Elevate | What Role Can YOU Play in Your Myeloma Treatment and Care?
Elevate | What Role Can YOU Play in Your Myeloma Treatment and Care? from Patient Empowerment Network on Vimeo.
How can you elevate your overall myeloma care and treatment? Myeloma expert Dr. Sikander Ailawadhi discusses advances in myeloma care, the importance of patient participation in myeloma treatment decisions, and shares key advice and resources for self-advocacy.
Dr. Sikander Ailawadhi is a hematologist and oncologist specializing in myeloma at Mayo Clinic in Jacksonville, Florida. Learn more about Dr. Ailawadhi.
Related Resources:
|
|
What Should You Know About Emerging Myeloma Treatment Options? |
Transcript:
Katherine:
Hello and welcome. I’m your host, Katherine Banwell. It’s no secret that the quality of care that patients receive can vary depending on a number of factors and patients who are educated about their condition and involved in their care may have improved outcomes. That’s why the Patient Empowerment Network developed the Elevate Series, which aims to help patients and care partners be informed about their disease and more confident participating in conversations with their healthcare team.
In today’s program, we’re going to hear from an expert to learn more about myeloma and hear tips and advice for accessing better overall care. Before we get into the discussion, please remember that this program is not a substitute for seeking medical advice. Please refer to your healthcare team about what might be best for you. Well, let’s meet our guest today. Joining us is Dr. Sikandar Ailawadhi. Dr. Ailawadhi, welcome. Would you please introduce yourself?
Dr. Ailawadhi:
Yes. Thanks a lot, Katherine. Thanks for this opportunity. To all our viewers, listeners, I’m Sikandar Ailawadhi. I’m one of the hematologists oncologists at Mayo Clinic in Jacksonville, Florida. So, at this Jacksonville, Florida site of Mayo, I lead our myeloma group, and we have a very comprehensive program with inpatient outpatient treatment and lots of clinical trials, cell therapy, et cetera. I look forward to the discussion.
Katherine:
Well, thank you so much for joining us today. I know you’re a busy man. I’d like to start by discussing your role as a researcher. You’re on the front lines of advancements in the myeloma field. So, what led you here, and why is it so important to you?
Dr. Ailawadhi:
Yeah. So, Katherine, thanks for asking that question because before jumping into the disease state and clinical trials and data, et cetera, I think it’s important for all of us to keep in mind what kind of brought us here or what kind of keeps driving us further. So, I think for me, the decision to come to the field of multiple myeloma was very strongly influenced by my mentors.
My mentor who shaped my career and also got me interested in this area. I think during my training, it was the time that newer drugs were just beginning to come about. So, the field of myeloma was just beginning to change. And since then, obviously, there have been lots of advancements, lots of research, clinical trials, new drugs, so that the outlook for not only the myeloma patients has improved quite a bit.
But also, for physicians, researchers, us academicians who work in this field, the opportunities are much, much more. And because I trained at a large academic center, I – and again, with working with my mentor, I got so interested in the clinical research because frankly giving the available drugs is one thing but being at that cutting edge where you can bring newer drugs to life, newer drugs to our patients’ lives, that was what was most important for me and is the driving force for my work today.
Katherine:
Thank you for that explanation, Dr. Ailawadhi. I appreciate it. So, when it comes to choosing therapy for myeloma, it’s important to work with your healthcare team to identify what might be best for you. How would you define shared decision-making and why is this so critical to properly managing life with myeloma?
Dr. Ailawadhi:
Excellent question, Katherine. Shared decision-making or a process in which the physician, the health care team, and the patient, their caregivers, everybody comes together, shared, to make a decision that we feel is in the best interest for that patient at that time. That is the whole concept.
Whenever we think about treatment decisions, in our mind, the three main components that have to be considered every single time. Not just newly diagnosed or relapsed or third line or whatever, every single time a treatment decision has been taken, we must consider patient-related factors. What is their preference? What are their goals? Do they have caregiver support? How far do they live? Do they want IV? Pills? Any side effects that are there?
Comorbidities? Other issues? Financial conditions? Everything comes into play, patient-related factors. Then, there are disease-related factors. How fast is the disease growing? Is this new? Is this old disease, high-risk, low-risk, or standard risk? Or what has been given before, et cetera. So, patient and disease-related. And the number three is the treatment-related factors. What is being considered for the patient? What are the ins and outs, pros, and cons?
All of this has to be laid out in front of the patient and preferably also their caregiver if the patient has someone who they can share their decision with.
And when we put all of that in the mix, we come up with a decision which is hopefully in the patient’s best interest. They are more likely to go through with it. They are informed. They are involved in their care. And then, hopefully, if the patient starts on a treatment that they are interested in, knowledgeable about, and committed to, we’ll be able to keep the patient on that longer term and get the best benefit out of it.
So, in my mind, the main reason for shared decision-making is to make sure my patient is committed to that treatment. They understand that treatment. And we make this kind of bond between us as clinicians and our teams and the patient and their home team, their family team, their caregiver team so that everybody is working together with a singular goal. Right treatment for the right patient at the right time because it must be patient-centric, not research or clinician, or drug-centric.
Katherine:
Yeah. Okay. That’s good advice. What are myeloma treatment goals, and how are they determined?
Dr. Ailawadhi:
So, I think the myeloma treatment goals can be very different depending on what vantage points you’re looking from. My treatment goal is to provide the best treatment for my patient that has least side effects, gets a deep control, and my patient’s able to live long with a good quality of life. Okay. But that’s my goal. I need to figure out what my patient’s goals are, and sometimes our patient’s goals are very different. A patient’s goal might be that they want to really avoid side effects. Well, they want to live, lead their quality of life, and keep traveling. And this happens on a day-to-day basis.
Just the other day, one of the patients said, “Well, I really want to keep driving around in my RV with my wife, because that is what we had wanted to do at this point of our life. What can you do to help me control my disease, but keep me driving my RV?” And we literally had to figure out where all they were traveling. We identified clinics close to them and connected with physicians so that they could continue their treatment wherever they were. So, the patient’s goals are very important, and in fact, I would say they are paramount. So, understanding what the patient wants. They may be wanting to control pain. They may be wanting to just live longer.
They may be wanting to delay treatment so that they could watch their daughter’s soccer game. I’m just saying that the goals can be very different. It is important to lay them out. Every time you’re making a treatment decision, the goals should be laid out into short-, mid-, and long-term goals. I should bring my goals to the discussion. The patient should bring their goals to the discussion, and we come up with whatever is the best answer for them that suits them.
Katherine:
So, you’re trying to maintain an open dialogue, an open line of communication, yeah.
Dr. Ailawadhi:
Absolutely.
Katherine:
What sort of tests should be done following a myeloma diagnosis?
Dr. Ailawadhi:
Generally, when myeloma is suspected, we need to know what the basic blood counts are, something that is called a CBC, complete blood count. We’re looking for anemia, low white blood cells, low clotting cells, or platelets. We want to do serum chemistries or blood chemistries, looking for kidney function, liver function, electrolytes, calcium, et cetera.
Then, we want to do some kind of an imaging of the body. Generally, routine X-rays are no longer done, and the most preferred is a PET-CT scan, a PET scan. We do PET-MRIs frequently. So, there are different tests available, but you want a good test to know what’s the state of bones and presence of any lesions or tumors. And then, the important question comes is doing a bone marrow biopsy.
The reason for doing a bone marrow biopsy, and even if somebody has had a biopsy done from a compression fracture, et cetera, that diagnosed myeloma, a bone marrow biopsy still should be done. It gives us a lot of pieces of information.
It tells us what is the percentage of plasma cells in the bone marrow. So, what is the disease burden we are starting with? Secondly, that bone marrow biopsy specimen can be sent for what is called a FISH testing, which is fluorescent in situ hybridization.
It is basically looking for any mutations in the cancer cells. Based on those mutations, myeloma can be classified into standard or high-risk myeloma. And sometimes our treatment choices are differed based on whether somebody is standard or high-risk. So, blood work, basic counts – and I skipped over one of the things. Right after chemistries, I wanted to add also are myeloma markers.
There are typically three lab tests of myeloma markers. One is called protein electrophoresis. It can be run in blood and urine. Ideally, it should be run in both. One is immunoglobulin levels, which gives us the level of IgG, IgA, IgM, et cetera. And the third one is serum-free light chains, which is kappa and lambda light chains. Neither one – none of these tests eliminates the needs for the other.
So, everybody, in the beginning, should have complete blood count, blood chemistries, SPEP or serum protein electrophoresis, urine electrophoresis, immunoglobulins, light chains, imaging, and then a bone marrow. This completes the workup. Then, based on that, the treatment can be determined.
Katherine:
Well, you mentioned lab work. How often should tests and blood work be done?
Dr. Ailawadhi:
Good question. Very, very important question because we see very frequently that the patients come in, they’re getting treatment somewhere, and every single time the patient steps foot in the door of that institution or wherever they’re going, they got a blood draw. That’s how they start their day. It’s needed more frequently in the beginning but needed less frequently later on.
Generally, the myeloma markers, those protein electrophoresis, immunoglobulins, light chains, they are frequently done just about every month. Generally, in myeloma, one month, three to four weeks is one cycle. So, at the beginning of every cycle, you want to know how good your response was. So, the myeloma markers once a month.
The blood counts and chemistries in the first month, first one to two months, they can be done every other week or so just to make sure counts are fine, no need for transfusions, kidney/liver is okay, et cetera. But after the first couple of months, when the body is used to the drugs when the patient is settled with the treatment, frankly, once-a-month labs are good enough. We don’t really need labs on every single treatment visit. Because the other thing that happens is some of these drugs can lower the blood counts normally during treatment, but they have a rest period at the end of the cycle when the counts recover.
So, if somebody does labs in the middle of the cycle when the counts are expected to be down but not an issue, treatments are stopped, and growth factors are given. And this is done, but that is not really necessary. So, first couple of one to two cycles, maybe every other week to make sure counts are okay. Myeloma markers monthly, but after the first couple of months when things are settled, once a month should be sufficient.
Katherine:
Okay. What questions should patients be asking about their test results?
Dr. Ailawadhi:
Yeah. Very, very, very important. In fact, whenever I’m speaking in a patient caregiver symposium or anything, I spend a lot of time on these test results because frankly, a lot of times it sounds like jargon and the people talk about, “Oh, my ratio is going up,” or the doctor is saying, “Hey, your immunoglobulins are normal. You’re in remission.” But so, I think the patients need to understand and ask from their doctors, “What is my marker of the disease that you will be following?” And I’ll tell you that immunoglobulins, that IgG or IgA level, is nearly never the marker. It’s either M spike or light chains, generally one of those.
So, the patients need to understand what is their marker. They also need to know what did their bone marrow show. What was the percentage and what was the FISH result or cytogenetic result? I think other than the tests, I will also add the patients need to ask their doctor a lot of these questions that you’re asking me. How frequently are the labs going to be done? Why is it important? Why was a certain treatment selected? What is the expected outcome? What are the chances that I can go into remission? How long does the intense treatment stay?
When does it go to some kind of a maintenance? Et cetera, et cetera. Basically, you want to understand everything about the disease and its treatment. It is overwhelming. This is a lot of information. A lot of times the patients may say, “Well, I got a diagnosis. I got a treatment started. I just need to move on.” That’s right. But once you spend all that time initially understanding your diagnosis and the treatment and the disease, it’ll make the rest of the journey much, much easier.
Katherine:
That’s really helpful as we drill down a little further. What are the types of treatments available for people with myeloma?
Dr. Ailawadhi:
So, myeloma has a lot of treatments available. We can classify these treatments into different classes of drugs, or we can classify the treatment as early lines or late lines of therapy. Or we can classify these treatments into cellular therapy or targeted therapy or chemotherapy. There are ways of classifying it. What I would suggest is we should think about classes of drugs. We have something called proteasome inhibitors. That class has three drugs FDA-approved. We have something called immunomodulatory drugs. That class has three drugs also approved, but generally, we use two.
Then, there are something called monoclonal antibodies. There are three drugs approved there as well.
There are cellular therapies or CAR T-cell therapy. There are two of them approved. There is also a stem cell transplant that is used as a part of treatment sometimes but is different from CAR T. Then, there are other immunotherapy, something called T-cell engagers, in which also there are three drugs approved. In fact, as I’m saying to you, I’m trying to think…yeah, wow. Every class has three drugs. That’s so weird. And then, there are some other classes of drugs. There is something called exporting inhibitors. There is a drug there. All said and done, there are these different classes of drugs.
There are some guiding principles for myeloma treatment. Generally, three to four drug combinations or regimens are better than two drugs. So, a patient should be in the initial therapy or later lines. Also, preferably be getting a three-drug combo. And I forgot to mention steroids, which are an important part of every regimen in myeloma, almost every regimen. So, three drugs or four drugs are better than two. That’s important to keep in mind. Longer durations of treatment are generally considered better. We should not tinker with the regimen’s recipe too soon. As long as the patient is tolerating for a longer duration before making any major changes like maintenance.
Generally, maintenance in myeloma is not a response-assessed thing like, “Oh, you’ve responded in two months. We should go to maintenance.” Generally, in myeloma, maintenance transition is a time-dependent thing. Okay, you’ve had six or nine months or 12 months. We can go to maintenance, sort of a thing. So, even if somebody has responded, they may need the same treatment for a longer period of time to keep the disease quiet.
And so, I think these are the different categories of drugs. We pick and choose from different categories to combine and make a regimen. The CAR T-cell therapy, the two CAR Ts that are approved, or the three T-cell engagers that are approved, they are all currently used as single agents. They are not combined with anything, not even with steroids.
Katherine:
Yeah, I see. How do clinical trials fit into a treatment plan?
Dr. Ailawadhi:
Okay, that’s an extremely important question, and you’re asking it from a person in my clinic about two-thirds of the patients who are on treatment at any given time are on clinical trials. So, I am very heavily, I shouldn’t say biased, but a proponent of clinical trials. In my opinion, clinical trials are a part and parcel of treatment for every single patient. In fact, when you look at the NCCN guidelines, which are National Comprehensive Cancer Network, which is large institutions across the country, and they make guidelines for all cancers, it is mentioned in every single setting that clinical trials should always be considered.
So, I personally feel that whenever the patient is coming up with a treatment decision, we talked about shared decision-making in the beginning, it’s important for them to ask at every single juncture, “Do you have any clinical trials available for me?
And if you don’t have any clinical trials available, are there any clinical trials that I should consider, even if it means going to a different place and getting an opinion?” I know logistically it’s challenging, but we should at least know our options. So, in my opinion, clinical trials should be considered at every single juncture, because that is how patients get access to either a new drug, a new treatment, or a different way of using the current drugs, which might actually improve upon their current state. So, everybody all the time should consider clinical trials.
Katherine:
That’s great information, Dr. Ailawadhi. Thank you for that. I’d like to add that if you’re interested in learning more about emerging treatments, such as CAR T-cell therapy, PEN has a number of resources available for you, and you can find these at powerfulpatients.org/myeloma, or by scanning the QR code on your screen.
So, the symptoms of myeloma, as well as the side effects of certain medications, can vary greatly among those being treated. How do you approach symptom management with your patients?
Dr. Ailawadhi:
It is extremely important that we focus on the symptoms, whether it’s coming from the disease or it’s coming from the treatment. Because frankly, if a person is responding to the treatment, you want them to stay on the treatment for a longer duration of time, so the disease can stay controlled.
If we don’t handle the symptoms from the treatment or the side effects that are happening or if the disease is causing too many symptoms, it is more likely that either we’ll start cutting down the drug too much or stopping the treatment, et cetera, and then the disease just comes back. In some cases, that is necessary, but generally we would like to modulate the treatment or address the symptoms.
So, one important piece that we should do, or at least we try to do over here, is that every single time that we talk to the patient for any of the visits – while there is enough time spent on, “Well, these are your labs, your diseases responding markers, SPEP, and M spike, and light chain,” and all that stuff – we spend a lot of time asking about symptoms.
It is, I understand, challenging to cover everything, but to familiarize what drugs cause what kind of symptoms, and at least making sure that we ask those from the patient. For example, IMiDs like lenalidomide (Revlimid) can cause some diarrhea, can cause fatigue, can cause sleepiness. Well, I must ask about diarrhea from all my lenalidomide patients.
Bortezomib (Velcade) can cause neuropathy. It can give rise to shingles. I must ask my patients for every bortezomib-treated patient. “Hey, do you have any neuropathy numbness, or tingling?
Are you taking your medication to prevent shingles, et cetera?” I’m just saying we may not be able to do a comprehensive review of every single symptom from every single patient, but whatever the target side effects are important to know every single time. We educate the patients about these side effects so that they are aware of them, and they can report these side effects. And then, if the side effects are happening, any symptoms are happening, then is it to the point that we need to stop the treatment?
