Tag Archive for: maintenance therapy

HCP Roundtable: Strengthening the Patient-Provider Partnership in Myeloma Care

 Multiple myeloma experts Dr. Sikander Ailawadhi and Dr. Craig Cole explore how to strengthen the provider-patient partnership through actionable communication tools, workflows, and team-based approaches. Drawing from deep clinical experience, they highlight best practices for supporting informed, collaborative decisions, especially around innovative therapies like CAR-T and bispecifics.

See More from EPEP Myeloma

Related Resources:

How Can Myeloma HCPs Initiate Clinical Trial Conversations?

How Can Myeloma HCPs and Nurses Help Manage Patient Concerns?

Do Myeloma Treatment Advancements Create Care Challenges?

Transcript:

Dr. Nicole Rochester:

Welcome to this Empowering Providers to Empower Patients, EPEP program. I’m Dr. Nicole Rochester. EPEP is a Patient Empowerment Network program that serves as a secure space for healthcare providers to learn techniques for improving physician-patient communication and overcoming practice barriers. In this myeloma healthcare roundtable, we are tackling the patient-provider partnership in multiple myeloma treatment decision-making.

Some of the topics we’ll explore today include: aligning treatment goals and quality of life preferences among myeloma patients, care partners, and their providers, sharing healthcare provider-to-provider best practices and real world strategies to reduce treatment burden and optimize outcomes, recognizing and addressing differences in treatment priorities between patients, care partners, and clinicians and applying these insights to clinical practice.

It is a privilege to be joined by Dr. Sikander Ailawadhi, Professor of Medicine in the Division of Hematology Oncology at the Mayo Clinic, Florida. Dr. Ailawadhi’s career focus includes the treatment of plasma cell disorders, multiple myeloma, Waldenstrom’s macroglobulinemia, and chronic lymphocytic leukemia. His research focuses on understanding the epidemiology and pathophysiology of these disorders, evaluating the benefit of various therapeutic strategies in different populations. Thank you for joining us today, Dr. Ailawadhi.

Dr. Sikander Ailawadhi:

Thanks for having me.

Dr. Nicole Rochester:

We’re also joined by Dr. Craig Cole, a board-certified hematologist. We are also joined by Dr. Craig Cole, a board-certified hematologist. Dr. Cole leads multiple clinical trials in multiple myeloma and has worked extensively with patient advocacy groups to empower, educate, and bring equitable care to everyone. Thank you so much for joining us today, Dr. Cole.

Dr. Craig Cole:

Thank you for having me. Thank you.

Dr. Nicole Rochester:

We have a lot to discuss as it relates to the patient-provider partnership and myeloma treatment decision-making. So let’s start with aligning treatment goals and quality of life preferences among myeloma patients, care partners, and providers. So I’m going to ask this question of each of you, but I’ll start with you, Dr. Ailawadhi. In the context of an increasingly complex myeloma treatment landscape, how do you approach shared decision-making with your patients?

Dr. Sikander Ailawadhi:

Dr. Rochester, you’re asking such an important question and thanks a lot for starting there. As you rightly point out, the treatment landscape of myeloma is becoming increasingly complex. In fact, if you ask 10, quote unquote, experts on myeloma of how the treatment would be, you’ll probably get 11 to 12 responses around them. So you can imagine that when patients who have just been given this devastating diagnosis along with their caregivers are trying to negotiate that path of decision-making, it can be quite complicated. So the way I approach it in my clinic is, I think before getting to the treatment part, to try to build a bond and a relationship with the patient and their caregivers, make sure that they understand about the disease and the diagnosis very well. 

They need to understand those ins and outs first. What are the markers in myeloma? What is the risk stratification? What is the disease stage? What are the symptoms they are dealing with? Just to make sure that we talk to them on a person-to-person level, trying to bring it down to their level of understanding. And then when we are starting to talk about the treatment options, the way I approach it is I try to lay it down by categories and kind of buckets of treatments with some broad treatment guidelines. Two versus three drugs, three versus four drugs, what are the different categories we are going to choose from and why we are selecting certain options, what is the data to support them?

Once we have come up with some decisions, once we have come up with some plans, I’ll also make sure that they are very aware of the side effects to expect and what to expect with treatment, what to expect in the next one month, in the next six months, over the next five years, et cetera. But then I’ll try my best to write that down in as much detail and simple language as possible in their notes. And I highly encourage patients to record the meeting or have a loved one, a caregiver on the phone if they were not present in person. And if they try making the notes, I’ll tell them, let me make the notes, let me write down on paper, and I’ll share this with you. And then you read my note, but I want your full attention as we are talking.

Then typically after the patient has left and gone home, once we have decided on a treatment, there will be an education visit, during which the nurse will contact the patient, again answer questions, and hopefully within these two or three touch points, we’ve been able to answer questions. It is very difficult, I completely understand, and we don’t have enough time. But that’s also the challenge and that’s also the opportunity for us. And I don’t know what…maybe Dr. Cole can also help guide this even further.

Dr. Nicole Rochester:

Yeah, thank you, Dr. Ailawadhi. Those are great practices. And Dr. Cole, we’d love to hear from you about how you approach shared decision-making. And maybe if you have an example where the patient’s input meaningfully shifted your initial treatment plan.

Dr. Craig Cole:

Yeah, just like Sikander had mentioned, myeloma is complex. For patients, it takes a lot of medical literacy to be able to navigate this disease. If you have melanoma you can go, I always worry about the…I always imagine, what’s my patient going to say when she goes to church? She has melanoma, she can just show them here’s my melanoma. If you have myeloma, then you have to be able to tell another person that you have a cancer of the immune system of a certain cell called a plasma cell that’s inside the bone marrow that I’m checking blood counts.

