Recent data suggest a suboptimal antibody response to COVID-19 vaccination in patients with hematological malignancies. Neutralizing antibodies (NAbs) against SARS-CoV-2 were evaluated in 276 patients with plasma cell neoplasms after vaccination with either the BNT162b2 or the AZD1222 vaccine, on days 1 (before the first vaccine shot), 22, and 50. Patients with MM (n = 213), SMM (n = 38), and MGUS (n = 25) and 226 healthy controls were enrolled in the study (NCT04743388). Vaccination with either two doses of the BNT162b2 or one dose of the AZD1222 vaccine leads to lower production of NAbs in patients with MM compared with controls both on day 22 and on day 50 (p < 0.001 for all comparisons). Furthermore, MM patients showed an inferior NAb response compared with MGUS on day 22 (p = 0.009) and on day 50 (p = 0.003). Importantly, active treatment with either anti-CD38 monoclonal antibodies (Mabs) or belantamab mafodotin and lymphopenia at the time of vaccination were independent prognostic factors for suboptimal antibody response following vaccination. In conclusion, MM patients have low humoral response following SARS-CoV-2 vaccination, especially under treatment with anti-CD38 or belamaf. This underlines the need for timely vaccination, possibly during a treatment-free period, and for continuous vigilance on infection control measures in non-responders.
The Revised International Staging System (R-ISS) was recently introduced in order to improve risk stratification over that provided by the widely used standard International Staging System. In addition to the parameters of the standard system, the R-ISS incorporates the presence of chromosomal abnormalities detected by interphase fluorescence in situ hybridization [t(4;14), t(14;16) and del17p] and elevated serum lactate dehydrogenase. The R-ISS was formulated on the basis of a large dataset of selected patients who had participated in clinical trials and has not been validated in an independent cohort of unselected patients. Thus, we evaluated the R-ISS in 475 consecutive, unselected patients, treated in a single center. Our patients were older and more often had severe renal dysfunction than those in the original publication on the R-ISS. As regards distribution by group, 18% had R-ISS-1, 64.5% R-ISS-2 and 18% R-ISS-3. According to R-ISS group, the 5-year survival rate was 77%, 53% and 19% for R-ISS-1, -2 and -3, respectively (P<0.001). The R-ISS could identify three groups with distinct outcomes among patients treated with or without autologous stem cell transplantation, among those treated with either bortezomib-based or immunomodulatory drug-based primary therapy and in patients ≤65, 66–75 or >75 years. However, in patients with severe renal dysfunction the distinction between groups was less clear. In conclusion, our data in consecutive, unselected patients, with differences in the characteristics and treatment approaches compared to the original International Myeloma Working Group cohort, verified that R-ISS is a robust tool for risk stratification of newly diagnosed patients with symptomatic myeloma.
Clinical trials with carfilzomib have indicated a low but reproducible incidence of cardiovascular and renal toxicities. Among 60 consecutive myeloma patients treated with carfilzomib-based regimens who were thoroughly evaluated for cardiovascular risk factors, 12% (95% confidence interval, 3.8%-20%) experienced a reversible reduction of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) by ≥20%, an objective measure of cardiac dysfunction. The incidence of LVEF reduction was 5% at 3 months, 8% at 6 months, 10% at 12 months, and 12% at 15 months, whereas the respective carfilzomib discontinuation rate unrelated to toxicity was 17%, 35%, 41%, and 49%. The presence of any previously known cardiovascular disease was associated with an increased incidence of cardiac events (23.5% vs 7%; = .07), but there was no association with the dose of carfilzomib or the duration of infusion. Re-treatment with carfilzomib at lower doses was possible. Carfilzomib was commonly associated with a transient reduction of estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) but also improved renal function in 55% of patients with baseline eGFR<60 mL/min/1.73 m. Further investigation is needed to elucidate the underlying mechanisms of carfilzomib-related cardiorenal toxicity.
High circulating activin-A correlates with advanced features of myeloma, supporting the rationale for the use of activin-A antagonists, such as sotatercept in myeloma. The inability of RD to reduce activin-A reveals RD as a good candidate for combination therapies with activin-A antagonists in myeloma.
A staging system for patients with renal AL amyloidosis, based on eGFR (<50 ml/min/1.73 m ) and proteinuria (≥5 g/day) at diagnosis, as well as criteria for renal progression (≥25% eGFR reduction) and response (≥30% reduction of proteinuria without renal progression) were recently proposed. We validated these criteria in a cohort of 125 patients with renal AL amyloidosis, mostly treated with bortezomib or lenalidomide. We confirmed the prognostic value of the renal staging system but also identified the limitations of renal progression criteria which are based only on eGFR reduction. We identified the ratio of 24h proteinuria to eGFR as a sensitive marker of renal risk which also accounts for changes in both proteinuria and eGFR: 24h proteinuria/eGFR ratio <30 (in mg/ml/min/1.73 m ) was associated with a 2-year progression to dialysis rate of 0% compared to 9% for a ratio of 31-99 and 35% for a ratio ≥100 (P < .001). In landmark analysis, patients who achieved a reduction of this ratio by at least 25% or ≤100 (if initially >100) at 3 months had a 2-year progression to dialysis of 0% vs 24% for patients who either did not reduce to or still had a ratio >100 (P = .001); similar results were obtained by applying the same criteria at 6 months; thus, the evaluation of treatment effect on renal function may be identified early. Furthermore, primary bortezomib-based therapy was more effective than lenalidomide-based therapy, in terms of renal outcomes, especially in patients at intermediate renal risk, but without affecting overall survival.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.