Efficacy of Isatuximab With Pomalidomide and Dexamethasone in Relapsed Myeloma: Results of a UK-Wide Real-World Dataset.

Real-world data on the efficacy and tolerability of isatuximab with pomalidomide and dexamethasone (IsaPomDex) in relapsed/refractory myeloma patients have not been reported. In this UK-wide retrospective study, IsaPomDex outcomes were evaluated across 24 routine care cancer centers. The primary endpoint was overall response rate (ORR). Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), duration of response (DOR) for patients who achieved an objective response (≥partial response [PR]), and adverse events (AEs). In a total cohort 107 patients, median follow up (interquartile range [IQR]) was 12.1 months (10.1-18.6 mo), median age (IQR) was 69 years (61-77). Median (IQR) Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) score was 3 (2-4); 43% had eGFR <60 mL/min. Median (IQR) number of prior therapies was 3 (3-3). Median (IQR) number of IsaPomDex cycles administered was 7 (3-13). ORR was 66.4%, with responses categorized as ≥ very good partial response: 31.8%, PR: 34.6%, stable disease: 15.9%, progressive disease: 15%, and unknown 2.8%. Median PFS was 10.9 months. Median DOR was 10.3 months. There was no statistical difference in median PFS by age (<65: 10.2 versus 65-74 13.2 versus ≥75: 8.5 mo, log-rank P = 0.4157), by CCI score (<4: 10.2 mo versus ≥4: 13.2, log-rank P = 0.6531), but inferior PFS was observed with renal impairment (≥60: 13.2 versus <60: 7.9 mo, log-rank P = 0.0408). Median OS was 18.8 months. After a median of 4 cycles, any grade AEs were experienced by 87.9% of patients. The most common ≥G3 AEs were neutropenia (45.8%), infections (18.7%), and thrombocytopenia (14%). Our UK-wide IsaPomDex study demonstrated encouraging efficacy outcomes in the real world, comparable to ICARIA-MM trial.

Infections in relapsed myeloma patients treated with isatuximab plus pomalidomide and dexamethasone during the COVID-19 pandemic: Initial results of a UK-wide real-world study.

OBJECTIVES: There are no real-world data describing infection morbidity in relapsed/refractory myeloma (RRMM) patients treated with anti-CD38 isatuximab in combination with pomalidomide and dexamethasone (IsaPomDex). In this UK-wide retrospective study, we set out to evaluate infections experienced by routine care patients who received this novel therapy across 24 cancer centres during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: The primary endpoint was infection morbidity (incidence, grading, hospitalization) as well as infection-related deaths. Secondary outcomes were clinical predictors of increased incidence of any grade (G2-5) and high grade (≥G3) infections. RESULTS: In a total cohort of 107 patients who received a median (IQR) of 4 cycles (2-8), 23.4% of patients experienced ≥1 any grade (G2-5) infections (total of 31 episodes) and 18.7% of patients experienced ≥1 high grade (≥G3) infections (total of 22 episodes). Median time (IQR) from start of therapy to first episode was 29 days (16-75). Six patients experienced COVID-19 infection, of whom 5 were not vaccinated and 1 was fully vaccinated. The cumulative duration of infection-related hospitalizations was 159 days. The multivariate (MVA) Poisson Regression analysis demonstrated that a higher co-morbidity burden with Charlson Co-morbidity Index (CCI) score ≥4 (incidence rate ratio (IRR) = 3, p = 0.012) and sub-optimal myeloma response less than a partial response (

Updated Guidance on Use and Prioritization of Monoclonal Antibody Therapy for Treatment of COVID-19 in Adolescents.