And it takes a lot in order to get through that. And shared decision-making for myeloma isn’t something that one day that I just walk into a room and say, we’re going to do share decision-making today. It’s a complete journey. And that journey starts with the first visit. So I do exactly what Dr. Ailawadhi said that I actually have the patient information about myeloma. We start with what the disease is. And I actually write down a lot of the information.

Instead of giving them a brochure and saying here you go, read this when you go home. I go over that brochure with the patient. And so we sit, I have my pens, they have their pens. I make sure that when it’s a new visit, when it’s the first couple of visits, that our scheduling people are sure to say, bring your family with you, don’t come alone. Bring somebody with you that can help with all the things that we’re going to talk about during their visit. And sort of too, so I go over every all the details. And I tell them my mom was an elementary school principal.

And I know that it takes three passes, three exposures in order for you to really learn something. So I tell the patients, there’s no pressure. There’s no test at the end, that we’re going to go over this again and again. And the goal set is that eventually you’ll understand this disease as well as I do. And that we’ll be able to talk colleague to colleague, that we’re not going to have this imbalance between the patient and the doctor, but we work together.

And the way to do that is really education. And that education doesn’t take place on one visit. It takes place on every visit, every time. So I had a patient just recently, and she’s 90 years old with myeloma. I put her on Dr. Ailawadhi’s clinical trial. So there you go. And how we got to that is that she came in with…she came from a nursing home. We talked to the nursing home and said a daughter has to come with her, really has to not just…they’re going to send the person with the nursing home. Daughter has to come with her. We sat down and had went through myeloma 101, kind of wrote down everything for her. And I asked her one thing is tell me something about yourself that’s outside of myeloma. Tell me something that hasn’t anything to do with this disease. So I found out she was a nurse, and she was a cardiovascular nurse for years. And so now we talk about that, her history. And I asked her when, on her second visit, about goal setting, and she said that we talked about options.

She said she wanted to not have pain, and she wanted to have more energy. And I said, well, here are the therapies that can get you there. And she was really interested in the clinical trial. She said, “I want to help other people behind me that will have this disease in the future.” That was very motivating for her. When I asked her about the goals of care, that was a very strong motivator for her. And so she decided to go on the clinical trial. I would have offered it anyway, but her motivation was definitely to go on the clinical trial. There have been a few bumps in the road, but she’s very happy with her care right now.

Dr. Nicole Rochester:

That is incredible. I love that both of you really talked about the humanity aspect of your encounters with your patients and the importance that they understand and getting to know them beyond their disease and making sure that they have the proper support during these visits. I really appreciate that. Well, we know that patients come to the table with lots of experiences and expectations, and all of those things can influence their preferences. So, Dr. Ailawadhi, how do you navigate situations where the patient’s goals may not align with the evidence-based recommendations for their disease?

Dr. Sikander Ailawadhi:

An excellent question. I’m so glad that we are having these discussions because we think about these things and we encounter these things, but we don’t end up talking about these situations all the time. So it can be a little challenging because I’ll be very frank. All of us have preferences of what we think is in a way…might be beneficial for the patient. And frankly, doctors, medical professionals, may have this kind of paternalistic view towards medicine. That happens very often.

Similarly, sometimes patients have that similar view that they just want their doctors to take the decision. But at the same time, in this kind of focus on shared decision-making, it is extremely important to understand where the patient is coming from, what are their beliefs, and why are those beliefs there. And frankly, if at some point, see, it’s important to remember our job is to guide the patient, do the best for the patient within our knowledge, our experience, et cetera. But what I say all the time to the patients is, well, we’re presenting these options to you. You’re more than welcome to pick what you want. Let’s discuss. If I don’t feel that may be the best option for you, I’ll put across my case.

But that said, if you take a decision which complies with your beliefs, your knowledge, your understanding, and you’ve decided to go there, we will still fully support you. We will try our best to walk you through that decision in the most appropriate manner. And I’ll give you an example. One of the very important treatments for myeloma today is CAR T-cell therapy. And I’ve recently had, maybe in the past month or so, had a patient who lives maybe an hour, hour-and-a-half away from us, but has good family support, and unfortunately has had disease that is progressing through treatment options relatively rapidly.

So we had a discussion, virtual visit, and I laid out some treatment options, but I strongly suggested CAR T-cell therapy because there’s a possibility that person may get a meaningful response with treatment. And the patient’s first response was, “Nope, not going to do that.” I said, “All right, let’s try to talk about it.” “Nope, not going to do that.” It took maybe a visit or two to get to the point that they were beginning to open up. And they opened up that the side effect profile was just extremely scary for them.

They had read about it. It was extremely scary. It took a third visit, till the third visit for me to try to convey to them enough that, well, all you’re reading is not necessarily all that will happen. Things may happen, but this is the range within which we expect. And our treatment, our management of side effects is much better now, et cetera, et cetera. So I made my case quite vehemently, quite enthusiastically. But despite that, the patient actually sent a message to the nurse because they were not very comfortable saying it again to my face that they really didn’t want to do that. So they sent a message to the nurse that, “Hey, we’re not going to do CAR T.” And they canceled an appointment. So I actually then called the patient and I said, “Well, if you don’t mind, may I speak with you for a few minutes?” They said, “Yeah, sure.” I said, “First of all, if by any reason you’re canceling the appointment was because you thought that you were not going according to my recommendation and that would hurt  me or hurt my ego or make me angry, please, that’s not the case. You don’t want to do CAR T.”

“We will not bring up CAR T, at least in the near foreseeable future. I’m not guaranteeing I won’t bring it up, but I may bring it up in the future, but we can still take care of you. We can do a lot for you. Please, if you’re okay about keeping the appointment and discussing alternative options, let’s discuss alternatives to CAR T. We have many, many things we can do for you.” That made a difference in which the patient then set up the follow-up appointment with his spouse because he wanted her to be there. And we discussed options, and now they’re going to start some other treatment.

