Teclistamab in Relapsed or Refractory Multiple Myeloma.

BACKGROUND: Teclistamab is a T-cell-redirecting bispecific antibody that targets both CD3 expressed on the surface of T cells and B-cell maturation antigen expressed on the surface of myeloma cells. In the phase 1 dose-defining portion of the study, teclistamab showed promising efficacy in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma. METHODS: In this phase 1-2 study, we enrolled patients who had relapsed or refractory myeloma after at least three therapy lines, including triple-class exposure to an immunomodulatory drug, a proteasome inhibitor, and an anti-CD38 antibody. Patients received a weekly subcutaneous injection of teclistamab (at a dose of 1.5 mg per kilogram of body weight) after receiving step-up doses of 0.06 mg and 0.3 mg per kilogram. The primary end point was the overall response (partial response or better). RESULTS: Among 165 patients who received teclistamab, 77.6% had triple-class refractory disease (median, five previous therapy lines). With a median follow-up of 14.1 months, the overall response rate was 63.0%, with 65 patients (39.4%) having a complete response or better. A total of 44 patients (26.7%) were found to have no minimal residual disease (MRD); the MRD-negativity rate among the patients with a complete response or better was 46%. The median duration of response was 18.4 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 14.9 to not estimable). The median duration of progression-free survival was 11.3 months (95% CI, 8.8 to 17.1). Common adverse events included cytokine release syndrome (in 72.1% of the patients; grade 3, 0.6%; no grade 4), neutropenia (in 70.9%; grade 3 or 4, 64.2%), anemia (in 52.1%; grade 3 or 4, 37.0%), and thrombocytopenia (in 40.0%; grade 3 or 4, 21.2%). Infections were frequent (in 76.4%; grade 3 or 4, 44.8%). Neurotoxic events occurred in 24 patients (14.5%), including immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome in 5 patients (3.0%; all grade 1 or 2). CONCLUSIONS: Teclistamab resulted in a high rate of deep and durable response in patients with triple-class-exposed relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma. Cytopenias and infections were common; toxic effects that were consistent with T-cell redirection were mostly grade 1 or 2. (Funded by Janssen Research and Development; MajesTEC-1 ClinicalTrials.gov numbers, NCT03145181 and NCT04557098.).

Real-World Experience of Cryopreserved Allogeneic Hematopoietic Grafts during the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Single-Center Report.

In response to the widespread COVID-19 pandemic, cryopreservation of allogeneic donor apheresis products was implemented to mitigate the challenges of donor availability and product transport. Although logistically beneficial, the impact of cryopreservation on clinical outcomes and graft composition remains unclear. In this study, we compared outcomes and graft composition with cryopreserved versus fresh allografts in the setting of allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (allo-HCT). We retrospectively analyzed the clinical outcomes of 30 consecutive patients who received cryopreserved allografts between March and August 2020 and 60 consecutive patients who received fresh allografts before the COVID-19 pandemic. Primary endpoints were hematopoietic engraftment and graft failure (GF), and secondary outcomes were overall survival (OS), relapse-free survival (RFS) and nonrelapse mortality (NRM). In addition, extended immunophenotype analysis was performed on cryopreserved and prospectively collected fresh apheresis samples. Compared with recipients of fresh allografts, both neutrophil and platelet recovery were delayed in recipients of cryopreserved reduced-intensity conditioning (RIC) allo-HCT, with a median time to engraftment of 24 days versus 18 days (P = .01) for neutrophils and 27 days versus 18 days (P = .069) for platelets. We observed primary GF in 4 of 30 patients in the cryopreserved cohort (13.3%) versus only 1 of 60 patients (1.7 %) in the fresh cohort (P = .03). Cryopreserved RIC allo-HCT was associated with significantly lower median total, myeloid, and T cell donor chimerism at 1 month. OS and RFS were inferior for cryopreserved graft recipients (hazard ratio [HR], 2.16; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.00 to 4.67) and HR, 1.90; 95% CI, 0.95 to 3.79, respectively. Using an extended immunophenotype analysis, we compared 14 samples from the cryopreserved cohort to 6 prospectively collected fresh apheresis donor samples. These analyses showed both a decrease in total cell viability and a significantly reduced absolute number of natural killer cells (CD3-CD56+) in the cryopreserved apheresis samples. In this single-institution study, we found delayed engraftment and a trend toward clinical inferiority of cryopreserved allografts compared with fresh allografts. Further evaluation of the use of cryopreserved allografts and their impact on clinical and laboratory outcomes is warranted.