BACKGROUND: Starting in November 2020, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has issued Emergency Use Authorizations (EUAs) for multiple novel virus-neutralizing monoclonal antibody therapies, including bamlanivimab monotherapy (now revoked), bamlanivimab and etesivimab, casirivimab and imdevimab (REGEN-COV), and sotrovimab, for treatment or postexposure prophylaxis of Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in adolescents (≥12 years of age) and adults with certain high-risk conditions. Previous guidance is now updated based on new evidence and clinical experience. METHODS: A panel of experts in pediatric infectious diseases, pediatric infectious diseases pharmacotherapy, and pediatric critical care medicine from 18 geographically diverse US institutions was convened. Through a series of teleconferences and web-based surveys, a guidance statement was developed and refined based on a review of the best available evidence and expert opinion. RESULTS: The course of COVID-19 in children and adolescents is typically mild, though more severe disease is occasionally observed. Evidence supporting risk stratification is incomplete. Randomized controlled trials have demonstrated the benefit of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2)-specific monoclonal antibody therapies in adults, but data on safety and efficacy in children or adolescents are limited. Potential harms associated with infusion reactions or anaphylaxis are reportedly low in adults. CONCLUSIONS: Based on evidence available as of August 31, 2021, the panel suggests a risk-based approach to administration of SARS-CoV-2 monoclonal antibody therapy. Therapy is suggested for the treatment of mild to moderate COVID-19 in adolescents (≥12 years of age) at the highest risk of progression to hospitalization or severe disease. Therapeutic decision-making about those at moderate risk of severe disease should be individualized. Use as postexposure prophylaxis could be considered for those at the highest risk who have a high-risk exposure but are not yet diagnosed with COVID-19. Clinicians and health systems should ensure safe and timely implementation of these therapeutics that does not exacerbate existing healthcare disparities.

A Pedagogical Reflection on Counseling Skills in Asynchronous Learning Environments

The online environment provides a unique opportunity for students from wide-ranging locations to participate in academic activities to develop collegial abilities or vocational skills. The training process for working in the counseling field consists of graduate level learning pertaining to mental health issues, self-exploration, ethical and moral development, and reviewing contemporary research topics affecting diverse populations of people. Perhaps most importantly, it also involves developing the skill to be able to translate knowledge into a new counselor's skills and dispositional presentation. Since online courses are typically delivered in synchronous, asynchronous, or hybrid formats, it is reasonable to reflect on the differences experienced by students in skills-based courses and consider possible impacts the varied online learning environments could have on their development towards becoming counseling professionals. This reflection seeks to blend research and publication findings for counselor education in skills courses through the experiences of faculty and students exposed to varied learning environments utilizing the online format.

Predictors of Humoral Response to SARS-CoV-2 Vaccination after Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation and CAR T-cell Therapy.

Cellular therapies including allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplant (allo-HCT) and autologous hematopoietic cell transplant (auto-HCT) and chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy render patients severely immunocompromised for extended periods after therapy, and data on responses to COVID-19 vaccines are limited. We analyzed anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike IgG Ab (spike Ab) titers and neutralizing Ab among 217 recipients of cellular treatments (allo-HCT, n = 149; auto-HCT, n = 61; CAR T-cell therapy, n = 7). At 3 months after vaccination, 188 patients (87%) had positive spike Ab levels and 139 (77%) had positive neutralization activity compared with 100% for both in 54 concurrent healthy controls. Time from cellular therapy to vaccination and immune recovery post-cellular therapy were associated with response. Vaccination against COVID-19 is an important component of post-cellular therapy care, and predictors of quantitative and qualitative response are critical in informing clinical decisions about optimal timing of vaccines and the requirement for booster doses. Significance: Identifying predictors of response to vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 in patients following cellular therapy is critical to managing this highly vulnerable patient population. To date, this is the most comprehensive study evaluating quantitative and qualitative responses to vaccination, providing parameters most predictive of response and potentially informing booster vaccination strategies.See related article by Chung et al., p. 568. This article is highlighted in the In This Issue feature, p. 549.

Disease- and Therapy-Specific Impact on Humoral Immune Responses to COVID-19 Vaccination in Hematologic Malignancies.

Coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) vaccine response data for patients with hematologic malignancy, who carry high risk for severe COVID-19 illness, are incomplete. In a study of 551 hematologic malignancy patients with leukemia, lymphoma, and multiple myeloma, anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike IgG titers and neutralizing activity were measured at 1 and 3 months from initial vaccination. Compared with healthy controls, patients with hematologic malignancy had attenuated antibody titers at 1 and 3 months. Furthermore, patients with hematologic malignancy had markedly diminished neutralizing capacity of 26.3% at 1 month and 43.6% at 3 months, despite positive seroconversion rates of 51.5% and 68.9% at the respective time points. Healthy controls had 93.2% and 100% neutralizing capacity at 1 and 3 months, respectively. Patients with leukemia, lymphoma, and multiple myeloma on observation had uniformly blunted responses. Treatment with Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitors, venetoclax, phosphoinositide 3-kinase inhibitors, anti-CD19/CD20-directed therapies, and anti-CD38/B-cell maturation antigen-directed therapies substantially hindered responses, but single-agent immunomodulatory agents did not. Significance: Patients with hematologic malignancy have compromised COVID-19 vaccine responses at baseline that are further suppressed by active therapy, with many patients having insufficient neutralizing capacity despite positive antibody titers. Refining vaccine response parameters is critical to guiding clinical care, including the indication for booster vaccines, for this vulnerable population.See related article by Tamari et al., p. 577. This article is highlighted in the In This Issue feature, p. 549.

Adherence to self-administered biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs across health-system specialty pharmacies.

PURPOSE: Adherence to self-administered biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) is necessary for therapeutic benefit. Health-system specialty pharmacies (HSSPs) have reported high adherence rates across several disease states; however, adherence outcomes in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) populations have not yet been established. METHODS: We performed a multisite retrospective cohort study including patients with RA and 3 or more documented dispenses of bDMARDs from January through December 2018. Pharmacy claims were used to calculate proportion of days covered (PDC). Electronic health records of patients with a PDC of <0.8 were reviewed to identify reasons for gaps in pharmacy claims (true nonadherence or appropriate treatment holds). Outcomes included median PDC across sites, reasons for treatment gaps in patients with a PDC of <0.8, and the impact of adjusting PDC when accounting for appropriate therapy gaps. RESULTS: There were 29,994 prescriptions for 3,530 patients across 20 sites. The patient cohort was mostly female (75%), with a median age of 55 years (interquartile range [IQR], 42-63 years). The median PDC prior to chart review was 0.94 (IQR, 0.83-0.99). Upon review, 327 patients had no appropriate treatment gaps identified, 6 patients were excluded due to multiple unquantifiable appropriate gaps, and 420 patients had an adjustment in the PDC denominator due to appropriate treatment gaps (43 instances of days' supply adjusted based on discordant days' supply information between prescriptions and physician administration instructions, 11 instances of missing fills added, and 421 instances of clinically appropriate treatment gaps). The final median PDC after accounting for appropriate gaps in therapy was 0.95 (IQR, 0.87-0.99). CONCLUSION: This large, multisite retrospective cohort study was the first to demonstrate adherence rates across several HSSPs and provided novel insights into rates and reasons for appropriate gaps in therapy.

Initial Guidance on Use of Monoclonal Antibody Therapy for Treatment of Coronavirus Disease 2019 in Children and Adolescents.

BACKGROUND: In November 2020, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) provided Emergency Use Authorizations (EUA) for 2 novel virus-neutralizing monoclonal antibody therapies, bamlanivimab and REGN-COV2 (casirivimab plus imdevimab), for the treatment of mild to moderate coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in adolescents and adults in specified high-risk groups. This has challenged clinicians to determine the best approach to use of these products. METHODS: A panel of experts in pediatric infectious diseases, pediatric infectious diseases pharmacy, pediatric intensive care medicine, and pediatric hematology from 29 geographically diverse North American institutions was convened. Through a series of teleconferences and web-based surveys, a guidance statement was developed and refined based on review of the best available evidence and expert opinion. RESULTS: The course of COVID-19 in children and adolescents is typically mild and there is no high-quality evidence supporting any high-risk groups. There is no evidence for safety and efficacy of monoclonal antibody therapy for treatment of COVID-19 in children or adolescents, limited evidence of modest benefit in adults, and evidence for potential harm associated with infusion reactions or anaphylaxis. CONCLUSIONS: Based on evidence available as of December 20, 2020, the panel suggests against routine administration of monoclonal antibody therapy (bamlanivimab, or casirivimab and imdevimab), for treatment of COVID-19 in children or adolescents, including those designated by the FDA as at high risk of progression to hospitalization or severe disease. Clinicians and health systems choosing to use these agents on an individualized basis should consider risk factors supported by pediatric-specific evidence and ensure the implementation of a system for safe and timely administration that does not exacerbate existing healthcare disparities.