Frequently, we do take drug holidays for a few weeks just to make sure, okay, we know is it coming from the drug or the disease? And every now and then, we realize, well, the drug was not even causing the symptom, because we stopped it, and the symptom stayed. Or so then, why stop the drug? There’s no point stopping it if I can’t control the symptom. So, understanding whether it’s coming from disease or drug or something else, addressing them, making the changes appropriately to lower the dose, space them out, et cetera. All of that is done. And of course, like I said, importantly, educating the patient is so very important. I’ll add one quick thing. We focus on the drug-related effects.
As you rightly mentioned, Katherine, the disease itself can cause a lot of symptoms. So, generally, when I see a new myeloma patient, in the first couple of visits, we’ve done all the testing, we’ve discussed the treatment, and we’ve addressed some of the basic symptoms like pain, for example. That is big in myeloma.
But then, when the patient has started treatment, generally within the first two months, the focus that our clinic has is we need to control any side effects, and we need to address any symptoms that are being left over from the disease. And that’s when we start referring patients to interventional radiology for any bone procedures or palliative care for pain control or neurology for neuropathy, whatever so that we are controlling all the symptoms.
And that’s when we hopefully get the patient as close to their baseline as possible.
Katherine:
I would like to talk more about self-advocacy, Dr. Ailawadhi, managing the worry associated with a diagnosis, concerns about relapse, side effects. It can lead to emotional symptoms like anxiety and fear for many. So, why is it important for patients to share any worries they’re having with their healthcare team?
Dr. Ailawadhi:
Yes. Extremely important. See, nobody’s thinking, “Okay, I’m going to have cancer today.” Nobody’s prepared for it ever. Cancer is always a diagnosis that comes out of the blue, blindsides us, and then suddenly we have to change the rest of our life because of it. Not only our life, our caregiver’s life, family’s life, everything changes.
So, it is okay to admit that it is difficult. It is okay to admit that we need help. And, Katherine, I like your kind of the use of the word, self-advocacy, although I want to qualify it.
A lot of times we say patients got to be their own advocates. But if a patient doesn’t know what to ask, they’re going to be lost. My thought is it is okay to – the first and foremost that a patient or their caregiver can do is please report your symptoms or how you’re feeling. And those symptoms could be physical, those could be psychological.
Please report what are you feeling, what are the symptoms. On a drug, what are the side effects, et cetera, so that your healthcare team can try to address them. Don’t ever assume, “I am on chemotherapy. I should have diarrhea.” No. Don’t think, “I’m on chemotherapy. Other patients outside in the waiting room look sicker than I. I feel embarrassed to ask a question.”
We hear this so many times. A lot of patients will say, “I feel embarrassed to ask that I’m going through this symptom, because I see sicker people outside.” Yeah, but know when I’m with you as a patient, you are it. I’m not thinking about anybody else. And I don’t want anybody else’s decision to obscure or cloud our relationship at that visit. Please report your symptoms. Please ask for help. To me, that is good enough self-advocacy. Self-advocacy is not saying, “I should get this treatment, not that treatment.” But self-advocacy could mean, are there clinical trial options? I know I live far away from a large center. Could I get a tele-visit with a large center? Could I get a second opinion from someone? Those are all very, very reasonable questions, and by asking those questions, a patient is advocating for themselves.
Katherine:
As you alluded, there’s a whole healthcare team working with each patient, and there’ll be people on that team who can help support a patient’s emotional needs. So, one thing that’s on the mind of many viewers is the financial aspect of care. And you mentioned that earlier everyone’s situation is different, of course, but where can patients turn if they need resources for financial support
Dr. Ailawadhi:
Very important question. I can tell you every day when I come into my office, my nurse has a stack of documents ready for my signature. Every single day. Today, there was only one, but there could be different numbers. And these are generally from foundations from diagnosis confirmations, et cetera. Things that we are filling on and signing on behalf of our patients so that they are able to receive resources, whether it’s from a pharmaceutical manufacturer, a foundation, or society that has funding available, et cetera. I should start by saying, Katherine – and I feel embarrassed to admit this, but I should start by saying, I may not have all the answers for my patient during that visit.
But I think the very important piece where we can start is asking the patient, “Is this causing any financial strain on you?” As I mentioned earlier, we don’t think about, “Oh, I’m going to have cancer today. Let me prepare for that.” Or “I’m going to have cancer five years down the road. Let me prepare for that.” We’re not always ready for this. It’s okay. It’s important for me to ask if there is a problem, and it’s important for the patient to admit there’s a problem or say, “Well, I’m having difficulty with copayments.” And whatever may be difficult for one may be okay for the other. So, I shouldn’t assume. So, that discussion must happen.
Generally, in our setup, what happens is if the patient brings up a concern, if I identify a concern, or if we think something may be going on, but we’re not very sure about it, we tend to bring in our social workers. The social workers are typically the ones who are able to do that discussion with the patient, talk about what are the resources available. What are the foundations that we can apply to? We have patient navigators who can do the similar things. So, the patient navigator, social worker, there are different individuals who will be able to provide much more granular information. I also strongly suggest patients to join support groups.
There are lots of resources, which I may not be aware of during our visit with a patient, but I can connect to the social worker, their patient navigators, and online support.
Katherine:
Thank you for that. It’s great advice. As we close the program, what would you like to leave the audience with? Why are you hopeful?
Dr. Ailawadhi:
First of all, I should admit, yes, I’m very, very hopeful for myeloma. I started my work with myeloma or my time working in this field in somewhere around the year 2000 or around that year. In the early 2000s, the average survival of a myeloma patient despite treatment was about two to three years.
Today, while national data is suggesting somewhere in the vicinity of 10ish years, give or take, all of us who are myeloma-focused physicians and have specialized centers that we work in, we have many patients who are living in excess of 10 years and pushing the envelope. In fact, my longest survivor is now maybe 34, 35 years with myeloma, and she’s not even been on treatment for a few years.
This is what gives me hope. That it’s not only that patients are living longer, more and more patients are living with less disease burden, better quality of life, and in a lot of cases, not even on a treatment. Our myeloma world is now going from everybody should be treated forever and ever to there are many a clinical trial that are testing the hypothesis of, “Can we stop treatment? Who needs to be treated? Could we be getting closer to that elusive cure that we all are looking for in myeloma?”
So, to me, the hope is newer drugs that are better tolerated, providing better quality of life for patients. And in a lot of cases, the patients are not even on treatment. That is where we think we are making a change and making a difference. And you had started by asking me, “What is the driving force?” That to me is the driving force of why we get excited to come to work every morning, because we know that we can help someone else, and we can learn something new.
Katherine:
That’s very promising, Dr. Ailawadhi. Thanks so much for taking the time to join us today.
Dr. Ailawadhi:
Absolutely. Thanks a lot for this opportunity.
Katherine:
And thank you to all of our collaborators. To learn more about myeloma and to access tools to help you become a proactive patient, visit powerfulpatients.org. I’m Katherine Banwell. Thanks for being with us today.
Is Myeloma Research Examining Sequencing of CAR T and Bispecifics?
Is Myeloma Research Examining Sequencing of CAR T and Bispecifics? from Patient Empowerment Network on Vimeo.
Is the sequencing of CAR T-cell therapy and bispecific antibodies being examined in myeloma studies? Expert Dr. Ola Landgren from University of Miami Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center discusses what’s known about sequencing of CAR T and bispecifics and what needs further study in clinical trials.
Download Guide | Descargar Guía
See More from START HERE Myeloma
Related Programs:
|
|
|
Transcript:
Lisa Hatfield:
So with both CAR T and some of the bispecifics approved, obviously if a patient comes in and they need something right away, they’ll take whatever is first available. But all things being equal, if a patient says, well, I can, I have both CAR T accessible and bispecifics accessible. There are some patients out there, I’ve spoken with some who are wondering, is there a benefit to sequencing one before the other, or are there any trials looking into that?
Dr. Ola Landgren:
There are studies that have allowed patients to go on treatment with one of these modalities. For example, the bispecific antibodies with the prior exposure to a CAR T-cell therapy. There are also trials with CAR T-cell therapy that has allowed patients who have been exposed to prior antibodies, either bispecifics or the conjugated antibody drug conjugates, Belantamab mafodotin. So if you look at those studies and see how the numbers compare, if you are not exposed or you are exposed, I think the data is not entirely clear-cut.
There is no definitive study. Some data suggests that maybe it’s not that different, but then there are some studies that suggest that if you go to the antibody first that maybe that would lower the efficacy of the CAR T cell. So some people have for that reason said the CAR T cell should be done first. To make it even more complicated, there are some studies that have then taken time into the equation. So that means that you could have the patient treated with the antibodies for BCMA and CD3, and the antibody is given successfully for a long time, for many years. And eventually, unfortunately, the antibody may stop working.
Now, if you switch back to back to a CAR T-cell therapy without any other therapy in between, some studies indicate that that’s less likely to be beneficial. But if you instead do another target, say you did GPRC5D/CD3, or you did a completely different therapy with small molecules or you did carfilzomib (Kyprolis), or you did venetoclax (Venclexta), or IMiDs, or different types of combinations that are out there, been around for a long time, and you get good mileage out of those combinations.
Now, if that stops working, if you now go to this other therapy, you go back to the CAR T cell, that will suggest that the results are not that different. So I think that there are aspects that we don’t fully understand. I personally believe, based on what I’ve seen, based on what I know from treating thousands of patients with myeloma for almost 30 years I’ve been a doctor, I think time is probably very, very important. So if you go back to back from one therapy to the other, that’s less likely to be beneficial. If you go from one therapy, and it stops working and go to the other drug with the same target.
But I would say it’s not that different from how we think about IMiDs or proteasome inhibitors. If you were to go single drug with a proteasome inhibitor and you switch to single drug with another proteasome inhibitor, or the same thing with an IMiD, that’s less likely to work versus if you went to something else in between. So we just need to generate more data and learn. Lastly, I want to say that in my experience, from all I see in my clinic at the current time, I think the choice that patients make is based on personal preference and to some degree also the situation of the patient. I saw a patient yesterday, 50 years old, who came from another country and has relocated to us here in Miami and asked, what are the options?
And we talked about CAR T cells, we talked about bispecifics. And considering all the different factors that CAR T cell would imply that we had to give some other combination therapy for two or three cycles while we harvest the CAR T cells and manufacture the CAR T cells and then plan for the admission and give it, and also that the patient was not really very happy about the side effects in the hospital with CAR T cell. That patient shows the bispecific, but I’ve also seen other patients in the same situation saying, I’d rather do these different steps for two or three months, I stay in the hospital, and then I enjoy being off therapy.
Actually, I saw another patient just a few days ago, a gentleman in his upper 70s who we had the same conversation, and he had picked the CAR T cells. And I saw him with his wife and he has been off treatment for two years doing excellent. So different patients make different decisions. And I think that is just how the field is evolving. So I think we should be open to individual patient’s priorities and what they want, and we should just offer everything. And of course, we can guide if a patient wants us to give direction, but I think presenting it and let patients be part of the decision-making, that’s the future of how medicine should be practiced.
Share Your Feedback:
What Myeloma Patient Monitoring Occurs After Induction Therapy?
What Myeloma Patient Monitoring Occurs After Induction Therapy? from Patient Empowerment Network on Vimeo.
What is involved in myeloma patient monitoring following induction therapy? Expert Dr. Ola Landgren from University of Miami Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center discusses some common treatment and monitoring scenarios that he carries out with his patients.
Download Guide | Descargar Guía
See More from START HERE Myeloma
Related Programs:
|
|
|
|
Transcript:
Lisa Hatfield:
So I think we’re going to shift a little bit to managing and monitoring multiple myeloma. Once you’ve had a patient go through the induction therapy, what kind of monitoring do you complete for your myeloma patients and in particular those who have reached a certain level response and are maybe on maintenance or continuous therapy, what type of tests do you do and how often regarding labs, imaging, bone marrow biopsies?
Dr. Ola Landgren:
There are a lot of different ways, obviously, of practicing medicine. So every center has developed models that they feel very comfortable doing. So I like details. I like to know things. I like to check things. I’m not excessive in ordering invasive tests, but I like to know. Also, I like to make sure the patient not only has good long-term clinical outcomes, but also good quality of life. And to me, I try to minimize the intrusiveness of what we do. So, for example, if I give a combination therapy where there is an injection or infusion, say week one, week two, week three, and then there is a week off. I recognize that if you do labs during that week off, you will have a better yield and understanding of how these three different injections or infusions actually have moved the disease forward and suppressed the disease.
But in my mind, I think that week off is a very important week off for the patient. So I would rather do testing the third day of the treatment at the treatment unit. So if it’s week one, week two, week three, I would draw the myeloma labs that same day. And that would give the patient six more days off from injection, infusion that third week and the whole fourth week off. So I would give the patient 13 days off. Again, these are small things. These are things I’ve thought about a lot. I’ve practiced medicine for many years and I recognize that having time off like that, many patients travel, they go on vacation, they do different things. So I don’t want to just randomly put a blood test in the fourth week just because I want to check after week one, two, three, and then have the assessment.
I sort of underestimate the benefit of the therapy and then I start the next cycle, say back to back cycle two and cycle three and so forth. I would typically do blood tests once a month following these principles. I do baseline and I would do the last day of injection or infusion. For a newly diagnosed patient, you ask me, I would for baseline always do bone marrow biopsy and an aspirate. I would always do a PET-CT for every patient as my default.
Sometimes we end up doing MRI. So that could be other things that are happening, but that is what we do for the majority of our patients. After we have completed four to six cycles of treatment for patients that are candidates for consideration of transplant with chemotherapy with melphalan (Alkeran), we would usually do a biopsy after four to six cycles and we would use that to determine what’s the optimal mobilization protocol for stem cells. When we do that, we would run a MRD test.
We would run our in-house flow cytometry test that we developed when I used to work at Sloan Kettering and we have developed that here in Miami as well. We work closely with Sloan Kettering, and we have set up this assay in collaboration in the new 2.0 version. We will also send the aspirate for the clonoSEQ at Adaptive Biotech, which is the DNA-based sequencing for MRD. We would send the patient for collection of stem cells. When the patient is back, we will continue treating. So if you say we do it after four cycles, we would collect, if we do it after five or six, then we collect.
After that, we would typically resume therapy and for the majority of our patients, we actually give around eight cycles of therapy, and we have seen that you can deepen the response. You don’t increase the toxicity, but you deepen the response for the vast, vast majority of our patients. When we have used our best therapies, we have done it that way…
We have even published on this, over 70 percent of our patients are MRD-negative, and many of those patients, when they come to cycle eight, they ask, do I have to do the transplant? And that is a controversial topic. But I think there are two large randomized trials that have shown the same thing, that there is no survival benefit with transplant. But you can also say that there is, in those two trials, a progression free survival benefit, meaning that the disease would stay way longer with transplant. But many patients say, if I reach MRD-negative, both those two trials show that if you’re MRD-negative without transplant, or you’re MRD-negative with the transplant, PFS was actually the same.
And given that there is no survival, overall survival benefit, why would I subject myself to go to that? Why don’t I keep the cells in the freezer and go right to maintenance? And we will have a conversation with every patient, they would meet our transplant team, they would meet our myeloma expert team.
And the individual patient will make decisions. I think over time, more and more patients have chosen to keep the cells in the freezer. For patients that are MRD-positive, we would counsel towards transplant, but there are patients that don’t want to do that, and we are not forcing any patients to do that. We would give patient maintenance, and on some of our trials, we use the standard of care, which is lenalidomide (Revlimid) maintenance. And we are also developing new approaches where we have done daratumumab (Darzalex) added once a month with lenalidomide. We have gone one year, and we have started to do two years of that. And after that, we would stop daratumumab and just do lenalidomide maintenance.
Lastly, to answer your question fully here, we would do a PET-CT in the bone marrow after the eight cycles as a repeat, and we would offer a patient to check on maintenance on an annual basis, and this is in accord with the NCCN guidelines. So a lot of details here, but you asked me how we do testing.
Share Your Feedback:
Targeting of Myeloma Disease Progression and Bispecific Antibody Advantages
Targeting of Myeloma Disease Progression and Bispecific Antibody Advantages from Patient Empowerment Network on Vimeo.
How can myeloma progression and bispecific antibodies be used for myeloma care? Expert Dr. Ola Landgren from University of Miami Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center discusses how disease progression and genomic features can be targeted and the role that he perceives for bispecific antibodies in myeloma care.
Download Guide | Descargar Guía
See More from START HERE Myeloma
Related Programs:
|
|
|
|
Transcript:
Lisa Hatfield:
Dr. Landgren, what are the key biological processes driving disease progression and evolution of multiple myeloma, and how can we target these processes to prevent disease relapse and improve long-term outcomes?