In fact, I made a plan that they are going to be getting with their local doctor, so they don’t have to come an hour-and-a-half back and forth. But frankly, bottom line is that the patient’s choices, preferences, beliefs, goals, as Dr. Cole also mentioned, are paramount. And it’s important to be able to convey this to the patient. Our job is to guide. Our job is not to dictate. Sometimes we will come across these situations that the patients are taking a decision which may not be the best based on evidence. But if we really try to think about why the patient is taking that decision, I think that may be the best decision for that individual.

Dr. Nicole Rochester:

That’s such a great example, Dr. Ailawadhi. Thank you for sharing that and even for being vulnerable and sharing with us how things kind of didn’t quite go as well and then you were able to get the patient back on track. Well, speaking of CAR-T therapy, Dr. Cole, I’m going to address this question with you. Do you have any similar stories or have you identified communication strategies that have been effective in improving patient comprehension and engagement around some of these newer treatments like CAR T?

Dr. Craig Cole:

Yeah, you know that myeloma isn’t curable yet, right? So everyone at some point is going to have a relapse. And so right when I say to a patient, you’ll know this stuff as well as I do, once they kind of got settled into their induction therapy, once they got settled in, the one thing that we do is that we talk to the patients about the new therapies. Because after they kind of get settled in, now they’re kind of curious about what else is out there. So even when a patient is on maintenance therapy, there are people on maintenance therapy for years, and their visits can be pretty straightforward. And I use the opportunity during those sort of quiet time visits to talk about new therapies. Now my patients come out, walk in the door, and they say, what’s new in myeloma? And I mentioned the CAR T, and I mentioned under very, very easygoing circumstances I could, I could walk in and say, how do you do? How’s your maintenance?

I could walk out. But I sit down and I talk about these new therapies. So I talk about these are the new bispecifics, or really, you don’t need it now, but this is how they work, there are side effects. Then they come another visit, a couple months later, we talk about bispecifics, talk about how they work, encourage them to go to some of the meetings. I know the patient support meetings, they talk about this, they hear it from other patients. And I kind of lay the groundwork because I can’t go home and talk about the new myeloma therapies with my wife, because she’s heard it for 20 years. She doesn’t want to hear any more about myeloma, bless her heart. And so I talk about it with my patients. So then when the day comes that they actually have relapse and we’re talking about bispecifics, clinical trials, or CAR T, it’s nothing that’s foreign. They’ve heard this over the course of years. And so patient empowerment isn’t, like I mentioned earlier, patient empowerment isn’t you walk in one day and say, hey, it’s time to be empowered.

It’s a journey. It is a practice style that you, just like you practice piano and practice guitar, you practice patient empowerment every visit every day. And you, and I do, I think about that when I go and see a patient, have I engaged this patient so that they understand? Because if they don’t understand what I’m talking about, it’s not on them. That responsibility is solely on my shoulders. So if they say, I don’t understand what an M protein is, then I have failed at doing my job. I need to up my game a bit to make sure they understand that. And so it is really, it’s a journey over time to empower patients and to know about their options, even when we’re not engaging them on that visit.

Dr. Nicole Rochester:

Well, each of you have described just some really amazing ways that you interact with your patients and the personalized care and the conversations and the writing of the notes. And the thing that I’m struck by is that we all know there is very limited time that most physicians have to spend with their patients. So I’m curious, how are you doing this with the limited time? Are there certain strategies that you’ve implemented from a system level? Are there things that you would like to see adopted? And I’ll have you share one, Dr. Ailawadhi, and then I’ll go to you, Dr. Cole.

Dr. Sikander Ailawadhi:

So, you’re so right. In this time-constrained world where we have double-, triple-booked meetings on top of clinic and then grand rounds or tumor boards and this and that, it becomes very difficult. So, I think the first thing is that as an individual or even I would say for my institution, the guidance that we follow is, when I’m in front of a patient, I have to leave everything else at the door when I enter that room. So, in that particular visit, nothing else matters. It is only that patient and everything related to them.

That said, I shared an example earlier where to get to one treatment decision, it took almost four visits. And that’s the reality of the world. So, at least in our system, how we have it set up is that this barrage of messages and in-basket and information, et cetera, that comes, it is screened at a few tiers. So, messages that are related to medications, et cetera, there are clinical assistants who are constantly dealing with that and taking care of that. Clinical questions are typically being handled by our nurse or the pod nurses for the pod.

There are two of them who handle all the questions that come and are clinical and can be handled. At the next tier is that if they have any need for a clinical decision, they will first go to the APPs in the team, the advanced practice providers, which actually I should say one of the things we have implemented is the whole team sits together. So, there is about a five-step radius between me, my nurse, the nurse practitioner, the physician assistant, the scheduler, the research coordinator, everybody sits together for the clinic.

So, that helps that communication. And if they are not able to get the answer with the APP or if it’s a very specific question which I must answer, it’s a treatment-related guidance or a change in management or an urgent message, then I will be involved in that. So, I think we have this tiered work or a process which tends to work good. There are some tools that are being implemented. I personally don’t use that, but there are AI tools for documentation, for example. When we are with the patient, the notes are almost finalized before even we leave the room. So, those AI tools really help with taking away some of that documentation burden. So, I’ll stop with these two examples, but over to you, Craig.

Dr. Craig Cole:

I need one of those. So, one thing, I loved everything that you said, and we kind of do some of the same things that it’s kind of tiered, that I’m not, when a patient is ruined, I’m not the first person that they’ve seen that day. And some of the questions have already been…they may have or concerns or problems have already been screened by one of our, by like our pod nurses too. So, when I walk in, if they’re having a problem with their central line, that’s being taken care of in the background while I’m with the patient. And so, I think for some of the complex patients that we…some of the patients on maintenance there, but I don’t ask the nurse to really go in and see them. But some of the more complex patients, the pod nurse will go in and kind of screen through to make sure that everything’s okay so I can be prepared, which then streamlines things. The other thing is I make sure that I tell patients to write down your questions.