The Na+, K+-ATPase ß1 subunit regulates epithelial tight junctions via MRCKα.

An intact lung epithelial barrier is essential for lung homeostasis. The Na+, K+-ATPase (NKA), primarily serving as an ion transporter, also regulates epithelial barrier function via modulation of tight junctions. However, the underlying mechanism is not well understood. Here, we show that overexpression of the NKA ß1 subunit upregulates the expression of tight junction proteins, leading to increased alveolar epithelial barrier function by an ion transport-independent mechanism. Using IP and mass spectrometry, we identified a number of unknown protein interactions of the ß1 subunit, including a top candidate, myotonic dystrophy kinase-related cdc42-binding kinase α (MRCKα), which is a protein kinase known to regulate peripheral actin formation. Using a doxycycline-inducible gene expression system, we demonstrated that MRCKα and its downstream activation of myosin light chain is required for the regulation of alveolar barrier function by the NKA ß1 subunit. Importantly, MRCKα is expressed in both human airways and alveoli and has reduced expression in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), a lung illness that can be caused by multiple direct and indirect insults, including the infection of influenza virus and SARS-CoV-2. Our results have elucidated a potentially novel mechanism by which NKA regulates epithelial tight junctions and have identified potential drug targets for treating ARDS and other pulmonary diseases that are caused by barrier dysfunction.

Multicenter Interim Guidance on Use of Antivirals for Children With Coronavirus Disease 2019/Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2.

BACKGROUND: Although coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a mild infection in most children, a small proportion develop severe or critical illness. Data describing agents with potential antiviral activity continue to expand such that updated guidance is needed regarding use of these agents in children. METHODS: A panel of pediatric infectious diseases physicians and pharmacists from 20 geographically diverse North American institutions was convened. Through a series of teleconferences and web-based surveys, a set of guidance statements was developed and refined based on review of the best available evidence and expert opinion. RESULTS: Given the typically mild course of COVID-19 in children, supportive care alone is suggested for most cases. For children with severe illness, defined as a supplemental oxygen requirement without need for noninvasive or invasive mechanical ventilation or extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO), remdesivir is suggested, preferably as part of a clinical trial if available. Remdesivir should also be considered for critically ill children requiring invasive or noninvasive mechanical ventilation or ECMO. A duration of 5 days is appropriate for most patients. The panel recommends against the use of hydroxychloroquine or lopinavir-ritonavir (or other protease inhibitors) for COVID-19 in children. CONCLUSIONS: Antiviral therapy for COVID-19 is not necessary for the great majority of pediatric patients. For children with severe or critical disease, this guidance offers an approach for decision-making regarding use of remdesivir.

Multicenter Initial Guidance on Use of Antivirals for Children With Coronavirus Disease 2019/Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2.

BACKGROUND: Although coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is mild in nearly all children, a small proportion of pediatric patients develop severe or critical illness. Guidance is therefore needed regarding use of agents with potential activity against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 in pediatrics. METHODS: A panel of pediatric infectious diseases physicians and pharmacists from 18 geographically diverse North American institutions was convened. Through a series of teleconferences and web-based surveys, a set of guidance statements was developed and refined based on review of best available evidence and expert opinion. RESULTS: Given the typically mild course of pediatric COVID-19, supportive care alone is suggested for the overwhelming majority of cases. The panel suggests a decision-making framework for antiviral therapy that weighs risks and benefits based on disease severity as indicated by respiratory support needs, with consideration on a case-by-case basis of potential pediatric risk factors for disease progression. If an antiviral is used, the panel suggests remdesivir as the preferred agent. Hydroxychloroquine could be considered for patients who are not candidates for remdesivir or when remdesivir is not available. Antivirals should preferably be used as part of a clinical trial if available. CONCLUSIONS: Antiviral therapy for COVID-19 is not necessary for the great majority of pediatric patients. For those rare cases of severe or critical disease, this guidance offers an approach for decision-making regarding antivirals, informed by available data. As evidence continues to evolve rapidly, the need for updates to the guidance is anticipated.