Dr. Ola Landgren:
So that’s a very good question. So I think in a nutshell if you use genomics, which refers to the genetic changes that you can see in the plasma cells, there are certain features that the myeloma cells have. They have the copy number changes, that’s the gains and losses of chromosomes. You can find these if you do FISH and cytogenetics could be, for example, gain of chromosome 5 or gain of chromosome 7 or gain of chromosome 11. That would be part of the hyperdiploidy disease, or you have loss of chromosome 13 or 13q deletions. We also refer to 17p deletion. These are copy number changes, they’re extra or loss of these chromosomes. But then you have also the structural variance where you have the translocations of chromosome 14, chromosome 14 harbors the IGH locus, which regulates the making of immunoglobulins.
Plasma cells make immunoglobulins. For reasons that are not entirely clear. The translocations in myeloma that include IgH, they are partnering up with oncogenes. There is a list of oncogenes, there’s MATH, there’s three MATHs, A, B, C. There’s FGFR3, MMSET, and there’s also Cyclin D1 that are on the list. So these are the different types of structural variants that you can see with FISH probes. What people have understood less about are something called mutational signatures. And myeloma is made up by eight distinct mutational signatures that you can see in every single patient. And what that means is that you can, if you conduct whole genome sequencing and you look at all the base pairs, you can see there are certain number of combinations. C can be swapped for A and C can be swapped for G or C can be swapped for T, T can be A and T can be C and T can also be G.
Those are the combinations. So there are four different base pairs, but if you, because the DNA is double-stranded, these are the only possibilities that mathematically that you can see. Now if you look for every base pair and you look on one base pair on the left and one on the right, we call that 5 and 3 prime, you look through triplicates, every of these base pairs can have these different swaps I mentioned. Mathematically, there are 96 different combinations that you can come up with. That’s it.
If you don’t go through the entire genome from left to right, you see that there are these recurrent eight signatures that are there in every patient. So although we don’t understand why they are and exactly how they function, the fact that you see them in every patient tells us that this has to have something to do with the biology of the disease. It must have a role in the control of the disease. We are starting to see that there is one signature that’s called APOBEC. That signature seems to be very important for resistance to treatments. And you can see that APOBEC can be more or less expressed.
And if APOBEC is very expressed, we see that there are lot of mutations in the cells. We have seen in patients with the chemotherapy that APOBEC can be very expressed. When we treat with four drug combinations, it can be very expressed. And what I’m saying, when I say it can be expressed, these are in the patients that relapse out of these therapies. We have also seen that in CAR T cells and bispecifics. So that makes me believe and our group believe that the cells use some form of what we call tumor intrinsic defense mechanism to protect themselves from whatever therapy we use.
It doesn’t matter if it’s immunotherapy, chemotherapy or small molecule therapy, there are some fundamental programs the cells can turn on. We need to understand that better and we are spending a lot of time trying to drill into this. Lastly, I also want to say there was a fourth class of genomic events called complex events that you can see in myeloma, something called chromothripsis. That’s a very severe genomic lesion, is a ripple effect through the genome. There are a lot of havoc going on. And the first time we saw that, we thought this has to be something wrong with this sample. But when we look through more and more samples, we see that about a quarter of the patients actually have this chromothripsis.
So the bottom line is, it’s time to stop doing FISH, it’s time to do more advanced sequencing, ideally whole genome sequencing, but a step towards a whole genome could be to do whole exome sequencing. But there are companies saying that you can do whole genome sequencing for $1 in the future. So that’s really what needs to happen. We need to have better tools to better understand and then we can use this to better understand how to differentiate the therapy and have an individualized treatment. That’s what I talked about with the IRMA model.
Lisa Hatfield:
All right, well, thank you so much for that explanation. Dr. Landgren, can you speak to the advantages that bispecific antibodies offer over traditional therapies, and how do you see their role in overcoming treatment resistance?
Dr. Ola Landgren:
Well, the bispecific antibodies is a novel way of engaging the immune system to go after the myeloma. So if you think about the other antibodies we have, we have three other antibodies. We have daratumumab, we have isatuximab (Sarclisa), we have elotuzumab (Empliciti), they are naked antibodies. They bind to the myeloma and on the backend of these antibodies, there is something called the FC receptor that attracts cells, NK cells, for example, also T cells, and they also attract, some of these antibodies also attract complement and they also by themselves send what’s called a death signal into the myeloma cell.
The bispecific antibodies are very different. They bind and they don’t send death signals, they don’t engage with the complement. What they do is that they have another arm sticking out that binds to the T cells. That’s a CD3 arm and there’s an open pocket. So when a T cell passes by, it grabs the T cell. And now you have a T cell linked to the antibody sitting next to the myeloma cell and the T cell will kill the myeloma. T cells can be very aggressive and kill the myeloma. You just hold them together, it’s like a matchmaker.
And if you think about how CAR T-cell therapy is designed, you take out the T cells, you manufacture them to have a special antenna receptor on their surface, and then you give them back again. And then they bind, this receptor binds to myeloma cells. So in the setting of a CAR T-cell therapy, the T cell sits next to the myeloma cell, but that’s because the T cells were taken out of the body, manufactured to have this receptor that then finds the myeloma cell. But the bispecific antibody, that they don’t require the T cells to be taken out, to be modified this way.
You just use your existing T cells in your body and these antibody just binds to the T cells and the myeloma cells in the body. So it’s sort of a little bit mimics what the CAR T cells do, but it does it in its own way within the cell, within the tissue in the body. You asked me for resistance mechanism and how they are better. Well, I think the best answer I can give you is to say that the overall response rate for the bispecific antibodies are very high. They are 60 to 80 percent single drug compared to the current trials. And if you look and see the trials that have led to approval for the other existing drugs, they were 20 or 30 percent.
So the overall response rate is much higher for the bispecifics than they were for the other existing drugs. We don’t really know exactly how to use them, I would say. What’s the optimal dosing schedule? We give them weekly, it may be every other week, and maybe monthly, eventually, I would think. And should they be combined with which drugs? That’s ongoing investigation. Other questions are, can they be stopped? Can you monitor patients off therapy for a long time? Will some patients never have the disease coming back? We hope so, but we don’t know. Or would it be patients could be off therapy for a long time, like with CAR T cell? Could that happen with the bispecifics? It’s possible.
And if you were to monitor with blood-based tests and you see that there is reappearing disease, would you then put patients back on the therapy? These are questions we…there are a lot of questions, we don’t have answers to all these, but that’s where I think the field is going. A lot of people, including us, are trying to investigate this.
Share Your Feedback:
What Are the Latest Artificial Intelligence Advancements for Myeloma?
What Are the Latest Artificial Intelligence Advancements for Myeloma? from Patient Empowerment Network on Vimeo.
What artificial intelligence advancements have emerged for myeloma? Expert Dr. Ola Landgren from University of Miami Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center discusses the IRMMa prediction model for myeloma care, factors that go into the IRMMaa model, and potential AI advancements for myeloma.
Download Guide | Descargar Guía
See More from START HERE Myeloma
Related Programs:
|
|
|
Transcript:
Lisa Hatfield:
So that kind of leads to the next question that is really an exciting area. I know it’s not necessarily new, but newer is artificial intelligence. And I know I was reading an article about one of, that you and your colleagues have worked on a newer project and I don’t know if you pronounce it IRMMa or not, but using these large databases to help predict I think, it’s the response of treatment in some patients. So can you talk about that a little bit and tell us about that development and what developments are exciting with artificial intelligence in cancer, in particular myeloma?
Dr. Ola Landgren:
Yeah. So you mentioned the study we just published. We published a model that we call IRMMa and that stands for individual risk prediction for patients with multiple myeloma. So what we were thinking was at the current time, all the existing models are pretty much providing the average patient’s predicted outcome. So think about it is like it’s a probability measure.
So you say, if I take this about therapy, what’s the predicted average outcome for patients that take this therapy, say, five years later? So on average, say 70 percent of patients are free from progression. That sounds pretty good. The problem is that you don’t know if you are in the group, 70 percent group that didn’t progress or if you’re in the 30 percent that did progress.
So where are you as an individual? So it’s almost like looking at the weather app on your phone. If it says it’s a 70 percent probability of sunshine and then you go outside and it’s raining, it’s because it didn’t say that it’s 100 percent probability of sunshine. So if you think about another situation would be, say, in a GYN clinic, if a woman were to come and ask the doctor, am I pregnant? Yes or no? You couldn’t say it’s 70 percent probability. You would say, yes, you’re pregnant or not pregnant.
So for myeloma, we have for a long time been living in these weather report systems where we say 70 percent or 30 percent. And we want to go in the other direction of the pregnancy test, where we actually can say for someone with this particular disease profile, with this treatment, this is where this is going to take us. We worked on this project for almost four years, and we worked with a lot of other groups around the world that have a lot of data. And they have graciously agreed to collaborate with us and share their data sets. The beauty with this collaboration, there are many beauties of it, but one of them is that people don’t treat patients the same way.
And that actually has allowed us to say for patients that have a particular biological or genomic makeup, if you’re treated this way or that way or the other way or a fourth way and so forth, which of these different treatments would make patients have the longest progression and overall survival? So if you have a large database, you can actually ask those questions. So you can say that you profile individual patients in full detail and you put them in detailed buckets instead of grouping everybody together.
And now if you add a new case, if a new patient is being added and you say, which bucket would this individual fit? Well, this is the right biological bucket. You can then use this database to say out of all the different treatment options, which treatment option would last the longest, which would give the best overall survival? Other questions you could ask is also, for example, you have a patient with a certain biological workup or makeup. And you say, if I treat with these drugs, will the addition of, say, transplant, will that prolong progression for his survival?
And you can go into the database and the computer will then say, I have these many patients that have this genomic makeup and these many people that were treated with this treatment with transplant versus the same treatment without transplant. There was no difference in their progression or overall survival. So then the computer would say, it doesn’t add any clinical benefit, but there could be another makeup where the answer is opposite, but transplant actually would provide longer progression for his survival. I think the whole field of medicine is probably going to go more and more in this direction.
So what we want to do is to expand the number of cases. So we are asking other groups around the world, if they have data sets with thousands of patients, they could be added to this database and we could then have more and more detailed information on sub-types of disease and more and more treatment. So it will be better as we train it with larger data sets. The model is built as an open interface so we can import new data. And that’s also important because the treatments will continue to change. So we, for example, say I have a patient that has this genetic makeup. I was thinking of using a bispecific antibody for the newly diagnosed setting.
How is that going to work? The computer will say, I don’t know, because we don’t have any patients like that in the database because that’s not the data, type of data that currently exists from larger studies. But let’s say in the future, if there were datasets like that, you could ask the computer and the computer will tell you what the database finds as the answer. But if you go for another combination, if that’s in the database, it would answer that too. That is where I think the field is going.
And lastly, I would say we are also using these types of technologies to evaluate the biopsies, the material. We work with the HealthTree Foundation on a large project where we are trying to use computational models to get out a lot of the biological data out of the biopsies and also to predict outcomes. So I think artificial intelligence is going to come in so many different areas in the myeloma field and probably in many, many other fields in medicine.
Lisa Hatfield:
Yeah, that’s wonderful. So if you have a newly diagnosed patient coming in to see you, do you use this model and explain to them what came back to you? Or is it right now just collecting the data for this dataset?
Dr. Ola Landgren:
So at the current time, we have to be cautious. We cannot promise things that we cannot deliver. So we have clearly said this is a research tool. It was just published less than a month ago in the Journal of Clinical Oncology. It is publicly available. The paper is available. Anyone can go there and download the paper and anyone can also in this paper find there’s a website. You can actually see the database as well. And there is a lot of corresponding material online on how to interpret. So for now, it is a research tool. But I think it’s possible in the future that we would start considering using it. And if other people find it useful, maybe they will do that, too. But for now, it is a research tool.
Lisa Hatfield:
As a patient, I would be very intrigued with that and what might come back. Just like you said, it’s a tool to maybe help identify new treatments or whatever. I did ask ChatGPT if there’s a cure for myeloma, if there will be one in the next 10 years. I didn’t really love the answer. It was a little bit vague. But yeah, I like looking into AI a little bit and ChatGPT and all that. So thank you so much for that overview.
Dr. Ola Landgren:
This is exactly like ChatGPT. It works the same way, but it’s only centered around multiple myeloma. For now, the way we have done it is that we have to start somewhere. As I told you, it’s a four-year work effort with a lot of people. We have like 10, 15 people working day and night on this project. So we started on the newly diagnosed patients. But we intend to scale it up. We intend to build in a lot of new features. And, of course, we want to add more datasets to it. And last thing I want to say to you, I find it very, very fascinating how you can, as a human being, as a researcher, you can ask the computer, and it will give you answers back that you didn’t think about yourself.
So you talk about ChatGPT. So we are using our model. We can have the model looking at biopsies. We can ask the computer, what is this biopsy? What’s going on? And the computer will say this and this and this genetic feature is going on. And then we ask the question, how did you conclude that? And then the computer will say, look here. So it would then label areas in the biopsy and say, I looked here. It doesn’t yet tell us what it found, but it tells us where it found it or where it looked to come to its conclusion.
So when it finds the right conclusion, we are looking in these areas to see what’s going on in these areas and how does it look different from other areas or in other samples. So having a dialogue with the computer can give us new insight. It’s almost like taking a young kid and you go out for a walk and you look and you see a lot of buildings and the kid looks down and looks and finds a little flower on the ground. And you say, oh, my gosh, I missed that one. The kid would not miss it. The computer is the same way.
Lisa Hatfield:
Yeah, that’s a great analogy, too. And I think we could have a 10-hour conversation about that, particularly with myeloma, because it’s so complicated, complex. So I hope we can in the future again talk about that.
Share Your Feedback:
What Are the Benefits of Myeloma Consults and Second Opinions?
What Are the Benefits of Myeloma Consults and Second Opinions? from Patient Empowerment Network on Vimeo.
What can myeloma consults and second opinions bring to patients? Expert Dr. Ola Landgren from University of Miami Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center discusses the benefits of consults, second opinions, and myeloma specialist centers.
Download Guide | Descargar Guía
See More from START HERE Myeloma
Related Programs:
|
|
|
|
Transcript:
Lisa Hatfield:
I’m going to segue into a comment that I always make to myeloma patients. As Dr. Landgren was explaining all of these treatment options, he is on top of all the latest and greatest news and therapies. I always recommend to myeloma patients newly diagnosed or otherwise to seek out at least one consult from a specialist. If you have difficulty accessing care, then a lot of places can do video conferencing, but even that one consult to see a myeloma specialist is so important in your care and treatment options. So I’ll just throw that out there, Dr. Landgren, as a myeloma specialist that you are, we appreciate your expertise in explaining that so well.
Dr. Ola Landgren:
I agree 100 percent with what you said, and I would like to add to that and say, going to a specialist center and it doesn’t have to be here, can really really help. It can be a lot of small things. There is data indicating that survival is longer for patients who have access to specialists. That has been published in the Journal of Clinical Oncology. The Mayo Clinic has published that, I think it was more than one year longer survival.
That by itself is, of course, very strong, but I also think that there are a lot of the small things like the different types of pre-medications, the drugs that are given around myeloma drugs. Could you decrease the dose of some of these drugs like the dexamethasone (Decadron)? Could you get rid of Benadryl if you give the antibodies? These may look as small things, but they can make a huge difference for quality of life.
We have a lot of people coming for second opinions, and we always say if you live closer to someone that you trust, you should go back and be treated there. You can always reach out to us. We are happy to be involved. You have us as a backup. We can be your quarterback if you ever need us. I think that is absolutely the best advice for every patient. Go and get feedback and if you’re not sure about the feedback you get, you could always have two different quarterbacks and you could ask them. I don’t think having 10 or 20 is going to help, but having one or two second opinions, I think is a good decision.
Share Your Feedback:
Self-Advocacy in Myeloma Care | Advice From an Expert
Self-Advocacy in Myeloma Care | Advice From an Expert from Patient Empowerment Network on Vimeo.
What questions should myeloma patients ask their doctor about a treatment plan? Myeloma expert Dr. Omar Nadeem shares key advice and emphasizes the importance of patients engaging with their healthcare team in treatment decisions.
Dr. Omar Nadeem is the Clinical Director of the Myeloma Immune Effector Cell Therapy Program and Associate Director of the Multiple Myeloma Clinical Research Program at the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute. Learn more about Dr. Nadeem.
Related Resources:
Clinical Trials for Myeloma Treatment | Essential Information for Patients |
|
Personalized Medicine for Myeloma Treatment | What Patients Should Know |
Transcript:
Katherine:
What questions should patients be asking their provider about a proposed treatment plan?
