Background: Elotuzumab (elo) is a humanized monoclonal antibody, which has been approved by the FDA for use in combination with lenalidomide (lena) and dexamethasone (dexa) in patients (pts) with relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). Elotuzumab is effective as a single agent, as well as in combination for multiple myeloma treatments, supporting the use of elo in pts with RRMM and newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) pts. Method: After review of literature using database searches was done on 6/27/18 (Pubmed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science and Clinical Trials.gov), 9 prospective and 1 retrospective study with 1128 enrolled pts met the inclusion criteria to date in RRMM and 2 clinical trials including 123 pts in NDMM (Table 1). CMA software v.3 was used for meta-analysis. A random-effect model was applied. Result: Regimens used in RRMM: Based on pooled analysis (95% CI), an overall response rate (ORR) of 66% (54-76.2) was calculated in 685 evaluable pts treated with elo based regimens in RRMM (Figure 1). Most common grade (G) ≥ 3 hematological adverse events (HAE) and non-hematological adverse events (NHAE) based on regimen were calculated using pooled analysis in RRMM pts (Table 2). Anemia was noted in 12.1% ( 7.7-18.6) in 559 pts, while neutropenia in 14.5% (7.5-26.4) out of 591 pts and thrombocytopenia (tcp) in 11.9% (7.9-17.4) in 198 evaluable pts. Diarrhea 5.5% (3.6-8.3), pyrexia 2.4% (1.5-4), peripheral neuropathy (PN) 8.4% (3.8-17.8) were measured in 626, 668 and 143 pts respectively. Elotuzumab as monotherapy: 1 study (n=34) evaluated the efficacy of elo as single agent in RRMM. The median age, time from diagnosis and number of prior therapies were 64.5 years (y) (46-87), 4.4 y (0.9-12.8) and 4.5 y (2-10) respectively. It produced an ORR of 1.4% (0.1-19.1 95% CI) in 34 evaluable pts. Adverse events recorded were pyrexia and fatigue in 17.6% and 8.8% pts respectively. Elotuzumab in two drug regimen: In RRMM, 2 clinical trials (n=49) evaluated the efficacy (95% CI) of elo, ORR of 25% (4.1-72.3) was calculated. The best PFS (progression free survival) produced was in combination of elo 20 mg with bortezumib (bort) 1.3mg/m2 of 9.46 months as compared to 1.8 months when elo10mg/kg + dexamethasone (dexa) 28mg was used. In our analysis for safety, common G≥ 3 HAE calculated were, thrombocytopenia 8.7% (3.3-21.1) n=49, neutropenia 10.7 % (3.5-28.4) n=28 pts and anemia 7.1% (1.8-24.5) n=28 pts. NHAE included diarrhea 1.7% (0.1-22.3), PN 10.7% (3.5-28.4), pyrexia 1.7% (0.1-22.3) in 28 evaluable pts each. Elotuzumab in three drug regimen: In RRMM, 10 clinical trials including 602 pts evaluated the efficacy of elo as a part of triple drug regimen, producing an ORR of 72.2% (54-76.2). The best results were produced with the combination of elo 10-20mg/kg + lenalidomide (lena) 25mg + dexa 40mg producing a PFS of 32.2 mo and 28.62 mo in its phase I and II cohorts respectively. Based on pooled analysis (95% CI) common HAE calculated were neutropenia 17.5% (7.6-35.4) in n=563, thrombocytopenia 12.7% (8.2-19.4) in n=149 and anemia 13% (8-20.5) in n=531 pts. Common G ≥ 3 NHAE estimated were diarrhea 5.7% (3.7-8.6), PN 6.6% (2-19.2), pyrexia 2.5% (1.5-4.1) in 598, 115 and 640 pts respectively. Elotuzumab based regimen in NDMM: A currently ongoing clinical trial NCT02272803 has produced promising results in NDMM pts. As a part of three drug regimen with dose of elo 10mg/kg-20mg/kg, lena 25mg, dexa 20mg in 40 pts produced an ORR of 87.5% (73.2-95.8) versus control group of lena 25mg plus dexa 40mg in 42 pts with an ORR of 73.8% (58-86.1). The PFS rate recorded at 1 year was 93% (79-98%) and 91% (73-97%) respectively. The HAE G ≥ 3 included, neutropenia 18% and leukopenia 15%. In another study with 41 pts, elo was used in combination with lena, bort and dexa producing an ORR of 100% and greater than grade 3 adverse events including Tcp 15%, PN 2%. Conclusion: Results produced in our study suggest that elotuzumab is highly effective when used in pts with RRMM and NDMM. Combination regimens for elo produces an ORR ranging from 79-83% with elo + lena+ dexa, proving that the best results were produced by three drug regimens. Large prospective studies are required to evaluate efficacy and safety of elotuzumab in combination therapies. Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