Come in and write and have your questions set because it will streamline, instead of patients kind of hemming and hawing and saying, gosh, what was I going to ask you? I think the biggest thing which has really helped is I congratulate patients when they bring in their notes. I say, those are fantastic questions. I’m so glad that you wrote them down, which then encourages them to do it again.

And then it really, I have one patient, bless her heart, and she always has, I think she works really hard at making 20 questions because some of the questions like 17, 18, 19 are just, they’re definitely filler questions, but her magic number is 20. So we just hit, hit, hit, hit, hit, hit, hit. And usually, and I say, make sure you incorporate questions about how you’re feeling and what you’re doing now and how you’re doing now and as part of our visit. And it streamlines things quite a bit. And sometimes I ask to make a copy of their questions. So when I make my note, I have at least a template of some of the stuff that we talked about.

But having an organized visit as much as you can with a patient, of course, are going to be things that kind of get you by surprise. The other thing is just like Sikander said, I am a time, very, very time, timed person. And I’m always thinking, gosh I’m running late, but I’m with the patient. I encourage my patients. And I do, when I do talks for patients, I say, slow down your doctor. If your doctor’s running too fast, slow them down. I even tell my patients that if I’m going too fast, slow me down. So all my patients know that I run a little late, sometimes a lot late, but they know the reason I’m running late is I had to spend time with somebody. And they’re very understanding for my tardiness.

Dr. Nicole Rochester:

That is wonderful. Thank you to both of you for such a rich conversation about engaging patients and their partners. So now we’re going to shift to talk to our healthcare provider audience about best practices and real world strategies to reduce treatment burden and optimize outcomes. And I’m going to start with you, Dr. Ailawadhi. As the therapeutic arsenal for myeloma continues to grow, how are you and your team proactively addressing treatment burden, whether related to toxicity, visit frequency, or logistical demands so that your patients are adherent to therapy and also having quality of life?

Dr. Sikander Ailawadhi:

So extremely important question that you raise. Treatments are clearly becoming very complex. The needs on the patients, the needs on the caregivers, the needs from the practice, from us, from our staff, they are just increasing tremendously. Literally, our nurses had to be trained how to handle CRS-related calls, how to handle neurotox-related calls with all these new drugs, et cetera. So it’s required a lot of that training of our staff, our side first, to be able to handle all the anticipated and unanticipated asks from the patients.

That said, I think the goal, and I think this is something that as a myeloma community, all of us have to spend time on is try to, like you rightly pointed out, decrease the treatment burden. I would say decrease the burden on our patients collectively. We have several drugs that have been now approved where we’re still learning how to use them. None of us in the medical community feel that those drugs are optimally dosed or their frequency is optimal, et cetera. So I think in the day-to-day work, what we’re doing is providing tons of education and awareness opportunities for patients and caregivers to try to arm them with as much information as possible prior to starting a treatment, so preparing them.

We have an effort going on which is a little bit tricky and difficult, but almost giving an informed consent-type information to patients and caregivers when they’re even starting standard of care treatment because just preparing them. We don’t do that for standard of care. We give tons of information for trials. We just don’t give that much information for standard of care. We have certain videos that have been prepared, and we share those. We host those on YouTube, for example, and we share those with patients and give them links saying, hey, watch this, see this. It’ll help you understand, et cetera.

We’re also planning some, so I think we’re trying to harmonize our own practice where we’re trying to say, okay, at such and such intervals as a group, we have decided we will do XYZ testing. Based on that, we will discuss with the patients the current data, and if need be, we will space out their treatment so their visit frequency decreases, et cetera. And then at our institution, we also have, at Mayo Clinic, we also have this opportunity for what’s called remote patient monitoring, so all our patients who start on treatments like bispecifics and sometimes even CAR-T patients are kind of connected with our remote patient monitoring infrastructure where they don’t even have to come in that frequently, and, of course, they don’t have to stay in the hospital.

We treat all our bispecifics as outpatient, but by doing those things, we’re trying to reduce their burden for having to deal with the treatment and its impact. We want the patients to feel better. We want them to have improved quality of life, and frankly, we want them to stay home when they don’t really need to be out of the home. We’re trying to gear an infrastructure, we’re really far from being perfect. I think in a myeloma community, all of us are far from being at that optimal state, but slowly, gradually, we’re making progress towards it.

Dr. Nicole Rochester:

Thank you so much, Dr. Ailawadhi. Dr. Cole, kind of staying on this same topic, when we think about patients who are receiving multiple lines of therapy or maybe those who are experiencing functional decline, how do you adjust your strategies over time to engage with those patients?

Dr. Craig Cole:

Yeah, it is, as patients kind of go through their journey and as they go through treatment lines, I am sure not to assume that the treatment goals that we had 10 years ago are the same treatment goals that we have today. And so it is, we have these periodic, when I’m meeting with my patient, meeting with their family we reassess what are the goals of treatment? I had a patient with high-risk disease that had come in to see me a few years ago and their goal was, “I want to be MRD-negative.” And I was like, okay, we have studies, we have therapies that can try to achieve that goal. And then later on, years later, after a couple of relapses, we talked about what was the goal? And their goals had shifted. Their next therapy after they had failed a CAR T could have been more aggressive this, more aggressive that. And I said, “So with everything that’s been happening is, what’s your current goal? What do you want out of the next decision that we make?”