Dr. Nadeem:
Yeah. I think because myeloma therapy’s so nuanced and much of this is still in clinical trials or under investigation about what to do with some of these results, I would say, as a whole, it’s important to know which tests the physician looks at to determine how you’re doing, and kind of what their assessment of that result is. So, for example, if somebody’s had a 50 percent reduction in the amount of abnormal protein in the blood, is that sufficient, or should we be aiming for a number that’s much higher than that?
Some of that depends on kind of where they are in their treatment course, but that’s a very sort of reasonable question to ask your physician is that where do you see my response now, let’s say six months into therapy, and is this adequate, and what is now, after we have all this information, what is my roadmap going forward to try to keep this disease in check?
Katherine:
Yeah. Well, that’s great advice, Dr. Nadeem. Thank you. I’d like to turn to self-advocacy, Dr. Nadeem. Why is it so important that patients engage in their care treatment decisions?
Dr. Nadeem:
Yeah. As I mentioned, myeloma therapy is so individualized now and we can sit here, look at the trial data, get very into the weeds and technical about this therapy with this approach as X or Y higher response rate.
Or MRD-negative rate, but in reality, we’re dealing with people and we’re dealing with people that have lives.
They have all their priorities, and until you share that with us, it’s very difficult for us to know exactly what’s important to you. So, what I may consider to be kind of the “best therapy” for you may not make sense for you because of all the priorities that you may have, and I think it’s so important to advocate for yourself and not be afraid to bring that up to your physician because I think many patients kind of hold that stuff in for a long time because they don’t want it to impact their care. But I would argue the other way around.
Tell us. Tell us exactly what you prioritize. Tell us if you can’t be out of commission for work for X amount of time because of a stem cell transplant. We now have options. We now have options for patients because of all these amazing new therapies for myeloma and we can come up with a very individualized treatment plan for you based on your priorities.
Katherine:
If a patient is feeling like they’re not getting the best care or they’re uncomfortable with the care they’re receiving, what steps should they take to change that?
Dr. Nadeem:
Yeah, I think that’s very difficult because this is a complex system. Medical systems are getting even more and more complex. They’re busy. Everybody’s busy: busy offices, labs, radiology. We’re all feeling that. It doesn’t matter where you are. So, I think it’s important to raise those concerns, number one, to your practice that you’re being seen at because they would like to see that feedback, right? So, kind of see what is something that they can perhaps improve upon. I think it’s always important, like we just said, to advocate for yourself and raise some of these issues and not be afraid of that.
We’re all in this together, right, so I think ultimately, we’re all trying to take the best care of you and we would need to know which part of that may or may not be working so well.
Personalized Medicine for Myeloma Treatment | What Patients Should Know
Personalized Medicine for Myeloma Treatment | What Patients Should Know from Patient Empowerment Network on Vimeo.
What is personalized medicine, and how can myeloma patients access this type of care? Myeloma expert Dr. Omar Nadeem defines personalized medicine and shares how test results can impact myeloma care and treatment options.
Dr. Omar Nadeem is the Clinical Director of the Myeloma Immune Effector Cell Therapy Program and Associate Director of the Multiple Myeloma Clinical Research Program at the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute. Learn more about Dr. Nadeem.
Related Resources:
|
|
|
|
Transcript:
Katherine:
Well, Dr. Nadeem, we’ve been hearing the term personalized medicine more frequently in recent years. How would you define personalized medicine for myeloma, and how can patients access this type of care?
Dr. Nadeem:
Yeah, personalized medicine or precision medicine is a term that we’ve really sort of used for many oncologic conditions over the last decade or so. I would say, for multiple myeloma, in terms of identifying a target within the myeloma cell that’s unique to the patient.
And then deploying a certain therapy to that patient because of that target is still lacking. We do have one example where patients have, for example, an 11;14 translocation, which we see in about 15 percent of myeloma patients.
There’s an agent called venetoclax (Venclexta) that is very active against that particular cohort of patients, although that is still not approved to be used, but that’s one example where that agent specifically benefits that type of myeloma. Other than that, most of the therapies that we have benefit essentially everybody with myeloma, which is great, but it’s not so personalized.
Where I would say there’s the most personalization happening now, at least in my practice, is looking at which types of therapies an individual patient may receive. What I mean by that is if somebody’s in an excellent response, with quadruplet-based induction therapy, I have a very real discussion with them about the pros and cons of stem cell transplant.
We make those decisions in real time depending on how the patient doing, depending on how their response is.
And then kind of deciding a whole kind of what are the kind of risks and benefits and what makes sense for that individual patient. Similarly, when you go on to maintenance therapy, maintenance therapy means that after you’ve gone through the initial phase of your myeloma therapy and the disease is under control, what type of therapy can we keep you on to keep it under control for as long as possible? Historically, that has been lenalidomide or Revlimid. Now we’re adding drugs such as daratumamab (Darzalex) and other agents to Revlimid to see if that can further prolong the response to that initial therapy.
So, all those decisions are so individualized that you have to discuss with your provider what makes sense for you and what are the pros and cons of doing one approach versus the other.
Katherine:
Well, if we’re talking about in-depth testing, how do the results of that testing affect treatment options?
Dr. Nadeem:
So, right now we use conventional blood tests to get a sense of response in the vast majority of patients. That includes the serum protein electrophoresis and the serum free light chain assay.
Most patients have detectable levels of these proteins, abnormal proteins in the blood at diagnosis and then you can follow them using a blood test. There’s a subset of patients that have disease only that shows up on scans. So, we then kind of incorporate some of those scans and then, also, utilize the bone marrow results both in the beginning and in subsequent analyses to kind of give a big-picture composite response assessment for that particular patient. Nowadays, there are also other tools that we’re using, such as MRD, or minimal residual disease.
That is a test that is done on a bone marrow biopsy to determine, if you don’t have detectable protein in the blood, do you have myeloma cells present at the deepest level possible? And if you do versus if you don’t, trials have shown that there is a difference in terms of prognosis. Now, while that hasn’t fully been utilized yet to make treatment decisions in patients that are not on clinical trials, we do get prognostic information out of it, and nowadays, more and more of those trials are using these MRD tests to determine what to do with treatment.
And I think that’s how it’s going to be in the future. So, having those extra tests available but, again, important to discuss with your provider what is the utility of this test. How are we going to use this information for your individual case to make some decisions?
Next Generation Myeloma Treatment Options
Next Generation Myeloma Treatment Options from Patient Empowerment Network on Vimeo.
What new myeloma therapies are showing promise? Myeloma expert Dr. Omar Nadeem shares an update on emerging myeloma treatment research, including CELMoDs, and shares advice for a having a treatment plan roadmap.
Dr. Omar Nadeem is the Clinical Director of the Myeloma Immune Effector Cell Therapy Program and Associate Director of the Multiple Myeloma Clinical Research Program at the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute. Learn more about Dr. Nadeem.
Related Resources:
|
Personalized Medicine for Myeloma Treatment | What Patients Should Know |
|
|
Transcript:
Katherine:
Are there other emerging myeloma therapies that are showing promise?
Dr. Nadeem:
Yes. So, I think over the last few years, most of the buzz has been with these immunotherapies. And, again, more work to be done there to see whether combinations, different schedules, different targets, different types, will show more and more benefit in each of these myeloma disease settings.
But we also have simultaneous development of other agents that are not in this sort of immunotherapy T-cell redirecting therapy realm. We have newer versions of our classic immunomodulatory drugs, such as lenalidomide (Revlimid) or pomalidomide (Pomalyst).
We now have their next generation agents, called CELMoD drugs and there’s two of them in development. One of them is called iberdomide; one is called mezigdomide.
These are, again, kind of building up on the success of some of these previous therapies that are kind of cornerstone therapies for myeloma patients and because these are essentially better agents, they’re more targeted, and they also have greater response rates as single agents and as combinations.
We’re hoping that these would be approved in the not-so-distant future and then perhaps will replace some of these immunomodulatory drugs that we have currently utilized in newly diagnosed and relapsed myeloma. Essentially what this means is things are just getting better and better and better as we get newer versions of some of these therapies. So, those are, I would say, kind of next in line in terms of hopeful approvals.
And then we’ll add to some of the options that we have for myeloma patients.
Katherine:
How can patients and care partners stay informed about the latest myeloma research?
Dr. Nadeem:
Yeah, it’s a lot of moving parts all the time. From one six-month interval to the next, you tend to have nowadays perhaps some drug approvals, which is amazing, but if not updates of all these sort of combination trials, etcetera, of where these things are going. I think kind of talking to your physician, obviously, about some of these updates is really critical. As I mentioned before, having a roadmap in your mind about what the myeloma therapy for you might look like going forward, wherever you are in your disease state, is always important because it gives you time to sort of think about it, learn about it, prepare for it.
Some of these therapies really require an effort from the patient and their caregivers because, for example, for CAR-T cells. If you’re not near a center, you may have to relocate for a month.
And it’s very difficult, and we fully understand that and try to help as much as we can, but that’s the kind of commitment that it takes. So, talking to your physician, obviously content like this, reviewing this as much as you can. Online patient support groups are great because you learn from the other patients’ experiences. So, the good news now is we have so many channels of communication, but you have to in a way, in the end, discuss with your physician and verify things you may find on your own.
Katherine:
Exactly, yeah. You want to make sure you’re getting facts rather than fiction.
Dr. Nadeem:
Yeah. That’s right.
Evolving Myeloma Treatment Options | Bispecific Antibody Therapy
Evolving Myeloma Treatment Options | Bispecific Antibody Therapy from Patient Empowerment Network on Vimeo.
What are bispecific antibodies, and how are they advancing myeloma care? Dr. Omar Nadeem of Dana-Farber Cancer Institute discusses the role of this new therapy in myeloma care, shares an update on ongoing bispecific antibody research, and compares this treatment to CAR T-cell therapy.
Dr. Omar Nadeem is the Clinical Director of the Myeloma Immune Effector Cell Therapy Program and Associate Director of the Multiple Myeloma Clinical Research Program at the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute. Learn more about Dr. Nadeem.
Related Resources:
What Is the Role of Bispecific Antibody Therapy in the Future of Myeloma Care? |
|
|
Transcript:
Katherine:
Well, another therapy that has emerged in myeloma is bispecific antibodies. What patient type is this therapy right for?
Dr. Nadeem:
So, bispecific antibodies are great because they’re off the shelf. What that means is that CAR-T cells, we first have to collect the T cells and we then have to send them off to be manufactured, and that manufacturing process can take up to a month, sometimes even longer, for some of the current available CAR-T products.
And then, after the cells are returned to the facility, we then give usually three days of chemotherapy to try to suppress some of the immune systems of the patients. So, that way, when the cells are administered, they can expand robustly and do essentially what they need to do.
So, that whole logistical process can take a couple of months by the time you identify somebody for CAR-T cells and then, from that moment until they can actually be treated. With bispecific antibodies, if we think somebody’s ready to go, you can basically get it as soon as we can have somebody ready to go either in our clinic or on the in-patient facility.
So, they’re much easier. They also utilize T cells to attack myeloma cells. We now have three approved bispecific antibodies. Two of them are targeting BCMA, the same exact target that we have in CAR-T cells, and one of them is now targeting a new target called GPRC5D, which is also highly expressed on myeloma cells.
So, having all these bispecific antibodies available is excellent because patients can have access to them a lot faster and now we’re trying to answer the question of sequencing. Can you give bispecific antibodies after CAR-T cells for example? Can you give one bispecific antibody after another, especially if there’s a different target that we now have available?
As a whole, though, bispecific antibodies tend to have lower response rates than CAR-T cells, particularly cilta-cel (Carvykti), which is cilta-cel that has a very high response rate of close to 100 percent.
Most bispecific antibodies have response rates somewhere around 70 or so percent, so about two-thirds of patients respond to these therapies, again, in that fifth line or four or more lines of therapy. So, in that space, that’s the response rate. And across the board, generally speaking, patients benefit from these bispecific antibodies approximately a year on average. Some of the studies have shown longer benefit, and it also depends somewhat on response to therapy.
Patients that have a really deep response can go even way longer than that. So, it is quite mixed in terms of how somebody may do on these bispecific antibodies, but those are the numbers.
Katherine:
Well, it sounds like bispecific antibodies have really transformed myeloma treatment options.
Dr. Nadeem:
Absolutely, and what goes hand in hand in this.
I mentioned the logistics of CAR T, but then there’s also the supply and availability of CAR-T cells. Since the approval, the demand for CAR-T cells has been very high because of all these excellent results, but the supply really hasn’t been there. So, even at a center as busy as ours, we can only treat a handful of patients with CAR T-cell therapies compared to bispecific antibodies, where that is essentially an injection similar to many other approved myeloma agents that you can just readily treat patients with. So, CAR-T cells, while I think, again, have higher efficacy, with that comes slightly higher toxicity as well. It’s a very different kind of treatment program.
And then, patients get a treatment-free interval, which you don’t see yet with bispecific antibodies. On the other hand, bispecific antibodies are readily available, slightly lower response rates, slightly lower toxicity when it comes to at least the traditional T-cell directing toxicities. And then you have, again, the readily available nature of it, which I think is hugely beneficial for patients.
Katherine:
You talked about some specifics regarding bispecific antibodies, but are there updates in bispecific antibody research that you’d like to share?
Dr. Nadeem:
Yeah, so, again, kind of following the theme of what we just said about CAR-T cells, can you bring these antibody therapies earlier? And there’s ongoing trials now looking at it in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma and early relapses, and then we presented our data at ASH this previous year looking at it in high-risk smoldering myeloma. We treated patients with teclistimab (Tecvayli), which is a BCMA bispecific antibody that is approved for relapse refractory patients. And what we demonstrated in that study is that people that got teclistimab had a 100 percent response rate with an MRD-negative rate. So, kind of as deep of a response as we can measure, also at 100 percent.
So, this is something that we had not seen before. When their immune systems are a lot healthier, they may benefit more. So, hopefully we’ll see confirmation of these results in other trials.
Particularly in the newly diagnosed space because we do think that these antibody therapies have such huge potential to treat patients, and then hopefully we’ll have durable responses. So, I do think that some of this paradigm may shift over the next few years, and then there’s also combinations that are currently being studied: combinations with traditional myeloma therapies, such as monoclonal antibodies, other immunomodulatory agents, or proteasome inhibitors. All these combination trials are now ongoing to see can you improve upon some of those numbers that I highlighted before with single-agent bispecific antibody therapy.
Katherine:
Can you share the pros and cons of bispecifics and how it compares to CAR T?”
Dr. Nadeem:
Yeah. I think we mentioned earlier that as a whole, they’re very similar. They’re both T-cell re-directing therapies, in many circumstances, with the same exact target of the myeloma cell, but because this isn’t a cell infusion – this is a cell injection – that you receive that redirects your T cells to the myeloma cells, you tend to see a little bit of a lower toxicity signal when it comes to the cytokine release syndrome incidents and severity. You see lower neurological toxicity, usually, than you do with CAR T-cell products as a whole.
With that comes slightly lower efficacy than you see with at least some of our CAR-T products, but if you respond to therapy, then the durability of response can be as good as you can achieve with CAR-T cells. One thing to note about the bispecifics, though, is that it is continuous therapy, so you are getting it on some regular schedule. Right now the approval is for it to be given weekly and then go to every two weeks after six months of therapy if you’re basically in a good response.
A lot of that is to try to mitigate the risk of infection. So, that is one of the biggest things that we have seen with bispecifics more so than CAR-T cells. Because it is continuous administration of these therapies, that really suppresses your immune system significantly, and infection rates are quite high. So, we typically give other ways to try to mitigate that using immunoglobulin infusions to try to boost up your immune system. Typically, we do that once a month for patients, making sure you’re on the right prophylactic medications and then really adjusting the therapy and the schedule to you depending on your tolerability.
So, as we said before, it’s an excellent option. I think bispecific antibodies are going to be the mainstay of myeloma therapy going forward because CAR-T cells, again, we can’t really treat everybody with CAR-T cells just simply because of the dynamics of how the process is. So, having the bispecific antibodies available for patients is excellent.
Evolving Myeloma Treatment Options | CAR T-Cell Therapy
Evolving Myeloma Treatment Options | CAR T-Cell Therapy from Patient Empowerment Network on Vimeo.
What is CAR T-cell therapy, and who is it right for? Dr. Omar Nadeem of Dana-Farber Cancer Institute discusses the role of this therapy in myeloma care and shares an update in ongoing CAR T-cell therapy clinical trial research.
Dr. Omar Nadeem is the Clinical Director of the Myeloma Immune Effector Cell Therapy Program and Associate Director of the Multiple Myeloma Clinical Research Program at the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute. Learn more about Dr. Nadeem.
Related Resources:
|
Clinical Trials for Myeloma Treatment | Essential Information for Patients |
Personalized Medicine for Myeloma Treatment | What Patients Should Know |
|
Transcript:
Katherine:
Well, I’d like to talk about some new and emerging therapies in myeloma, starting with CAR T-cell therapy. Can you talk about who this treatment option might be appropriate for?
