult patients with relapsed FL who underwent ASCT.

Disclosures: This study did not receive any funding. Some authors declared receiving honoraria from various sources.

Source: Puckrin R et al. Long-term follow-up demonstrates curative potential of autologous stem cell transplantation for relapsed follicular lymphoma. Br J Haematol. 2023 (Jan 10). Doi: 10.1111/bjh.18640

Key clinical point: Second-line lisocabtagene maraleucel (liso-cel) offers better efficacy over standard of care (SOC; platinum-based immunochemotherapy followed by high-dose chemotherapy+autologous stem cell transplantation [ASCT]) in chemotherapy-sensitive patients with relapsed/refractory large B-cell lymphoma (LBCL) along with a favorable safety profile.

Major finding: After a 17.5-month median follow-up, the liso-cel vs SOC group had significantly improved median event-free survival (hazard ratio [HR] 0.356; 95% CI 0.243-0.522), median progression-free survival (HR 0.400; P < .0001), and complete response rate (74% vs 43%; P < .0001), along with low grade 3 cytokine release syndrome (1%) and neurological event (4%) rates.

Study details: This phase 3 study, TRANSFORM, included 184 adult patients with relapsed/refractory LBCL who were eligible for high-dose chemotherapy+ASCT and were randomly assigned to receive liso-cel (100×10⁶ chimeric antigen receptor-positive T cells) or three cycles of SOC.

Disclosures: This study was funded by Celgene, a Bristol-Myers Squibb Company. Some authors reported ties with various organizations, including Celgene. Three authors declared being employees of Celgene.

Source: Abramson JS et al. Lisocabtagene maraleucel as second-line therapy for large B-cell lymphoma: Primary analysis of phase 3 TRANSFORM study. Blood. 2022 (Dec 21). Doi: 10.1182/blood.2022018730

Key clinical point: Second-line lisocabtagene maraleucel (liso-cel) offers better efficacy over standard of care (SOC; platinum-based immunochemotherapy followed by high-dose chemotherapy+autologous stem cell transplantation [ASCT]) in chemotherapy-sensitive patients with relapsed/refractory large B-cell lymphoma (LBCL) along with a favorable safety profile.

Major finding: After a 17.5-month median follow-up, the liso-cel vs SOC group had significantly improved median event-free survival (hazard ratio [HR] 0.356; 95% CI 0.243-0.522), median progression-free survival (HR 0.400; P < .0001), and complete response rate (74% vs 43%; P < .0001), along with low grade 3 cytokine release syndrome (1%) and neurological event (4%) rates.

Study details: This phase 3 study, TRANSFORM, included 184 adult patients with relapsed/refractory LBCL who were eligible for high-dose chemotherapy+ASCT and were randomly assigned to receive liso-cel (100×10⁶ chimeric antigen receptor-positive T cells) or three cycles of SOC.

Disclosures: This study was funded by Celgene, a Bristol-Myers Squibb Company. Some authors reported ties with various organizations, including Celgene. Three authors declared being employees of Celgene.

Source: Abramson JS et al. Lisocabtagene maraleucel as second-line therapy for large B-cell lymphoma: Primary analysis of phase 3 TRANSFORM study. Blood. 2022 (Dec 21). Doi: 10.1182/blood.2022018730

Key clinical point: Second-line lisocabtagene maraleucel (liso-cel) offers better efficacy over standard of care (SOC; platinum-based immunochemotherapy followed by high-dose chemotherapy+autologous stem cell transplantation [ASCT]) in chemotherapy-sensitive patients with relapsed/refractory large B-cell lymphoma (LBCL) along with a favorable safety profile.

Major finding: After a 17.5-month median follow-up, the liso-cel vs SOC group had significantly improved median event-free survival (hazard ratio [HR] 0.356; 95% CI 0.243-0.522), median progression-free survival (HR 0.400; P < .0001), and complete response rate (74% vs 43%; P < .0001), along with low grade 3 cytokine release syndrome (1%) and neurological event (4%) rates.

Study details: This phase 3 study, TRANSFORM, included 184 adult patients with relapsed/refractory LBCL who were eligible for high-dose chemotherapy+ASCT and were randomly assigned to receive liso-cel (100×10⁶ chimeric antigen receptor-positive T cells) or three cycles of SOC.

Disclosures: This study was funded by Celgene, a Bristol-Myers Squibb Company. Some authors reported ties with various organizations, including Celgene. Three authors declared being employees of Celgene.

Source: Abramson JS et al. Lisocabtagene maraleucel as second-line therapy for large B-cell lymphoma: Primary analysis of phase 3 TRANSFORM study. Blood. 2022 (Dec 21). Doi: 10.1182/blood.2022018730