And they said, “Really, I just want to have enough energy to go to my granddaughter’s graduation.” And it wasn’t so much being MRD-negative, but it was very different. And so we de-emphasized a lot of the lab tests the M proteins and started really working on that aspect, which included involving a lot of palliative care during their treatment journey. And I think one important point is that involving the team shouldn’t be a surprise. When the team walks in the room with me, it shouldn’t be, “Oh, my goodness, I must be dying.” It’s that, “Yes, I met the social worker. Yes, I’ve met the palliative care doctor years ago, months ago. Yeah, I know these people.”

And when the goals have changed, enacting the multidisciplinary team isn’t such a surprise. And it makes that a much more comfortable transition and is not a surprise. A lot of patients say when they see palliative care, they’d never met them before. They’re that can be really frightening to meet a new person like that. In that situation, where they’ve met them before, they have rapport already, then it’s not such a bad transition. And then all of us we circle the wagons around what that goal is. And I tell my patients, that may change in a few months, it may in a few years, your goal, but make sure you verbalize that to me and make sure that I always ask that.

Dr. Nicole Rochester:

Thank you so much, Dr. Cole. Well, as we prepare to wrap up, we’re going to talk a little bit about treatment priorities and how they may differ between patients, their care partners, and their clinicians. So, Dr. Ailawadhi, in your experience, what are the most common differences in treatment priorities that you’ve encountered? Maybe you can share one example and how you successfully navigated those challenges in those situations.

Dr. Sikander Ailawadhi:

Sure, absolutely. So there’s actually, I think in myeloma, we’re lucky to have some of this question even supported by research. So there have been a couple of studies now done, one through the IMF even, where they looked at the doctors’ priorities and the patients’ priorities. And there is also some similar work that Dr. Cole and I actually have been able to collaborate on together and present at ASH a few years ago. And it seems that the doctor’s priorities are always very different from the patient’s. The doctors are always focused on this primary objective, secondary objective, PFS, OS, response rate, MRD negativity.

And majority of the times, while the patients do want to live longer, please don’t misunderstand me, but the focus on quality of life, the focus on symptom control, the focus on burden on the patient and their caregiver and the family, et cetera, is paramount and weighing them down all the time. So I think trying to understand, which I think Dr. Cole mentioned very nicely, is trying to understand that patient’s goals. What are they looking for in the treatment? And trying to meet them at that level becomes extremely important.

And if I was to give another example of specifically where things changed, I think Dr. Cole mentioned, for example, a graduation for a patient’s family member or child. I’ve had similar experiences where we came in with treatment options. So I’ll share with you, there is one patient, very dear patient, where it’s been a constant struggle to figure out the treatment options for that person because, to me, she may look like a myeloma patient, but when I try to dig deeper over these past maybe six or seven or eight years, I’ve known her, she is a grandmother who has custody of her grandkids and is taking care of them. She has her own daughter who’s going through some medical and family issues of her own so cannot take care of the grandkids or her kids.

So this patient of mine has custody of all her grandchildren. She lives about 30 to 40 minutes away from where we are. So the distance is a constraint. I’ve tried my best connecting her with their local community hematologist, but somehow that didn’t work out for her. So she insists on coming here. So on the face of it, while our team talks about, oh, it’s so difficult to get her to come or oh, so difficult to check labs. It’s so difficult to do this or that. I’ve been discussing CAR T with that patient for the past almost a year.

We have never been able to do that for the simple reason logistics don’t line up. So finally, we said, okay, why do we even keep talking about CAR T? This is the ideal patient who’s going to go to the bispecific antibody as long as we can get her to do that.  And so we’re tailoring the treatment plan to that patient’s goals because while she wants to live longer, she wants to take care of her grandkids. She wants to be able to stay at home as much as possible, provide some medical care to her own daughter while getting herself treated. So I think understanding these goals and trying to tailor the patient’s treatment with all our knowledge and all our biases and all our preconceived notions and this and that, the bottom line is that the needs of that patient must come first. And whatever the literature, the this, the that, the articles, the trials, that has to all conform to that one patient’s need at that moment.

Dr. Nicole Rochester:

Absolutely. Thank you so much. This has been an amazing conversation. Unfortunately, it is time to wrap up. And I want to give you all the opportunity to share closing thoughts. You’ve shared so many important tips today. So many things that the audience will be able to take away from this conversation. But if you were to summarize it all into one closing thought, I’ll start with you, Dr. Cole. What’s the most important takeaway message that you want to leave other health care professionals who are watching?

Dr. Craig Cole:

No, and thanks for the opportunity. This is a passion of mine. And what I hopefully get across to our fellows and our residents is no matter what the discipline, no matter what the field of oncology, these are really, really important things to incorporate in your practice. And I think the one thing is that patient empowerment and patient education is not a one-time event. It is a style of practice. It’s something that you do every visit, every day, every day that you see a patient.

And the question I always ask myself is, have I empowered this patient? Are they engaged to this disease? And I never blame the patient.  I always take a look inward if I’m not achieving those goals. So my takeaway is, know your patient. Know who your patient really is. Just like Sikander said, she may be a myeloma patient, but she’s someone’s grandmother and primary caregiver. Knowing those details goes a long way, goes a long way in patient care and patient empowerment. That levels the playing field between you and your patient so that your partners in the journey, and it doesn’t have a paternalistic dynamic.

Dr. Nicole Rochester:

Thank you so much, Dr. Cole. What about you, Dr. Ailawadhi? What’s your closing take-home message for the audience?

Dr. Sikander Ailawadhi:

So, Dr. Rochester, again, thanks for this opportunity. I think this has been a great discussion. So I think my thought, quite similar to what Craig mentioned, I think, as you’ve pointed out a couple of times in these questions, that the treatment and management of myeloma is becoming very complex. And when we try to say on top of that, we have to reduce disparity, we have to improve shared decision-making, we have to give the patient time, we have to empower the patient, we have to educate them, the patient should know what questions to ask.