Dr. Nadeem:
So, yeah, just to kind of give folks background, CAR T-cell therapy is a form of immunotherapy, where we take out an individual’s T-cells and then re-program them, essentially, to recognize myeloma cells. Right now there’s two approved CAR-T products for multiple myeloma, both in the relapse refractory setting. It’s really for patients that have had four or more lines of therapy.
So, that’s a lot of different combinations that we currently have available. Those therapies stop working before patients are actually eligible for CAR-T cells at the moment. Both of these CAR T-cell products have been gamechangers in terms of improving prognosis for patients.
The good thing about CAR-T cells is that it is a one-and-done treatment. So, patients, when they go through that initial phase of therapy, they are then off therapy, although we are now starting to study certain therapies that we may administer after CAR-T cells to get them to last even longer than they currently do, but that’s still in, for example, that’s one of the clinical trials or many of the clinical trials that are currently ongoing now, to try to answer that question.
So, a lot of patients can be eligible for CAR-T cells. They have to have the prerequisite amount of therapies. Again, there are some sort of baseline fitness characteristics that we look at for patient’s ability to tolerate it. But as a whole, I consider CAR T-cell therapy more broadly applicable to myeloma patients than compared to, let’s say, a stem cell transplant.
Katherine:
How has this therapy revolutionized myeloma care?
Dr. Nadeem:
Yeah, before the first approval, now a few years ago, in this space we didn’t really have anything like this to offer patients. So, many of the combinations and other compounds that were in clinical trials would have a response rate somewhere around, let’s say, 30 percent. So, 30 percent of patients may respond to that therapy in that space, and that may only last a few months, and that was considered successful not that long ago. Now, with CAR T-cell therapy and bispecific antibodies, these therapies are highly efficacious.
You see response rates of 70 to 100 percent in some of these immunotherapies, and what that’s translating into is patient’s disease staying away for a year or two years, even three years in some of these clinical trials. And again, this is completely unprecedented compared to what we had before.
Katherine:
I understand that there are a number of clinical trials for different types of CAR T, or even using it earlier in the disease. Can you share updates in CAR T-cell therapy research?
Dr. Nadeem:
Yeah, so, exactly as you pointed out, there have been trials already, actually, that have been completed, Phase III studies looking at CAR T-cell therapies in earlier relapses. So, patients that have had either one of two lines of therapy.
Both our CAR-T therapies have been compared to standard of care in that space and have shown superiority, and this is something that we all have been kind of waiting for to see if you deploy it earlier, perhaps you’re going to see even greater benefit, and that seems to be the case in some of these trials, and now we’re awaiting, hopefully, approval of some of these CAR T-cell therapies to be administered earlier because in fifth line, it’s very different than treating patients in second or third line, which I think will really vastly improve our ability to deliver this therapy to many patients, as it can be quite challenging for patients that are in fifth line, to allow them to go through the process of CAR-T cells and then having them be administered.
I was looking at it head-to-head with stem cell transplant, as I mentioned before, and this is in the context of quadruplet and induction therapy followed by either CAR-T cells or stem cell transplant, and then followed by maintenance therapy. So, really trying to see if I can overcome what we typically have achieved with stem cell transplantation.
We also are doing some studies even before that. So, patients, again, in high-risk smoldering myeloma, which we know have an increased risk of developing newly diagnosed disease in the next few years, perhaps that could be the time where we can give some of these immunotherapies, and that’s some work that we have going on at our center.
Clinical Trials for Myeloma Treatment | Essential Information for Patients
Clinical Trials for Myeloma Treatment | Essential Information for Patients from Patient Empowerment Network on Vimeo.
How do clinical trials advance treatment options for myeloma? Dr. Omar Nadeem discusses the important role of clinical trials in improving patient care, key questions to ask your care team about trial participation, and the benefits of seeing a myeloma specialist.
Dr. Omar Nadeem is the Clinical Director of the Myeloma Immune Effector Cell Therapy Program and Associate Director of the Multiple Myeloma Clinical Research Program at the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute. Learn more about Dr. Nadeem.
Related Resources:
|
Personalized Medicine for Myeloma Treatment | What Patients Should Know |
|
Transcript:
Katherine:
I’d like to start with the importance of a patient’s healthcare team. What are the benefits to seeking care with a myeloma specialist, even if it’s just for a second opinion or a consult?
Dr. Nadeem:
Yeah, so, myeloma is a little less than 2 percent of all cancers, and it’s the second most common blood cancer, so certainly not rare. With that being said, if you go to a general community practice, they don’t typically see too, too many patients with this disease. So, alongside that, we have so many different treatment options and combinations and these, as I mentioned, immune therapies.
And other therapies that are only actually carried out at academic centers for now, such as stem cell transplants, and CAR T-cell therapy.
I think it’s important to kind of meet with an academic provider just to get a sense of what the patient may be facing, both in that immediate time, but also in the future, because a lot of myeloma therapy is lifelong. And in that case, you do have to come up with a plan for your whole treatment in a way early. So, it’s important to kind of one: hear it from another person, and then two: really sort of figure out what the outlook would look like for the individual patient.
With that being said, many of our myeloma regimens that are approved can very easily be given at the local provider, and that’s usually our preference, for patients to be treated closer to home. So, ultimately, this is another way for patients to get input about their treatment program, but also talk about the future.
Katherine:
That makes sense. Specialists at academic medical centers are typically more involved in research and clinical trials.
And patient participation is essential to advancing medicine. So, how do clinical trials impact myeloma care?
Dr. Nadeem:
Well, everything that we have available today for myeloma therapy was once in a clinical trial. So, all these promising therapies usually start in early phase studies and move on to Phase II and Phase III studies, and then those are the ones that the FDA uses to approve a particular combination.
So, it all depends on kind of where someone is in their disease course. It also kind of depends on what their preferences may be in terms of taking on something that is beyond standard of care. So, as part of any clinical trial in whatever phase it may be, whether its newly diagnosed multiple myeloma, even smoldering myeloma, which is one step before that, relapsed/refractory myeloma…
At each step of the way, there are clinical trials that are there trying to improve upon what’s already out here, right? So, we are, despite all these amazing advances, unfortunately, the disease is still not curable for a vast majority of patients.
In that case, how do we move to that cure, or how do we kind of advance the disease even beyond this? And a clinical trial is a way to do that.
Katherine:
What type of patient is most appropriate for a clinical trial?
Dr. Nadeem:
So, there are criteria that each clinical trial uses in terms of eligibility. Some of that has to do with the disease characteristic itself, kind of where somebody is in their disease course, but many times it’s also patients’ fitness, organ status in terms of kidney function, their blood count to some extent, heart function, etcetera. There are some sort of minimal prerequisite guidelines that we have to enroll patients in trials. So, it really, again, depends on where somebody is in their disease course and what they may be willing to take on beyond what may be offered to them as part of standard of care.
Katherine:
What questions should patients be asking if they’re entrusted in participating in a clinical trial?
Dr. Nadeem:
I think the important thing is to sort of first recognize what’s available to them as part of standard of care and then what the clinical trial is trying to answer.
So, for example, if it’s newly diagnosed multiple myeloma, we now have quadruplet regimens that we give to patients at the time of their diagnosis, and then the next natural question for eligible patients that now comes up is whether they should do a stem cell transplant or not.
And alongside that goes with all these advances in immune therapies, such as CAR T-cell therapies and bispecific antibodies. And there are now trials looking at those therapies and comparing them, for example, to stem cell transplant to try to answer the question “Can we get even beyond something like a stem cell transplant?”
So, that’s one example of a trial where a patient may be interested in saying “Okay, well, a transplant may be my standard path, but what if I try to enroll in this study and get randomized, for example, to the CAR-T arm? Then, perhaps, I’m getting access to some of these therapies early and maybe that’s going to improve my outcomes.”
Myeloma Patient Expert Q&A: Dr. Ola Landgren
Myeloma Patient Expert Q&A: Dr. Ola Landgren from Patient Empowerment Network on Vimeo.
START HERE bridges the gap between expert and patient voices, empowering myeloma patients to feel comfortable asking precise questions of their healthcare team.
In this webinar, Dr. Ola Landgren delves into the emerging and exciting therapies and clinical trials for myeloma, discusses the latest options for relapsed disease, and explores the current landscape of managing and monitoring multiple myeloma. Watch as Dr. Landgren answers patient-submitted questions and discusses another hot topic: the utilization of artificial intelligence in multiple myeloma.
Download Guide | Descargar Guía
See More from START HERE Myeloma
Related Programs:
|
|
|
Transcript:
Lisa Hatfield:
Hello, and welcome. My name is Lisa Hatfield, your host for this Patient Empowerment Network START HERE program where we bridge the expert and patient voice to enable you and me to feel comfortable asking questions of our healthcare teams. The world is complicated, but understanding your multiple myeloma doesn’t have to be. The goal of this program is to create actionable pathways for getting the most out of myeloma treatment and survivorship.
Today I am honored and really excited to be joined by Dr. Ola Landgren. Dr. Landgren is chief in the Division of Myeloma and the Department of Medicine, and also serves as director of the Sylvester Myeloma Institute at the University of Miami’s Miller School of Medicine. Dr. Landgren, it’s such a pleasure having you today.
Dr. Ola Landgren:
Thank you very much for having me. It’s really a great pleasure to be here today.
Lisa Hatfield:
So in this program, first, we’ll get a high level update from Dr. Landgren on what the latest myeloma news means for you and your family. And then we will launch into some questions that we’ve received from you. Dr. Landgren. We’re at a pivotal moment in the history of multiple myeloma. We’re experiencing an unprecedented wave of progress marked by significant increase in new treatment options and ongoing research. We are very honored to have your expertise to guide us in understanding these advancements and providing clarity around all the evolving landscape of myeloma care.
So before we get started, to you at home, would you please remember to download the program resource guide via the QR code. This is where you’ll find useful information to follow before the program and after. So we are ready to START HERE. Dr. Landgren, can you speak to the emerging and exciting myeloma therapies and trials right now?
Dr. Ola Landgren:
I’ll do my best. There are so many things to talk about, and I don’t think we have 10 hours, so I will have to shorten it. But I would say that the past 12 to 18 months, we have had three new drugs approved in the field of myeloma. These are the bispecific antibodies. The first out of those three was the BCMA-CD3 targeted drug teclistamab-cqyv (Tecvayli). And in the middle of 2023, we had both talquetamab-tgvs (Talvey), and elranatamab-bcmm (Elrexfio) approved. Talquetamab has another target is GPRC5D with CD3. And elranatamab is similar to teclistamab with the BCMA-CD3 targeted bispecific antibody. These are amazing drugs. They have been found in patients that have been heavily pretreated to result in about 60 percent or more percent of patients responding.
So overall response rates ranging from 60 percent to 80 percent in various trials. We have now these drugs approved, they’re still only approved as single drug and there are new trials going, combinations of two of these or these drugs with other drugs such as daratumumab (Darzalex) or IMiDs, such as lenalidomide (Revlimid) or pomalidomide (Pomalyst). So a lot of drug development is ongoing as we speak. We also have the CAR T cells that are reasonably new drugs. We, you think about everything new every week there’s a new drug, but they are very new CAR T cells.
We have had them for about three or so years, three-and-a-half years. And, the two drugs that are approved in that setting is, ide-cel (idecabtagene vicleucel) [Abecma]. That was the first and then cilta-cel (ciltacabtagene autoleucel) [Carvykti], that was the second. They both go after BCMA similar to the two antibodies I mentioned, teclistamab and elranatamab because they are CAR T cells, that indicates that they are cells.
They come from the same person who’s going to receive them back as treatment. So you collect the cells from the blood and you manufacture them into to CAR cells. So chimeric antigen receptor T cells, and then you give them back. There are several new CAR T-cells in development. There are other targets in development, GPRC5D, for example. There are additional other targets and there are also dual targeted cell therapies in development.
There are also allogeneic CAR T cells in development and that means that you could have a product off the shelf. So someone could donate cells, they could be manufactured into CAR T cells, and then you could give them to technically any person, so it doesn’t have to be the same person collecting and then manufacturing, giving them back. So that would shorten the time window for production.
And there are a lot of other details also that are important in this context. The whole manufacturing process that’s currently four to six weeks is being improved. There are some technologies that can make the CAR T cells in 48 hours, but the turnaround time is maybe one to two weeks with all the control steps, but that’s still a huge improvement. And then you have the antibody drug conjugate if you want.
So then you have the belantamab mafodotin (Blenrep). That actually was the first BCMA targeted therapy we had in myeloma. And then the drug was approved on an accelerated approval study. But when the randomized study was completed, it turned out that it was not better than the control arm. The company took it off the market. And now what’s happening is that there are two new trials, and one of them was just reported in the beginning of February of 2024.
The other one was around the ASH meeting in 2023. These two trials show that if you combine it with other drugs, the most recent one was with bortezomib-dexamethasone (Velcade-Decadron), that was superior with the belantamab mafodotin with bortezomib-dexamethasone versus daratumumab with bortezomib-dexamethasone. So I think we will probably see this drug coming back to the myeloma field. It is currently available as compassionate use, so physicians can prescribe it, but these trials will most likely, I would think, lead to FDA approvals with these combinations.
And lastly, I would say that other exciting trials, there are so many trials going on, but another thing that I think is interesting and exciting is also the use of antigens. And you can use mRNA and things like that. So these are like the vaccines. You can either, take a patients’ myeloma cells and look what they have on the surface, you can make more traditional vaccines or you can use more sophisticated newer technologies just like how the COVID vaccines were developed. And you can inject these sequences and then they will translate into spike proteins where the immune system could go after myeloma cells.
We don’t yet have a product like that in the myeloma field, but there are a lot of biotech and groups that are working to see. Moderna, was actually initially a cancer vaccine company and then COVID came and they turned into a COVID company, and now they’re be back again in the cancer field. So that’s a little bit of a summary of a lot of the exciting news that’s out there.
Lisa Hatfield:
Thank you. And do you have any comments about the sequencing of some of these? So with both CAR T and some of the bispecifics approved, obviously if a patient comes in and they need something right away, they’ll take whatever is first available. But all things being equal, if a patient says, well, I can, I have both CAR T accessible and bispecifics accessible. There are some patients out there, I’ve spoken with some who are wondering, is there a benefit to sequencing one before the other, or are there any trials looking into that?
Dr. Ola Landgren:
There are studies that have allowed patients to go on treatment with one of these modalities. For example, the bispecific antibodies with the prior exposure to a CAR T-cell therapy. There are also trials with CAR T-cell therapy that has allowed patients who have been exposed to prior antibodies, either bispecifics or the conjugated antibody drug conjugates, Belantamab mafodotin. So if you look at those studies and see how the numbers compare, if you are not exposed or you are exposed, I think the data is not entirely clear-cut.
There is no definitive study. Some data suggests that maybe it’s not that different, but then there are some studies that suggest that if you go to the antibody first that maybe that would lower the efficacy of the CAR T cell. So some people have for that reason said the CAR T cell should be done first. To make it even more complicated, there are some studies that have then taken time into the equation. So that means that you could have the patient treated with the antibodies for BCMA and CD3, and the antibody is given successfully for a long time, for many years. And eventually, unfortunately, the antibody may stop working.
Now, if you switch back to back to a CAR T-cell therapy without any other therapy in between, some studies indicate that that’s less likely to be beneficial. But if you instead do another target, say you did GPRC5D/CD3, or you did a completely different therapy with small molecules or you did carfilzomib (Kyprolis), or you did venetoclax (Venclexta), or IMiDs, or different types of combinations that are out there, been around for a long time, and you get good mileage out of those combinations.
Now, if that stops working, if you now go to this other therapy, you go back to the CAR T cell, that will suggest that the results are not that different. So I think that there are aspects that we don’t fully understand. I personally believe, based on what I’ve seen, based on what I know from treating thousands of patients with myeloma for almost 30 years I’ve been a doctor, I think time is probably very, very important. So if you go back to back from one therapy to the other, that’s less likely to be beneficial. If you go from one therapy, and it stops working and go to the other drug with the same target.
But I would say it’s not that different from how we think about IMiDs or proteasome inhibitors. If you were to go single drug with a proteasome inhibitor and you switch to single drug with another proteasome inhibitor, or the same thing with an IMiD, that’s less likely to work versus if you went to something else in between. So we just need to generate more data and learn. Lastly, I want to say that in my experience, from all I see in my clinic at the current time, I think the choice that patients make is based on personal preference and to some degree also the situation of the patient. I saw a patient yesterday, 50 years old, who came from another country and has relocated to us here in Miami and asked, what are the options?