Background: Treatment for post-transplant relapsed/refractory acute lymphoblastic leukemia (R/R-ALL) is not well defined. A majority of ALL relapses occur within two years after allogeneic stem cell transplantation (allo-SCT). Blinatumomab, an anti-CD19/CD3 bispecific antibody, exerts cytotoxic activity leading to apoptosis of CD19 positive B cells. Blinatumomab and DLI combination therapy is a promising new concept in cancer treatment, whereby blinatumomab might achieve an initial reduction in ALL tumor burden using T-cells, and after tumor clearance, DLI can potentially stimulate the donor immune system to achieve longer lasting remission. Methods: Literature search was performed using PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane and Web of Science databases up to 3 July 2018. MeSH terms and keywords of blinatumomab, DLI and ALL were used. Results: Comprehensive search retrieved over 150 articles. After exclusion criteria were applied, three studies (n=15 patients) met our inclusion criteria. We summarized data on 15 patients (table 1). Outcomes were not reported homogeneously. Two studies (Ueda, M. et al. 2016; Paul, S. et al. 2017) reported CR in months and one study (Bondarenko, SN. et al. 2017) reported the response rate (RR). Before starting blinatumomab therapy, 12 patients had post-transplant bone marrow relapse, 1 patient had an extramedullary relapse and 2 patients had a minimal residual disease (MRD) without marrow relapse. Total cycles of blinatumomab ranged from 2 to 4. Total cycles of DLI ranged from 1 to 2 given after at least one cycle of blinatumomab. DLI was mostly given with blinatumomab during cycle 3 (ranged from cycle 2 to cycle 4). Blinatumomab doses were not uniformly reported. DLI doses varied between 1x107 and 5x107. Complete remission (CR) with MRD negative status was achieved after 2 cycles of blinatumomab in 3 patients, 2 of them remained in CR for 7 and 13 months. One patient achieved CR and negative MRD status 7 months after initiation of blinatumomab (total cycles of combination therapy=2). Ten patients who had median number of 2 cycles of blinatumomab showed RR of 70%. Grade I acute skin GVHD was reported in one patient during the cycle 3 of blinatumomab before the first combination therapy. One patient developed grade II aGVHD after the combination therapy (cycles were not reported). One patient developed GVHD involving mouth and skin during the second cycle of combination therapy (cycle 3). Grade 3 late-onset acute skin and gut GVHD were reported in one patient after the first dual therapy (cycle 3). No fatalities were observed with combination therapy. Therapy was stopped in one patient who had isolated central nervous system (CNS) relapse detected in the cerebral spinal fluid and orbit following allo-SCT; the patient was treated with intrathecal chemotherapy and radiation. One patient died of extramedullary and hematologic relapses seen at 6 and 11 months after initiating blinatumomab, respectively. This patient previously had a marrow relapse before starting therapy. One patient having an extramedullary disease progressed despite blinatumomab and DLI. Conclusion: Blinatumomab and DLI combination therapy appears to be safe and effective, specially for patients with MRD positive status after stem cell transplantation. Large prospective studies are required to completely understand the efficacy and safety of this combination therapy. Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

Introduction Selinexor, a SINE (selective inhibitor of nuclear export) compound, inhibits exportin 1 (XPO1) involved in transport of tumor suppressor proteins leading to apoptosis of tumor cells. XPO1 is overexpressed in variety of cancer including ovarian cancer, pancreatic cancer, glioma, osteosarcoma, leukemia, lymphoma, and multiple myeloma. The aim of this study is to summarize clinical response and adverse events of selinexor in hematological neoplasms. Methods A comprehensive literature search on PubMed, Embase, AdisInsight and Clinicaltrials.gov was completed on July 12, 2018. Studies focusing on efficacy and/or adverse events of selinexor in patients with hematological neoplasms were included for the review. Results Out of 321 studies found on initial search, we finalized 15 studies (8 phase I and 7 phase I/II) after screening by two reviewers. AML: Selinexor in combination with high-dose cytarabine and mitoxantrone has shown overall response rate (ORR) of 70% among 20 patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML), Wang et al., 2018. Out of 12 newly diagnosed AML (ND AML) patients, 11 (92%) patients showed response with complete response (CR) in 7, CR with incomplete recovery (CRi) in 3 and partial response (PR) in 1 patient. Among 8 relapsed/refractory AML (R/R AML) patients, only 3 patients showed CR while 5 had treatment failure (TF), ORR in this subset was 38%. In 81 evaluable R/R AML patients receiving selinexor as monotherapy only 14% of the patients showed response while 31% patients had disease progression (PD) along with grade ≥3 hematological adverse events (AEs) of thrombocytopenia, anemia and neutropenia in 19%, 15% and 13% patients, respectively (Garzon et al., 2017). MM: Relapsed refractory multiple myeloma patients receiving selinexor combined with pomalidomide and dexamethasone have achieved ORR of 60% with CR in 1 and PR in 5 patients (Chen et al., 2016 n=10) with grade ≥3 neutropenia in 8 patients. In another regimen with doxorubicin and dexamethasone the clinical benefit rate (CBR) was 26% with 15% overall response (Rachid et al., 2017 n=27). Grade ≥3 neutropenia, thrombocytopenia and hyponatremia occurred in 33%, 33% and 30% of patients, respectively. NHL: Kuruvilla et al. observed ORR in 31% patients with relapsed refractory non-Hodgkin lymphoma with single-agent selinexor. Grade ≥3 thrombocytopenia, neutropenia and anemia occurred in 47%, 32% and 27% patients, respectively. The efficacy of selinexor in phase I and I/II clinical trials is given in table 1 while toxicity is mentioned in table 2. With selinexor, the most common hematological and nonhematological AEs noted were thrombocytopenia and hyponatremia, respectively. Conclusion: Selinexor based combination regimens have shown better clinical response against AML as compared to monotherapy. The efficacy results in multiple myeloma and other hematological malignancies are also encouraging. The adverse events like cytopenias were common as in other chemotherapy regimens. Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

No abstract

No abstract