There is so much of this competing thoughts with constraint on time, staff, et cetera. My thought or my suggestion to our colleagues who are listening out there or spending time, and I thank them for spending their time listening to this program, is that it’s probably a good idea to take a step back, think of all the barriers in the ways of that patient, in the ways of a physician, in the ways of that practice, try to list all those barriers and start somewhere, start making some changes in your workflow, in your practice, and how you see the patient, how you talk to the patient.

We are, I would say, blessed, that one, the field is improving, but we also have several better tools, AI tools, communication tools, et cetera. So once you have an inventory of the barriers, start chipping away at them. And slowly, gradually, you will start seeing incremental improvements in how we are empowering the patient, but also empowering the practice, empowering the physicians, the healthcare providers. I think it’s important to help them start somewhere and hopefully incremental changes will make that bigger, meaningful difference.

Dr. Nicole Rochester:

Well, thank you both for just everything that you shared today. I feel like if I were to summarize this conversation, you all really talked about the art of medicine. There’s the science of medicine, and there’s the art of medicine. And so you all have really just articulated the art of medicine and the importance of connecting with patients and meeting them where they are and getting to know them as people outside of their disease. So thank you again for this riveting conversation. And thank you to those of you who are tuning in to this Empowering Providers to Empower Patients program. I’m Dr. Nicole Rochester. Have an amazing day.


Share Your Feedback:

 

Myeloma Research | Updates in CAR T-Cell Therapy

 What is the latest in myeloma CAR T-cell therapy research? Dr. Rahul Banerjee, a myeloma specialist and researcher, discusses advances in the field including progress in improving the CAR T manufacturing process and the role of clinical trial participation in developing new myeloma treatments.

Dr. Rahul Banerjee is a physician and researcher specializing in multiple myeloma and an assistant professor in the Clinical Research Division at the University of Washington Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center in Seattle, WA. Learn more about Dr. Banerjee.

Download Resource Guide

Related Resources:

How Can Myeloma Patients Access CAR T-Cell Therapy Clinical Trials?

How Can Myeloma Patients Access CAR T-Cell Therapy Clinical Trials?

How Is CAR T-Cell Therapy Research Advancing Myeloma Care?

How Is CAR T-Cell Therapy Research Advancing Myeloma Care?

Advice for Inquiring About Myeloma CAR T-Cell Therapy Clinical Trials

Advice for Inquiring About Myeloma CAR T-Cell Therapy Clinical Trials 

Transcript:

Katherine Banwell:

Can you share any updates in CAR T-cell therapy research? 

Dr. Rahul Banerjee:

Sure. So, several. I would say the first was how do we make that vein-to-vein time shorter? So, the vein-to-vein is, again, from the moment that the T cells are collected to when they’re put back into the patient.  

And so a lot of research is how do we make that better? We have rapid manufacturing protocols that, again, where the T cells are taken out and manufactured within a couple of days and brought back into the patient. They’re still testing for safety and sterility and everything that needs to be done, so it’s not overnight, but still, one or two weeks’ worth of vein-to-vein time is way better than one to two months. 

The allogeneic CAR T cells that are coming from a healthy donor, those are fascinating, right? Because if the cells are pre-manufactured, there’s no risk of them not manufacturing or manufacturing in an odd manner, what we call auto-specification. They’re ready from a healthy donor, ready to go. 

And one of the studies that was presented last month at our International Myeloma Society meeting in Brazil, the time, the median time from when the patient went on the study to when they started that lympho-depleting pre-CAR T therapy was one day, and that means they got CAR T therapy within one week of going on the study. That’s phenomenal. And so I think that research is ongoing.  

There are some side effects about allogeneic, healthy donor CAR T cells in terms of making sure the T cells stick around and don’t cause other issues. Sorry, for another day. I think that’s one area of research.  

 I think the other big area of research is how do we make CAR T cells work for longer for more people? There are easy ways, and there are controversial ways to do that. So, I think the easy way is can we use MRD negativity or other tests to identify who is at very low risk of relapse and monitoring them appropriately.  

There are patients where, in the future, we may talk about doing some form of post-CAR T maintenance therapy.  

Again, the bar for that should be set pretty high, and it is set pretty high because as I mentioned earlier, many patients prefer CAR T therapy, not just because of the deeper remissions and longer remissions, but because it truly is time away from treatment. But they’re still coming in for the IVIg and the blood work and seeing a doctor, et cetera, but they’re not getting daily treatment with lenalidomide, which is Revlimid, or pomalidomide, or Pomalyst, or something like that. And that’s wonderful. 

However, there may be some patients where some form of strategy will use one of those medications or experimental medications. There’s a newer class of the lenalidomide, Revlimid, pomalidomide, Pomalyst called CELMoDs.  

They’re not approved yet, but drugs like iberdomide or mezigdomide that work better, and not just against the myeloma. They actually make T cells stronger, believe it or not. 

And so in the future, there may be scenarios where we recommend for certain patients that, hey, in your particular case, after CAR T therapy, to keep the myeloma away, I’d recommend using this form of maintenance, a pill or something like that, just low dose to, again, keep the myeloma at bay and keep the T cells, in this case, the CAR T cells strong. So, I think those are all areas of exciting research.  

And then the last thing I would say is, we have several novel CAR T therapies that are being studied that may work better and safer than the existing products. Some of them, which are in early phase studies, actually target two proteins at once. The idea, going back to one of the earlier topics I mentioned, is that if the CAR T cells see that protein BCMA, they immediately destroy the cell that’s holding that. But what if the cell learns to turn off BCMA? All of a sudden, it’s invisible to the CAR T cells, and you’re right back to starting square one again. 