And we talked about CAR T cells, we talked about bispecifics. And considering all the different factors that CAR T cell would imply that we had to give some other combination therapy for two or three cycles while we harvest the CAR T cells and manufacture the CAR T cells and then plan for the admission and give it, and also that the patient was not really very happy about the side effects in the hospital with CAR T cell. That patient shows the bispecific, but I’ve also seen other patients in the same situation saying, I’d rather do these different steps for two or three months, I stay in the hospital, and then I enjoy being off therapy.
Actually, I saw another patient just a few days ago, a gentleman in his upper 70s who we had the same conversation, and he had picked the CAR T cells. And I saw him with his wife and he has been off treatment for two years doing excellent. So different patients make different decisions. And I think that is just how the field is evolving. So I think we should be open to individual patient’s priorities and what they want, and we should just offer everything. And of course, we can guide if a patient wants us to give direction, but I think presenting it and let patients be part of the decision-making, that’s the future of how medicine should be practiced.
Lisa Hatfield:
Thank you so much for that explanation. I’m going to segue into a comment that I always make to myeloma patients. As Dr. Landgren was explaining all of these treatment options, he is on top of all the latest and greatest news and therapies. I always recommend to myeloma patients newly diagnosed or otherwise to seek out at least one consult from a specialist. If you have difficulty accessing care, then a lot of places can do video conferencing, but even that one consult to see a myeloma specialist is so important in your care and treatment options. So I’ll just throw that out there, Dr. Landgren, as a myeloma specialist that you are, we appreciate your expertise in explaining that so well.
Dr. Ola Landgren:
I agree 100 percent with what you said, and I would like to add to that and say, going to a specialist center and it doesn’t have to be here, can really really help. It can be a lot of small things. There is data indicating that survival is longer for patients who have access to specialists. That has been published in the Journal of Clinical Oncology. The Mayo Clinic has published that, I think it was more than one year longer survival.
That by itself is, of course, very strong, but I also think that there are a lot of the small things like the different types of pre-medications, the drugs that are given around myeloma drugs. Could you decrease the dose of some of these drugs like the dexamethasone? Could you get rid of Benadryl if you give the antibodies? These may look as small things, but they can make a huge difference for quality of life.
We have a lot of people coming for second opinions, and we always say if you live closer to someone that you trust, you should go back and be treated there. You can always reach out to us. We are happy to be involved. You have us as a backup. We can be your quarterback if you ever need us. I think that is absolutely the best advice for every patient. Go and get feedback and if you’re not sure about the feedback you get, you could always have two different quarterbacks and you could ask them. I don’t think having 10 or 20 is going to help, but having one or two second opinions, I think is a good decision.
Lisa Hatfield:
That’s really helpful information, thank you, Dr. Landgren. So I think we’re going to shift a little bit to managing and monitoring multiple myeloma. Once you’ve had a patient go through the induction therapy, what kind of monitoring do you complete for your myeloma patients and in particular those who have reached a certain level response and are maybe on maintenance or continuous therapy, what type of tests do you do and how often regarding labs, imaging, bone marrow biopsies?
Dr. Ola Landgren:
There are a lot of different ways, obviously, of practicing medicine. So every center has developed models that they feel very comfortable doing. So I like details. I like to know things. I like to check things. I’m not excessive in ordering invasive tests, but I like to know. Also, I like to make sure the patient not only has good long-term clinical outcomes, but also good quality of life. And to me, I try to minimize the intrusiveness of what we do. So, for example, if I give a combination therapy where there is an injection or infusion, say week one, week two, week three, and then there is a week off. I recognize that if you do labs during that week off, you will have a better yield and understanding of how these three different injections or infusions actually have moved the disease forward and suppressed the disease.
But in my mind, I think that week off is a very important week off for the patient. So I would rather do testing the third day of the treatment at the treatment unit. So if it’s week one, week two, week three, I would draw the myeloma labs that same day. And that would give the patient six more days off from injection, infusion that third week and the whole fourth week off. So I would give the patient 13 days off.
Again, these are small things. These are things I’ve thought about a lot. I’ve practiced medicine for many years and I recognize that having time off like that, many patients travel, they go on vacation, they do different things. So I don’t want to just randomly put a blood test in the fourth week just because I want to check after week one, two, three, and then have the assessment.
I sort of underestimate the benefit of the therapy and then I start the next cycle, say back to back cycle two and cycle three and so forth. I would typically do blood tests once a month following these principles. I do baseline and I would do the last day of injection or infusion. For a newly diagnosed patient, you ask me, I would for baseline always do bone marrow biopsy and an aspirate. I would always do a PET-CT for every patient as my default. Sometimes we end up doing MRI. So that could be other things that are happening, but that is what we do for the majority of our patients.
After we have completed four to six cycles of treatment for patients that are candidates for consideration of transplant with chemotherapy with melphalan (Alkeran), we would usually do a biopsy after four to six cycles and we would use that to determine what’s the optimal mobilization protocol for stem cells. When we do that, we would run a MRD test.
We would run our in-house flow cytometry test that we developed when I used to work at Sloan Kettering and we have developed that here in Miami as well. We work closely with Sloan Kettering, and we have set up this assay in collaboration in the new 2.0 version. We will also send the aspirate for the clonoSEQ at Adaptive Biotech, which is the DNA-based sequencing for MRD. We would send the patient for collection of stem cells.
When the patient is back, we will continue treating. So if you say we do it after four cycles, we would collect, if we do it after five or six, then we collect. After that, we would typically resume therapy and for the majority of our patients, we actually give around eight cycles of therapy, and we have seen that you can deepen the response. You don’t increase the toxicity, but you deepen the response for the vast, vast majority of our patients. When we have used our best therapies, we have done it that way…
We have even published on this, over 70 percent of our patients are MRD negative, and many of those patients, when they come to cycle eight, they ask, do I have to do the transplant? And that is a controversial topic. But I think there are two large randomized trials that have shown the same thing, that there is no survival benefit with transplant. But you can also say that there is, in those two trials, a progression free survival benefit, meaning that the disease would stay way longer with transplant.
But many patients say, if I reach MRD-negative, both those two trials show that if you’re MRD-negative without transplant, or you’re MRD-negative with the transplant, PFS was actually the same. And given that there is no survival, overall survival benefit, why would I subject myself to go to that? Why don’t I keep the cells in the freezer and go right to maintenance? And we will have a conversation with every patient, they would meet our transplant team, they would meet our myeloma expert team.
And the individual patient will make decisions. I think over time, more and more patients have chosen to keep the cells in the freezer. For patients that are MRD-positive, we would counsel towards transplant, but there are patients that don’t want to do that, and we are not forcing any patients to do that. We would give patient maintenance, and on some of our trials, we use the standard of care, which is lenalidomide maintenance.
And we are also developing new approaches where we have done daratumumab added once a month with lenalidomide. We have gone one year, and we have started to do two years of that. And after that, we would stop daratumumab and just do lenalidomide maintenance. Lastly, to answer your question fully here, we would do a PET-CT in the bone marrow after the eight cycles as a repeat, and we would offer a patient to check on maintenance on an annual basis, and this is in accord with the NCCN guidelines. So a lot of details here, but you asked me how we do testing.
Lisa Hatfield:
Yes. And one of the questions that comes up, too, regarding bone marrow biopsy, so you talked about patients kind of through the process of myeloma treatment, perhaps they’ve reached a point where they’re going to be for a while. Do you see a need for continued bone marrow biopsy, say, annually, or is there some benefit to using the newer tests that are being investigated, like mass spec testing and some of the newer ones, I think the EuroFlow? Do you think that that can be used to test for bone marrow biopsy? And how will that be used to monitor the myeloma if a patient is doing relatively well, or do you still like to do bone marrow biopsies on a regular basis? And I know every specialist is different in how they’ll answer that question.
Dr. Ola Landgren:
So what’s known in the literature is that there is no study that definitively has compared annual biopsies with these blood-based tests that you mentioned, showing that they can replace the bone marrow. Those tests or those studies have not yet been published and shown in a convincing way that we have done. This is how it is. It’s still an open question. We don’t know the answer for sure. So our take has been to offer patients to repeat it on an annual basis for maybe two or three and sometimes up to five years. I don’t think we would do biopsies every year for five, 10, 15 or more years. At some point, you have to ask yourself, what are we trying to chase here?
But I think the data we’re looking at that we have published on this and others have also show that if you are MRD-negative after completion of the eight cycles with or without the transplant, the patient that are MRD-negative one year later, they are more likely to be free from progression 10 years later, compared to the ones where you only check once and you don’t know what happened one year later. And that is frankly because there is a small group of patients where MRD-negative could bounce back into positive.
So to check after completion after eight cycles and to check after one more year on maintenance, I think gives us more confidence in thinking about if we eventually could step down and maybe even stop the maintenance at the long term. There is no study that definitively has proven that, but the data suggests that being negative after eight and do another year and even if you do two years out, those are very strong indicators that the disease will stay away long term.
So that’s our justification for offering it, but we would never force any patient. And I also want to say that we have thought about for a long time, how we can contribute to the field and how we can advance the field for blood-based tests. So we are here in Miami, developing a lot of these technologies, and I have made a promise that we will make all these available for all patients that come here to Miami as part of our standard workup. Because they are not clinically validated tests, they will have to be reported for now as research tests, but we will share the information with individual patients.
So we have three different platforms for now. And we are working on the fourth one. So one of them is the mass spec with MALDI, where we can screen the blood with lasers. And we can increase the sensitivity by maybe hundred times compared to existing immunofixation assays. The second is something called clonotypic peptides, which is a more sophisticated way to run mass spec, which is probably up to thousand times more sensitive than immunofixation. And the third technology we are doing or setting up right now is circulating cells that we sequence.
And this is the Menarini technology that is approved for certain other solid tumors. I think for GI malignancies, it’s FDA cleared, but we are doing it in myeloma. We are also looking for free circulating DNA. We’re working with New York Genome Center to set those types of assays up. So my thinking is, if we can offer every patient that come here to do it, and many of those patients will do an annual biopsy, we actually will have the database that can answer the question you asked me, if it can replace. There is no other way that this can ever be answered.
But having a large database, we actually can compare on a patient level, how the bone marrow biopsy with flow cytometry and sequencing, how that behaves in relation to the blood base. How does it perform? Is any of these better? Can they replace each other? So I think if we do this for one or two years, we will have the answer to the question. That’s why I want to do it.
Lisa Hatifeld:
So that kind of leads to the next question that is really an exciting area. I know it’s not necessarily new, but newer is artificial intelligence. And I know I was reading an article about one of, that you and your colleagues have worked on a newer project and I don’t know if you pronounce it IRMMa or not, but using these large databases to help predict I think, it’s the response of treatment in some patients. So can you talk about that a little bit and tell us about that development and what developments are exciting with artificial intelligence in cancer, in particular myeloma?
Dr. Ola Landgren:
Yeah. So you mentioned the study we just published. We published a model that we call IRMMa and that stands for individual risk prediction for patients with multiple myeloma. So what we were thinking was at the current time, all the existing models are pretty much providing the average patient’s predicted outcome. So think about it is like it’s a probability measure. So you say, if I take this about therapy, what’s the predicted average outcome for patients that take this therapy, say, five years later? So on average, say 70 percent of patients are free from progression. That sounds pretty good. The problem is that you don’t know if you are in the group, 70 percent group that didn’t progress or if you’re in the 30 percent that did progress.
So where are you as an individual? So it’s almost like looking at the weather app on your phone. If it says it’s a 70 percent probability of sunshine and then you go outside and it’s raining, it’s because it didn’t say that it’s 100 percent probability of sunshine. So if you think about another situation would be, say, in a GYN clinic, if a woman were to come and ask the doctor, am I pregnant? Yes or no? You couldn’t say it’s 70 percent probability. You would say, yes, you’re pregnant or not pregnant.
So for myeloma, we have for a long time been living in these weather report systems where we say 70 percent or 30 percent. And we want to go in the other direction of the pregnancy test, where we actually can say for someone with this particular disease profile, with this treatment, this is where this is going to take us. We worked on this project for almost four years and we worked with a lot of other groups around the world that have a lot of data. And they have graciously agreed to collaborate with us and share their data sets. The beauty with this collaboration, there are many beauties of it, but one of them is that people don’t treat patients the same way.
And that actually has allowed us to say for patients that have a particular biological or genomic makeup, if you’re treated this way or that way or the other way or a fourth way and so forth, which of these different treatments would make patients have the longest progression and overall survival? So if you have a large database, you can actually ask those questions. So you can say that you profile individual patients in full detail and you put them in detailed buckets instead of grouping everybody together.
And now if you add a new case, if a new patient is being added and you say, which bucket would this individual fit? Well, this is the right biological bucket. You can then use this database to say out of all the different treatment options, which treatment option would last the longest, which would give the best overall survival? Other questions you could ask is also, for example, you have a patient with a certain biological workup or makeup. And you say, if I treat with these drugs, will the addition of, say, transplant, will that prolong progression for his survival?
And you can go into the database and the computer will then say, I have these many patients that have this genomic makeup and these many people that were treated with this treatment with transplant versus the same treatment without transplant. There was no difference in their progression or overall survival. So then the computer would say, it doesn’t add any clinical benefit, but there could be another makeup where the answer is opposite, but transplant actually would provide longer progression for his survival. I think the whole field of medicine is probably going to go more and more in this direction. So what we want to do is to expand the number of cases.
So we are asking other groups around the world, if they have data sets with thousands of patients, they could be added to this database and we could then have more and more detailed information on sub types of disease and more and more treatment. So it will be better as we train it with larger data sets. The model is built as an open interface so we can import new data. And that’s also important because the treatments will continue to change. So we, for example, say I have a patient that has this genetic makeup. I was thinking of using a bispecific antibody for the newly diagnosed setting.
How is that going to work? The computer will say, I don’t know, because we don’t have any patients like that in the database because that’s not the data, type of data that currently exists from larger studies. But let’s say in the future, if there were datasets like that, you could ask the computer and the computer will tell you what the database finds as the answer. But if you go for another combination, if that’s in the database, it would answer that too. That is where I think the field is going.
And lastly, I would say we are also using these types of technologies to evaluate the biopsies, the material. We work with the HealthTree Foundation on a large project where we are trying to use computational models to get out a lot of the biological data out of the biopsies and also to predict outcomes. So I think artificial intelligence is going to come in so many different areas in the myeloma field and probably in many, many other fields in medicine.
Lisa Hatfield:
Thank you so much, Dr. Landgren, for that broad overview of myeloma, especially relapsed and refractory myeloma. So it’s that time now where we answer questions we’ve received from you. Please remember that this is not a substitute for medical care. Always consult with your medical team. And we’re going to jump right into some questions that we’ve received from patients, Dr. Landgren, if you have a little bit of time to answer these questions for us.
Dr. Ola Landgren:
Of course.
Lisa Hatfield:
Okay. So broad questions. We try to make them broad so they apply to most people, but this patient is asking Dr. Landgren, what are the key biological processes driving disease, progression and evolution of multiple myeloma, and how can we target these processes to prevent disease relapse and improve long-term outcome?
Dr. Ola Landgren:
So that’s a very good question. So I think in a nutshell if you use genomics, which refers to the genetic changes that you can see in the plasma cells, there are certain features that the myeloma cells have. They have the copy number changes, that’s the gains and losses of chromosomes. You can find these if you do FISH and cytogenetics could be, for example, gain of chromosome 5 or gain of chromosome 7 or gain of chromosome 11. That would be part of the Hyperdiploidy disease, or you have loss of chromosome 13 or 13q deletions. We also refer to 17p deletion. These are copy number changes, they’re extra or loss of these chromosomes. But then you have also the structural variance where you have the translocations of chromosome 14, chromosome 14 harbors the IGH locus, which regulates the making of immunoglobulins.
Plasma cells make immunoglobulins. For reasons that are not entirely clear. The translocations in myeloma that include IgH, they are partnering up with oncogenes. There is a list of oncogenes, there’s MATH, there’s three MATHs, A, B, C. There’s FGFR3, MMSET, and there’s also Cyclin D1 that are on the list. So these are the different types of structural variants that you can see with FISH probes.
What people have understood less about are something called mutational signatures. And myeloma is made up by eight distinct mutational signatures that you can see in every single patient. And what that means is that you can, if you conduct whole genome sequencing and you look at all the base pairs, you can see there are certain number of combinations. C can be swapped for A and C can be swapped for G or C can be swapped for T, T can be A and T can be C and T can also be G.
Those are the combinations. So there are four different base pairs, but if you, because the DNA is double stranded, these are the only possibilities that mathematically that you can see. Now if you look for every base pair and you look on one base pair on the left and one on the right, we call that 5 and 3 prime, you look through triplicates, every of these base pairs can have these different swaps I mentioned. Mathematically, there are 96 different combinations that you can come up with. That’s it.
If you don’t go through the entire genome from left to right, you see that there are these recurrent eight signatures that are there in every patient. So although we don’t understand why they are and exactly how they function, the fact that you see them in every patient tells us that this has to have something to do with the biology of the disease. It must have a role in the control of the disease. We are starting to see that there is one signature that’s called APOBEC. That signature seems to be very important for resistance to treatments. And you can see that APOBEC can be more or less expressed.
And if APOBEC is very expressed, we see that there are lot of mutations in the cells. We have seen in patients with the chemotherapy that APOBEC can be very expressed. When we treat with four drug combinations, it can be very expressed. And what I’m saying, when I say it can be expressed, these are in the patients that relapse out of these therapies. We have also seen that in CAR T cells and bispecifics. So that makes me believe and our group believe that the cells use some form of what we call tumor intrinsic defense mechanism to protect themselves from whatever therapy we use.
It doesn’t matter if it’s immunotherapy, chemotherapy or small molecule therapy, there are some fundamental programs the cells can turn on. We need to understand that better and we are spending a lot of time trying to drill into this.
Lastly, I also want to say there was a fourth class of genomic events called complex events that you can see in myeloma, something called chromothripsis. That’s a very severe genomic lesion, is a ripple effect through the genome. There are a lot of havoc going on. And the first time we saw that, we thought this has to be something wrong with this sample. But when we look through more and more samples, we see that about a quarter of the patients actually have this chromothripsis.
So the bottom line is, it’s time to stop doing FISH, it’s time to do more advanced sequencing, ideally whole genome sequencing, but a step towards a whole genome could be to do whole exome sequencing. But there are companies saying that you can do whole genome sequencing for $1 in the future. So that’s really what needs to happen. We need to have better tools to better understand and then we can use this to better understand how to differentiate the therapy and have an individualized treatment. That’s what I talked about with the IRMA model.
Lisa Hatfield:
All right, well, thank you so much for that explanation. Dr. Landgren, can you speak to the advantages that bispecific antibodies offer over traditional therapies and how do you see their role in overcoming treatment resistance?
Dr. Ola Landgren:
Well, the bispecific antibodies is a novel way of engaging the immune system to go after the myeloma. So if you think about the other antibodies we have, we have three other antibodies. We have daratumumab, we have isatuximab (Sarclisa), we have elotuzumab (Empliciti), they are naked antibodies. They bind to the myeloma and on the backend of these antibodies, there is something called the FC receptor that attracts cells, NK cells, for example, also T cells, and they also attract, some of these antibodies also attract complement and they also by themselves send what’s called a death signal into the myeloma cell.
The bispecific antibodies are very different. They bind and they don’t send death signals, they don’t engage with the complement. What they do is that they have another arm sticking out that binds to the T cells. That’s a CD3 arm and there’s an open pocket. So when a T cell passes by, it grabs the T cell. And now you have a T cell linked to the antibody sitting next to the myeloma cell and the T cell will kill the myeloma. T cells can be very aggressive and kill the myeloma. You just hold them together, it’s like a matchmaker.
And if you think about how CAR T-cell therapy is designed, you take out the T cells, you manufacture them to have a special antenna receptor on their surface, and then you give them back again. And then they bind, this receptor binds to myeloma cells. So in the setting of a CAR T-cell therapy, the T-cell sits next to the myeloma cell, but that’s because the T cells were taken out of the body, manufactured to have this receptor that then finds the myeloma cell. But the bispecific antibody, that they don’t require the T cells to be taken out, to be modified this way.
You just use your existing T-cells in your body and these antibody just binds to the T cells and the myeloma cells in the body. So it’s sort of a little bit mimics what the CAR T cells do, but it does it in its own way within the cell, within the tissue in the body. You asked me for resistance mechanism and how they are better. Well, I think the best answer I can give you is to say that the overall response rate for the bispecific antibodies are very high. They are 60 to 80 percent single drug compared to the current trials. And if you look and see the trials that have led to approval for the other existing drugs, they were 20 or 30 percent.
So the overall response rate is much higher for the bispecifics than they were for the other existing drugs. We don’t really know exactly how to use them, I would say. What’s the optimal dosing schedule? We give them weekly, it may be every other week, and maybe monthly, eventually, I would think. And should they be combined with which drugs? That’s ongoing investigation. Other questions are, can they be stopped? Can you monitor patients off therapy for a long time? Will some patients never have the disease coming back? We hope so, but we don’t know. Or would it be patients could be off therapy for a long time, like with CAR T cell? Could that happen with the bispecifics? It’s possible.
And if you were to monitor with blood-based tests and you see that there is reappearing disease, would you then put patients back on the therapy? These are questions we…there are a lot of questions, we don’t have answers to all these, but that’s where I think the field is going. A lot of people, including us, are trying to investigate this.
Lisa Hatfield:
Okay, thank you. And we have a number of questions about MRD testing, so I’m going to try to combine those all together. Basically, what the questions are asking is how do you interpret MRD testing with regard to prognosis, treatment response, and maybe even like treatment, ongoing treatment? How do you use those results in your clinic or any comments you might have on the MRD test?
Dr. Ola Landgren:
So MRD tests have been around for quite some time. We have been pioneers pushing it. We have worked on it for over 15 years. We worked with the FDA to see if MRD could eventually become an endpoint for drug approval, that’s work in progress. The FDA will make those decisions. There are a lot of trials that use MRD as a secondary endpoint to see how it correlates with progression-free survival. And there actually are some trials that have been using it as a cool primary or primary endpoint in the absence of FDA’s decision to accept it. But that is probably going to change in the future. We will see. What have we done in the clinic? Well, we have used it in the same way as we have done with PET-CTs and the regular blood work. So if you use SPEP IFE light chains and you see there is residual disease after you have delivered your planned treatment, people have used what’s called consolidation therapy.
So we have done the same with the MRD test. If there is someone who has a little bit of disease left, we have tried to see if we could make that patient MRD-negative. We have also used it as a tool to build more reassurance. I mentioned before for patients who get this new combination therapies, if they are not very keen on jumping right to chemotherapy with Melphalan and transplant, if they want to collect the cells and keep them in the freezer, using the MRD as a tool to guide for reassurance.
Looking at the randomized trial showing that MRD negativity with or without transplant seems to have the same progression-free survival and in the absence of overall survival, either way, that has been published. But we would always say to patients, there are no definitive studies that have shown that this is how it is. It’s still an area of investigation. So if a patient wants to sort of do everything by the traditional book, we would give every step in the therapy and not pay attention. But a lot of patients say, I would rather monitor, and if I have to do these more toxic therapies, I wouldn’t do it. But I will use MRD to build confidence in myself.
Lisa Hatfield:
Well, thank you so much, Dr. Landgren, these have been great questions, and I actually have another half sheet of questions that we don’t have time for, because that’s all the time that we have. Dr. Landgren, thank you so much, it’s been a pleasure talking with you today. So thank you for joining our Patient Empowerment Network START HERE program. This has been an excellent discussion. Thanks to all of you, for your questions and tuning in. My name is Lisa Hatfield. I’ll see you next time.
Dr. Ola Landgren:
Thank you very much for having me. Thank you.
Share Your Feedback:
Evolving Myeloma Treatment Options: How You Can Access Cutting-Edge Care
Evolving Myeloma Treatment Options: How You Can Access Cutting-Edge Care from Patient Empowerment Network on Vimeo.
With the quickly evolving landscape of myeloma treatment and care, it’s important to work with your healthcare team to determine a care plan. In this program, Dr. Omar Nadeem discusses the latest updates in research and clinical trials, the role of new and emerging therapies– including bispecific antibodies and CAR T-cell therapy–and shares advice for accessing quality myeloma care.
Dr. Omar Nadeem is the Clinical Director of the Myeloma Immune Effector Cell Therapy Program and Associate Director of the Multiple Myeloma Clinical Research Program at the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute. Learn more about Dr. Nadeem.
Related Resources:
|
What Is the Role of Bispecific Antibody Therapy in the Future of Myeloma Care? |
|
Considering CAR T-Cell Therapy for Myeloma? Key Questions to Ask Your Doctor |
Transcript:
Katherine:
Hello, and welcome. I’m your host, Katherine Banwell. As patients collaborate on treatment decisions with their healthcare team, it’s important that they understand all of their options and how these options may be impacted by research developments. That’s why the Patient Empowerment Network created the Evolve series, to arm you with the latest information and help you feel empowered and confident during conversations about your myeloma care.
In today’s program, we’re going to hear from an expert in the field about the evolving treatment landscape and discuss how you can play an active role in your care. Before we get into the discussion, please remember that this program is not a substitute for seeking medical advice. Please refer to your healthcare team about what may be best for you. Well, let’s meet our guest today. Joining us is Dr. Omar Nadeem. Dr. Nadeem, welcome. Would you please introduce yourself.
Dr. Nadeem:
Thank you. Hi, everyone. My name is Omar Nadeem from the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute. It’s my pleasure to be here.
Katherine:
Thank you so much for joining us today. Before we get into our discussion, would you share with the audience how the field of myeloma care has changed over the course of your career?
Dr. Nadeem:
Yeah, and things are changing so rapidly. My career started after my training in 2015 and at that time, daratumumab (Darzalex) just had its approval in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma. That, along with several other monoclonal antibodies a few immunomodulatory drugs and proteasome inhibitors.
At that time, it felt like myeloma was at the forefront of significant advances and change in practice, which it was. Little did we know that we were right around the corner with the next renaissance of myeloma therapy, which is these immunotherapies that have been approved over the last three to four years now. So, safe to say things are changing so, so fast and it’s leading to excellent outcomes for patients.
Katherine:
Yeah, it’s great news. So positive. I’d like to start with the importance of a patient’s healthcare team. What are the benefits to seeking care with a myeloma specialist, even if it’s just for a second opinion or a consult?
Dr. Nadeem:
Yeah, so, myeloma is a little less than 2 percent of all cancers, and it’s the second most common blood cancer, so certainly not rare. With that being said, if you go to a general community practice, they don’t typically see too, too many patients with this disease. So, alongside that, we have so many different treatment options and combinations and these, as I mentioned, immune therapies.
And other therapies that are only actually carried out at academic centers for now, such as stem cell transplants, and CAR T-cell therapy. I think it’s important to kind of meet with an academic provider just to get a sense of what the patient may be facing, both in that immediate time, but also in the future, because a lot of myeloma therapy is lifelong. And in that case, you do have to come up with a plan for your whole treatment in a way early. So, it’s important to kind of one: hear it from another person, and then two: really sort of figure out what the outlook would look like for the individual patient.
With that being said, many of our myeloma regimens that are approved can very easily be given at the local provider, and that’s usually our preference, for patients to be treated closer to home. So, ultimately, this is another way for patients to get input about their treatment program, but also talk about the future.
Katherine:
That makes sense. Specialists at academic medical centers are typically more involved in research and clinical trials.
And patient participation is essential to advancing medicine. So, how do clinical trials impact myeloma care?
Dr. Nadeem:
Well, everything that we have available today for myeloma therapy was once in a clinical trial. So, all these promising therapies usually start in early phase studies and move on to Phase II and Phase III studies, and then those are the ones that the FDA uses to approve a particular combination.
So, it all depends on kind of where someone is in their disease course. It also kind of depends on what their preferences may be in terms of taking on something that is beyond standard of care. So, as part of any clinical trial in whatever phase it may be, whether its newly diagnosed multiple myeloma, even smoldering myeloma, which is one step before that, relapsed/refractory myeloma.
At each step of the way, there are clinical trials that are there trying to improve upon what’s already out here, right? So, we are, despite all these amazing advances, unfortunately, the disease is still not curable for a vast majority of patients.
In that case, how do we move to that cure, or how do we kind of advance the disease even beyond this? And a clinical trial is a way to do that.
Katherine:
What type of patient is most appropriate for a clinical trial?
Dr. Nadeem:
So, there are criteria that each clinical trial uses in terms of eligibility. Some of that has to do with the disease characteristic itself, kind of where somebody is in their disease course, but many times it’s also patients’ fitness, organ status in terms of kidney function, their blood count to some extent, heart function, etcetera. There are some sort of minimal prerequisite guidelines that we have to enroll patients in trials. So, it really, again, depends on where somebody is in their disease course and what they may be willing to take on beyond what may be offered to them as part of standard of care.
Katherine:
What questions should patients be asking if they’re entrusted in participating in a clinical trial?
Dr. Nadeem:
I think the important thing is to sort of first recognize what’s available to them as part of standard of care and then what the clinical trial is trying to answer.
So, for example, if it’s newly diagnosed multiple myeloma, we now have quadruplet regimens that we give to patients at the time of their diagnosis, and then the next natural question for eligible patients that now comes up is whether they should do a stem cell transplant or not.
And alongside that goes with all these advances in immune therapies, such as CAR T-cell therapies and bispecific antibodies. And there are now trials looking at those therapies and comparing them, for example, to stem cell transplant to try to answer the question “Can we get even beyond something like a stem cell transplant?”
So, that’s one example of a trial where a patient may be interested in saying “Okay, well, a transplant may be my standard path, but what if I try to enroll in this study and get randomized, for example, to the CAR-T arm? Then, perhaps, I’m getting access to some of these therapies early and maybe that’s going to improve my outcomes.”
Katherine:
Well, I’d like to talk about some new and emerging therapies in myeloma, starting with CAR T-cell therapy. Can you talk about who this treatment option might be appropriate for?
Dr. Nadeem:
So, yeah, just to kind of give folks background, CAR T-cell therapy is a form of immunotherapy, where we take out an individual’s T-cells and then re-program them, essentially, to recognize myeloma cells. Right now there’s two approved CAR-T products for multiple myeloma, both in the relapse refractory setting. It’s really for patients that have had four or more lines of therapy.
So, that’s a lot of different combinations that we currently have available. Those therapies stop working before patients are actually eligible for CAR-T cells at the moment. Both of these CAR T-cell products have been gamechangers in terms of improving prognosis for patients.
The good thing about CAR-T cells is that it is a one-and-done treatment. So, patients, when they go through that initial phase of therapy, they are then off therapy, although we are now starting to study certain therapies that we may administer after CAR-T cells to get them to last even longer than they currently do, but that’s still in, for example, that’s one of the clinical trials or many of the clinical trials that are currently ongoing now, to try to answer that question.
So, a lot of patients can be eligible for CAR-T cells. They have to have the prerequisite amount of therapies. Again, there are some sort of baseline fitness characteristics that we look at for patient’s ability to tolerate it. But as a whole, I consider CAR T-cell therapy more broadly applicable to myeloma patients than compared to, let’s say, a stem cell transplant.
Katherine:
How has this therapy revolutionized myeloma care?
Dr. Nadeem:
Yeah, before the first approval, now a few years ago, in this space we didn’t really have anything like this to offer patients. So, many of the combinations and other compounds that were in clinical trials would have a response rate somewhere around, let’s say, 30 percent. So, 30 percent of patients may respond to that therapy in that space, and that may only last a few months, and that was considered successful not that long ago. Now, with CAR T-cell therapy and bispecific antibodies, these therapies are highly efficacious.
You see response rates of 70 to 100 percent in some of these immunotherapies, and what that’s translating into is patient’s disease staying away for a year or two years, even three years in some of these clinical trials. And again, this is completely unprecedented compared to what we had before.
Katherine:
I understand that there are a number of clinical trials for different types of CAR T, or even using it earlier in the disease. Can you share updates in CAR T-cell therapy research?
Dr. Nadeem:
Yeah, so, exactly as you pointed out, there have been trials already, actually, that have been completed, Phase III studies looking at CAR T-cell therapies in earlier relapses. So, patients that have had either one of two lines of therapy.
Both our CAR-T therapies have been compared to standard of care in that space and have shown superiority, and this is something that we all have been kind of waiting for to see if you deploy it earlier, perhaps you’re going to see even greater benefit, and that seems to be the case in some of these trials, and now we’re awaiting, hopefully, approval of some of these CAR T-cell therapies to be administered earlier because in fifth line, it’s very different than treating patients in second or third line, which I think will really vastly improve our ability to deliver this therapy to many patients, as it can be quite challenging for patients that are in fifth line, to allow them to go through the process of CAR-T cells and then having them be administered.
I was looking at it head-to-head with stem cell transplant, as I mentioned before, and this is in the context of quadruplet and induction therapy followed by either CAR-T cells or stem cell transplant, and then followed by maintenance therapy. So, really trying to see if I can overcome what we typically have achieved with stem cell transplantation.
We also are doing some studies even before that. So, patients, again, in high-risk smoldering myeloma, which we know have an increased risk of developing newly diagnosed disease in the next few years, perhaps that could be the time where we can give some of these immunotherapies, and that’s some work that we have going on at our center.
Katherine:
Well, another therapy that has emerged in myeloma is bispecific antibodies. What patient type is this therapy right for?