And so the idea is that there are CAR T cells that are being developed that target two proteins at once, kind of what’s called origating, where if it sees this or this, it’s immediately able to attach and bind that cell.  

The idea being that it’s easy for a myeloma cell – not easy. It’s possible for a myeloma cell, just by dumb luck, bad luck for the patient, to mutate in a way that shuts off that one protein. For it to simultaneously be able to do that for two separate proteins at once, the odds are much lower.  

And so the idea with dual targeting is you may be able to knock out more cells more durably, or even knock out the myeloma precursor cells that aren’t quite myeloma cells, but are there, what we call stem cells under the hood that are still malignant? So, a lot of those areas, I think, are really fascinating. Obviously, we need a lot more research in those particular areas before they’re ready for prime time.  

Katherine Banwell:

Patient participation is essential in advancing myeloma research. How do clinical trials impact care? 

Dr. Rahul Banerjee:

Absolutely. So, phenomenally and importantly, I think it’s a short answer. It’s worth noting that clinical trials come in all shapes and sizes. People often assume that clinical trial means, by default, a Phase I study, first time in human being, a quote-unquote “guinea pig.” That’s true for a minority of studies, and that’s very important for us to understand how best to make the drug work better. I would say the vast majority of trials that I put my patients on are not like that. They’re often bigger Phase II or Phase III studies. 

As an example, you know, both ide-cel (Abecma) and cilta-cel (Carvykti), those were already approved in later lines, but to get them approved in earlier lines, we had to run a study of using them earlier versus not using them earlier. So, that’s a good example where the drug is FDA-approved, it’s just the sequencing of it that’s new.  

There are trials of supportive care. We’ll be opening a study, I alluded to this, the side effects of GPRC5D targeted therapies with taquetamab (Talvey).  

We’ll be opening a study that randomizes patients to one of four different supportive care strategies to figure out which one actually works to make the taste issues better. Because we don’t know until we try, right? If we don’t do a rigorous study, and we just go by, “Oh, I had one patient once where this worked, and one patient once where this worked,” that’s not a scientific way of answering questions, and we’re not really able to advance the field to help all patients.  

So, that’s where I think clinical trials come in handy. That, and I alluded to all these newer investigational CAR T therapies that might actually work better and be safer than the existing one. They’re all coming through investigational trials.  

So, trials is kind of how we get these drugs, one, these newer ones to market, but also how we learn to make them better. And we have trials, all sorts of trials, looking at all sorts of, again, not just new drugs, but also where to put the drugs, right? Where to sequence the CAR T therapies, or what supportive care strategies do we use? And the trials are kind of the linchpin of making the field work better. Again, not just for some patients who happen to do well, but for all patients. The only reason we’ve found out what works for all patients is by doing clinical trials.   

CAR T-Cell Therapy | Transforming Myeloma Patient Care

Dr. Rahul Banerjee, a myeloma specialist and researcher, describes how CAR T-cell therapy has revolutionized care for people with myeloma. Dr. Banerjee discusses recent advances in research, citing specific studies that are having an impact, and goes on to review the currently FDA-approved CAR T-cell therapies.

Dr. Rahul Banerjee is a physician and researcher specializing in multiple myeloma and an assistant professor in the Clinical Research Division at the University of Washington Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center in Seattle, WA. Learn more about Dr. Rahul Banerjee.

Related Resources:

Myeloma CAR T-Cell Therapy | How Is Success Measured?

Myeloma CAR T-Cell Therapy | How Is Success Measured?

Myeloma Research | Updates in CAR T-Cell Therapy

Myeloma Research | Updates in CAR T-Cell Therapy

Will CAR T-Cell Therapy Be Approved for Earlier Lines of Myeloma Treatment

Will CAR T-Cell Therapy Be Approved for Earlier Lines of Myeloma Treatment? 

Transcript:

Katherine Banwell:

We’ve been talking about CAR T-cell therapy for a number of years now. How has this treatment revolutionized care for patients? 

Dr. Rahul Banerjee:

Absolutely. So, the biggest benefit of CAR T therapy, I think, is how well it works. So, I’ll predominantly focus on multiple myeloma, but of course there are CAR T therapies that are approved for different kinds of lymphoma, and B-cell leukemia as well. But in brief, CAR T therapy, we train the immune system to fight back against the myeloma, against the cancer that’s there. And it’s phenomenal, because it’s the only living drug we have, really, in our toolbox. Everything else is dependent on the dose, right? As soon as the drug is out of your system, it stops working. CAR T cells don’t work that way. They can live and expand and proliferate to get rid of the threat within. 

And at least in myeloma, for example, CAR T therapies regularly have response rates, meaning complete response rates, how quickly they knock all the myeloma parameters down to zero basically in the 70, 80, 90 percent range. Many patients achieve measurable residual disease, or MRD negativity, meaning by all the best tools available in 2024, no sign of the myeloma anywhere.  

That doesn’t mean cure, to be fair, but that’s wonderful. With other conventional therapies, to have one drug with one infusion have that big of an impact on the myeloma is phenomenal.  

The other benefit of CAR T therapy is that it is a one-time infusion. It doesn’t mean that patients can get one-time CAR T and never have to see a cancer doctor again because again, at least in myeloma, I don’t consider CAR T to be uniformly curative for patients. However, if you look at the studies, and there’ve been two randomized studies in myeloma of CAR T therapy versus standard therapies. One was a KarMMa-3 trial with a drug called ide-cel, a CAR T drug also known as Abecma. And the other one was CARTITUDE-4, which was a study of cilta-cel versus standard treatment. And cilta-cel is a kind of CAR T also known as Carvykti.  

Both studies saw improvements, dramatic improvements in the response rate, how many patients had the myeloma numbers come down, but also durations of response and progression-free survival. How long patients were alive and disease-free for.  