Dr. Nadeem:
So, bispecific antibodies are great because they’re off the shelf. What that means is that CAR-T cells, we first have to collect the T cells and we then have to send them off to be manufactured, and that manufacturing process can take up to a month, sometimes even longer, for some of the current available CAR-T products. And then, after the cells are returned to the facility, we then give usually three days of chemotherapy to try to suppress some of the immune systems of the patients. So, that way, when the cells are administered, they can expand robustly and do essentially what they need to do.
So, that whole logistical process can take a couple of months by the time you identify somebody for CAR-T cells and then, from that moment until they can actually be treated. With bispecific antibodies, if we think somebody’s ready to go, you can basically get it as soon as we can have somebody ready to go either in our clinic or on the in-patient facility. So, they’re much easier. They also utilize T cells to attack myeloma cells. We now have three approved bispecific antibodies. Two of them are targeting BCMA, the same exact target that we have in CAR-T cells, and one of them is now targeting a new target called GPRC5D, which is also highly expressed on myeloma cells.
So, having all these bispecific antibodies available is excellent because patients can have access to them a lot faster and now we’re trying to answer the question of sequencing. Can you give bispecific antibodies after CAR-T cells for example? Can you give one bispecific antibody after another, especially if there’s a different target that we now have available?
As a whole, though, bispecific antibodies tend to have lower response rates than CAR-T cells, particularly Cilta-cel (Carvykti), which is cilta-cel that has a very high response rate of close to 100 percent.
Most bispecific antibodies have response rates somewhere around 70 or so percent, so about two-thirds of patients respond to these therapies, again, in that fifth line or four or more lines of therapy. So, in that space, that’s the response rate. And across the board, generally speaking, patients benefit from these bispecific antibodies approximately a year on average. Some of the studies have shown longer benefit, and it also depends somewhat on response to therapy.
Patients that have a really deep response can go even way longer than that. So, it is quite mixed in terms of how somebody may do on these bispecific antibodies, but those are the numbers.
Katherine:
Well, it sounds like bispecific antibodies have really transformed myeloma treatment options.
Dr. Nadeem:
Absolutely, and what goes hand in hand in this.
I mentioned the logistics of CAR T, but then there’s also the supply and availability of CAR-T cells. Since the approval, the demand for CAR-T cells has been very high because of all these excellent results, but the supply really hasn’t been there. So, even at a center as busy as ours, we can only treat a handful of patients with CAR T-cell therapies compared to bispecific antibodies, where that is essentially an injection similar to many other approved myeloma agents that you can just readily treat patients with. So, CAR-T cells, while I think, again, have higher efficacy, with that comes slightly higher toxicity as well. It’s a very different kind of treatment program.
And then, patients get a treatment-free interval, which you don’t see yet with bispecific antibodies. On the other hand, bispecific antibodies are readily available, slightly lower response rates, slightly lower toxicity when it comes to at least the traditional T-cell directing toxicities. And then you have, again, the readily available nature of it, which I think is hugely beneficial for patients.
Katherine:
You talked about some specifics regarding bispecific antibodies, but are there updates in bispecific antibody research that you’d like to share?
Dr. Nadeem:
Yeah, so, again, kind of following the theme of what we just said about CAR-T cells, can you bring these antibody therapies earlier? And there’s ongoing trials now looking at it in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma and early relapses, and then we presented our data at ASH this previous year looking at it in high-risk smoldering myeloma. We treated patients with teclistimab (Tecvayli), which is a BCMA bispecific antibody that is approved for relapse refractory patients. And what we demonstrated in that study is that people that got Teclistimab had a 100 percent response rate with an MRD-negative rate. So, kind of as deep of a response as we can measure, also at 100 percent.
So, this is something that we had not seen before. When their immune systems are a lot healthier, they may benefit more. So, hopefully we’ll see confirmation of these results in other trials.
Particularly in the newly diagnosed space because we do think that these antibody therapies have such huge potential to treat patients, and then hopefully we’ll have durable responses. So, I do think that some of this paradigm may shift over the next few years, and then there’s also combinations that are currently being studied: combinations with traditional myeloma therapies, such as monoclonal antibodies, other immunomodulatory agents, or proteasome inhibitors. All these combination trials are now ongoing to see can you improve upon some of those numbers that I highlighted before with single-agent bispecific antibody therapy.
Katherine:
Oh, I was just going to ask you the next question, which is are there other emerging myeloma therapies that are showing promise?
Dr. Nadeem:
Yes. So, I think over the last few years, most of the buzz has been with these immunotherapies. And, again, more work to be done there to see whether combinations, different schedules, different targets, different types, will show more and more benefit in each of these myeloma disease settings.
But we also have simultaneous development of other agents that are not in this sort of immunotherapy T-cell redirecting therapy realm. We have newer versions of our classic immunomodulatory drugs, such as lenalidomide (Revlimid) or pomalidomide (Pomalyst).
We now have their next generation agents, called CELMoD drugs and there’s two of them in development. One of them is called iberdomide; one is called mezigdomide.
These are, again, kind of building up on the success of some of these previous therapies that are kind of cornerstone therapies for myeloma patients and because these are essentially better agents, they’re more targeted, and they also have greater response rates as single agents and as combinations.
We’re hoping that these would be approved in the not-so-distant future and then perhaps will replace some of these immunomodulatory drugs that we have currently utilized in newly diagnosed and relapsed myeloma. Essentially what this means is things are just getting better and better and better as we get newer versions of some of these therapies. So, those are, I would say, kind of next in line in terms of hopeful approvals.
And then we’ll add to some of the options that we have for myeloma patients.
Katherine:
How can patients and care partners stay informed about the latest myeloma research?
Dr. Nadeem:
Yeah, it’s a lot of moving parts all the time. From one six-month interval to the next, you tend to have nowadays perhaps some drug approvals, which is amazing, but if not updates of all these sort of combination trials, etcetera, of where these things are going. I think kind of talking to your physician, obviously, about some of these updates is really critical. As I mentioned before, having a roadmap in your mind about what the myeloma therapy for you might look like going forward, wherever you are in your disease state, is always important because it gives you time to sort of think about it, learn about it, prepare for it.
Some of these therapies really require an effort from the patient and their caregivers because, for example, for CAR-T cells. If you’re not near a center, you may have to relocate for a month.
And it’s very difficult, and we fully understand that and try to help as much as we can, but that’s the kind of commitment that it takes. So, talking to your physician, obviously content like this, reviewing this as much as you can. Online patient support groups are great because you learn from the other patients’ experiences. So, the good news now is we have so many channels of communication, but you have to in a way, in the end, discuss with your physician and verify things you may find on your own.
Katherine:
Exactly, yeah. You want to make sure you’re getting facts rather than fiction.
Dr. Nadeem:
Yeah. That’s right.
Katherine:
Well, Dr. Nadeem, we’ve been hearing the term personalized medicine more frequently in recent years. How would you define personalized medicine for myeloma, and how can patients access this type of care?
Dr. Nadeem:
Yeah, personalized medicine or precision medicine is a term that we’ve really sort of used for many oncologic conditions over the last decade or so. I would say, for multiple myeloma, in terms of identifying a target within the myeloma cell that’s unique to the patient.
And then deploying a certain therapy to that patient because of that target is still lacking. We do have one example where patients have, for example, an 11;14 translocation, which we see in about 15 percent of myeloma patients.
There’s an agent called venetoclax (Venclexta) that is very active against that particular cohort of patients, although that is still not approved to be used, but that’s one example where that agent specifically benefits that type of myeloma. Other than that, most of the therapies that we have benefit essentially everybody with myeloma, which is great, but it’s not so personalized.
Where I would say there’s the most personalization happening now, at least in my practice, is looking at which types of therapies an individual patient may receive. What I mean by that is if somebody’s in an excellent response, with quadruplet-based induction therapy, I have a very real discussion with them about the pros and cons of stem cell transplant. We make those decisions in real time depending on how the patient doing, depending on how their response is.
And then kind of deciding a whole kind of what are the kind of risks and benefits and what makes sense for that individual patient. Similarly, when you go on to maintenance therapy, maintenance therapy means that after you’ve gone through the initial phase of your myeloma therapy and the disease is under control, what type of therapy can we keep you on to keep it under control for as long as possible? Historically, that has been lenalidomide or Revlimid. Now we’re adding drugs such as daratumamab and other agents to Revlimid to see if that can further prolong the response to that initial therapy.
So, all those decisions are so individualized that you have to discuss with your provider what makes sense for you and what are the pros and cons of doing one approach versus the other.
Katherine:
Well, if we’re talking about in-depth testing, how do the results of that testing affect treatment options?
Dr. Nadeem:
So, right now we use conventional blood tests to get a sense of response in the vast majority of patients. That includes the serum protein electrophoresis and the serum free light chain assay.
Most patients have detectable levels of these proteins, abnormal proteins in the blood at diagnosis and then you can follow them using a blood test. There’s a subset of patients that have disease only that shows up on scans. So, we then kind of incorporate some of those scans and then, also, utilize the bone marrow results both in the beginning and in subsequent analyses to kind of give a big-picture composite response assessment for that particular patient. Nowadays, there are also other tools that we’re using, such as MRD, or minimal residual disease.
That is a test that is done on a bone marrow biopsy to determine, if you don’t have detectable protein in the blood, do you have myeloma cells present at the deepest level possible? And if you do versus if you don’t, trials have shown that there is a difference in terms of prognosis. Now, while that hasn’t fully been utilized yet to make treatment decisions in patients that are not on clinical trials, we do get prognostic information out of it, and nowadays, more and more of those trials are using these MRD tests to determine what to do with treatment.
And I think that’s how it’s going to be in the future. So, having those extra tests available but, again, important to discuss with your provider what is the utility of this test. How are we going to use this information for your individual case to make some decisions?
Katherine:
What questions should patients be asking their provider about a proposed treatment plan?
Dr. Nadeem:
Yeah. I think because myeloma therapy’s so nuanced and much of this is still in clinical trials or under investigation about what to do with some of these results, I would say, as a whole, it’s important to know which tests the physician looks at to determine how you’re doing, and kind of what their assessment of that result is. So, for example, if somebody’s had a 50 percent reduction in the amount of abnormal protein in the blood, is that sufficient, or should we be aiming for a number that’s much higher than that?
Some of that depends on kind of where they are in their treatment course, but that’s a very sort of reasonable question to ask your physician is that where do you see my response now, let’s say six months into therapy, and is this adequate, and what is now, after we have all this information, what is my roadmap going forward to try to keep this disease in check?
Katherine:
Yeah. Well, that’s great advice, Dr. Nadeem. Thank you. PEN has also created a downloadable office visit planner to help you organize your thoughts and communicate effectively with your healthcare team. You can find these at Powerfulpatients.org/myeloma.
I’d like to turn to self-advocacy, Dr. Nadeem. Why is it so important that patients engage in their care treatment decisions?
Dr. Nadeem:
Yeah. As I mentioned, myeloma therapy is so individualized now and we can sit here, look at the trial data, get very into the weeds and technical about this therapy with this approach as X or Y higher response rate.
Or MRD-negative rate, but in reality, we’re dealing with people and we’re dealing with people that have lives. They have all their priorities, and until you share that with us, it’s very difficult for us to know exactly what’s important to you. So, what I may consider to be kind of the “best therapy” for you may not make sense for you because of all the priorities that you may have, and I think it’s so important to advocate for yourself and not be afraid to bring that up to your physician because I think many patients kind of hold that stuff in for a long time because they don’t want it to impact their care. But I would argue the other way around.
Tell us. Tell us exactly what you prioritize. Tell us if you can’t be out of commission for work for X amount of time because of a stem cell transplant. We now have options. We now have options for patients because of all these amazing new therapies for myeloma and we can come up with a very individualized treatment plan for you based on your priorities.
Katherine:
If a patient is feeling like they’re not getting the best care or they’re uncomfortable with the care they’re receiving, what steps should they take to change that?
Dr. Nadeem:
Yeah, I think that’s very difficult because this is a complex system. Medical systems are getting even more and more complex. They’re busy. Everybody’s busy: busy offices, labs, radiology. We’re all feeling that. It doesn’t matter where you are. So, I think it’s important to raise those concerns, number one, to your practice that you’re being seen at because they would like to see that feedback, right? So, kind of see what is something that they can perhaps improve upon. I think it’s always important, like we just said, to advocate for yourself and raise some of these issues and not be afraid of that.
We’re all in this together, right, so I think ultimately, we’re all trying to take the best care of you and we would need to know which part of that may or may not be working so well.
Katherine:
Let’s get to a few audience questions that we received prior to the program. This one is from Rita. “Is there an age limit on CAR T-cell therapy?”
Dr. Nadeem:
So, no, there isn’t. A lot of age-related cutoffs that we’ve historically used for transplants or even the CAR T originally don’t really apply because we all know there’s patients that are in their late 70s that may be more fit and robust than somebody in their 50s. We see this all the time. So, frailty is something that we assess quite a bit in patients in determining whether they can handle some of the toxicities that may come from these therapies. So, there’s no age cutoff.
Again, we look at certain other medical problems you may have, how fit you are, your organ function and things like that, but ultimately the goal is can you tolerate the chemotherapy you get before CAR-T cells and then can you tolerate some of the acute toxicities of CAR-T cells, such as the cytokine release syndrome, some risk of neurological toxicity, things like that. All of those are usually short-term, and if you feel confident that we can get you through that, then you’re eligible.
Katherine:
Yeah. Laura sent in this question: “I’m considering bispecific antibody therapy. I know some of the side effects are similar to CAR T-cell therapy. Can you share the pros and cons of bispecifics and how it compares to CAR T?”
Dr. Nadeem:
Yeah. I think we mentioned earlier that as a whole, they’re very similar. They’re both T-cell re-directing therapies, in many circumstances, with the same exact target of the myeloma cell, but because this isn’t a cell infusion – this is a cell injection – that you receive that redirects your T cells to the myeloma cells, you tend to see a little bit of a lower toxicity signal when it comes to the cytokine release syndrome incidents and severity. You see lower neurological toxicity, usually, than you do with CAR T-cell products as a whole.
With that comes slightly lower efficacy than you see with at least some of our CAR-T products, but if you respond to therapy, then the durability of response can be as good as you can achieve with CAR-T cells. One thing to note about the bispecifics, though, is that it is continuous therapy, so you are getting it on some regular schedule. Right now the approval is for it to be given weekly and then go to every two weeks after six months of therapy if you’re basically in a good response.
A lot of that is to try to mitigate the risk of infection. So, that is one of the biggest things that we have seen with bispecifics more so than CAR-T cells. Because it is continuous administration of these therapies, that really suppresses your immune system significantly, and infection rates are quite high. So, we typically give other ways to try to mitigate that using immunoglobulin infusions to try to boost up your immune system. Typically, we do that once a month for patients, making sure you’re on the right prophylactic medications and then really adjusting the therapy and the schedule to you depending on your tolerability.
So, as we said before, it’s an excellent option. I think bispecific antibodies are going to be the mainstay of myeloma therapy going forward because CAR-T cells, again, we can’t really treat everybody with CAR-T cells just simply because of the dynamics of how the process is. So, having the bispecific antibodies available for patients is excellent.
Katherine:
Thank you for this information, Dr. Nadeem. And please continue to send in your questions to questions@powerfulpatients.org and we’ll work to get them answered on future programs.
We’ve definitely learned today that the field of myeloma care is advancing quickly. As we close out the program, what would you like to leave the audience with? Why are you hopeful?
Dr. Nadeem:
Yeah. I think you all can see the tremendous progress that’s been made and, again, I still think it’s sort of the tip of the iceberg. These immunotherapies that are really showing this kind of activity, we’re just learning about them, and we’re going to improve them, not just the way we administer them. We’re going to make them even better and better and better and our hope is that a cure is not so far in the future. And perhaps even now we can cure a subset of patients if we deploy some of these therapies in the right person at the right time. So, I think that is really what I am hopeful for, that we have all these options available.
Now it’s up to us to figure out which one fits in where and then, as we do that, hopefully we’ll see even better and better outcomes. And my hope is, over time, that this is a disease that we can cure at least in a subset of patients, which means that they get fixed duration therapy with whatever that we have.
And then they’re done, and then hopefully never have to have therapy for this disease because it’ll be gone, and then, in patients that develop a disease relapse, we then treat them with some of these other agents. So, this is starting to hopefully mirror what we see in other blood cancers, such as lymphoma, for example, where you give the initial therapy and cure a subset of patients. Hopefully we can get there with myeloma in the not-so-distant future.
Katherine:
It’s a very promising outlook to leave our audience with. Dr. Nadeem, thank you so much for joining us today.
Dr. Nadeem:
Thank you so much for having me.
Katherine:
And thank you to all of our collaborators. To learn more about myeloma and to access tools to help you become a proactive patient, visit powerfulpatients.org. I’m Katherine Banwell. Thanks for joining us today.