Literally just a month ago, we found out officially that the cilta-cel trial and the CARTITUDE-4 study, CAR T actually prolonged overall survival compared to standard therapies, which is what patients are looking for.  

But for me, what I love about CAR T the most is not just that you’re in remission for longer, or with cilta-cel you live longer, but that you live better. Both studies, and I’m very happy to see this incorporated, what we call patient-reported outcomes, which is an area of research of mine. Patient-reported outcomes are, as you can imagine, outcomes that are reported by the patient. Not the blood test for the myeloma, but how are patients feeling in terms of their quality of life, in terms of their fatigue, in terms of their pain.  

And in both studies, off the charts. CAR T does way better and way faster in terms of improving quality of life than standard treatments, to the point where the studies, for example, often for both of them, if I recall correctly, the first time point where they looked and compared the two arms was three months after CAR T. And already by then, night and day difference.  

The patients who got CAR T, the first month a little bit rocky, but after the first month or two, they’re doing better, because they’re not on myeloma treatments continuously. They’re still getting blood work checked and so forth, but they’re not on treatment. It’s a one-time infusion and monitoring thereafter.  

And I love that about it, and I think that explains a lot of the quality of life benefits that we see.  

For my other patients with myeloma, outside of CAR T, there is never a scenario where they’re observed. The vast majority of patients because myeloma is considered incurable, we keep them on some form of maintenance treatment, and those come with side effects. Those come with financial toxicity. That’s the word we use for high out-of-pocket costs. They come with what I would call time toxicity. That’s time spent on the phone coordinating shipments or coming in for this infusion or that infusion. 

CAR T has much less of that, and I think that’s phenomenal. So, I would say that it’s revolutionized the field, not just scientifically from the things that you’d expect a researcher to care the most about – for how long, you know, how deep are their remissions and how durable are their remissions, but also for the things that I care about. The art of oncology is how our patients are living, and that’s why I think CAR T is revolutionary. 

Katherine Banwell:

Dr. Banerjee, would you walk us through the currently approved CAR T-cell therapies for myeloma and share how these treatments work to combat myeloma? 

Dr. Rahul Banerjee:

Absolutely so. So, there’s two FDA-approved CAR T therapies right now for multiple myeloma. One is ide-cel, also known as Abecma. One is cilta-cel, also known as Carvykti. The mechanics of them are pretty similar. Both involve T cells being collected from the patient and then turned into CAR T cells, cancer fighting cells in a lab, then put back into the patient after a small dose, what we call lympho-depleting chemotherapy, that creates a void and makes room for the T cells. 

And then the T cells come in and are able to activate and proliferate and respond and kill off the myeloma. In terms of the two drugs, the differences between them, we might come back to that a bit in terms of just how they’re approved. Cilta-cel is currently approved as early as first relapse. So, second line treatment onwards in myeloma for patients who have disease that is refractory to lenalidomide (Revlimid) or a similar class of drugs.  

So, lenalidomide is Revlimid. So, if someone’s been on Revlimid and it stopped working, they could technically go to cilta-cel, which is Carvykti, as soon as second line. 

Ide-cel or Abecma is approved for third line treatment, meaning at least two prior relapses or two types of therapy that were stopped unexpectedly because of not working or toxicities or so forth. And those patients would have had to have received both an iMiD, like Revlimid, which is lenalidomide, a proteasome inhibitor, which is like Velcade or bortezomib, and a CD38 directed monoclonal antibody like daratumumab, which is also called Darzalex or Darzalex Faspro. 

Elevate | AML Resource Guide

Download Resource Guide

PEN-208_ElevateAML_ResourceGuide

Download Resource Guide

See More from ELEVATE AML

AML Treatment | Understanding Induction and Consolidation Therapy

 
How are AML induction and consolidation therapies defined? Dr. Daniel Pollyea explains these phases of therapy and how they are used in AML patient care.
 
Dr. Daniel Pollyea is Clinical Director of Leukemia Services in the Division of Medical Oncology, Hematologic Malignancies and Blood and Marrow Transplant at University of Colorado Cancer Center. Learn more about Dr. Pollyea.
 

 

Related Resources:

How Is an AML Treatment Plan Determine?

How Is an AML Treatment Plan Determined?

An Overview of Current AML Treatment Types

An Overview of Current AML Treatment Types

AML Treatment Planning | Key Questions to Ask You Doctor

AML Treatment Planning | Key Questions to Ask You Doctor

Transcript: 

Katherine Banwell:

We’ve covered this in past programs, but I think it’s worth reiterating. Would you define induction and consolidation therapy for the audience? 

Dr. Daniel Pollyea:

Yeah. So, traditionally when we only had intensive chemotherapy treatments, induction meant “Let’s get your disease under control.” That’s the first sort of line of treatment. “Let’s induce a remission.” That’s where that comes from. 

And then, consolidation meant “Let’s do more stuff, more chemotherapy to consolidate that remission,” or you can think of it as maintain that remission, deepen that remission. All those are sort of the same adjectives there. So, induction was step one. Consolidation was step two. We’ve retained a lot of this language into a time when we don’t only have intensive chemotherapy.

So, we’ll still use the word induction sometimes to mean “Let’s get your disease under control, even if it’s not with intensive chemotherapy.” So, admittedly that can be very confusing, but if someone uses it in that manner, that what they’re talking about is “Let’s get your disease under control.”  

And consolidation still meant “Let’s deepen your remission” or “Let’s prolong your remission.” So, those are the general terms. They’re very much linked to intensive chemotherapy, which we still use, but it’s not all we use anymore.  

So, I think it has gotten confusing, and it’s perfectly reasonable to be confused about that terminology.  

Elevate | Expert Advice for Accessing Quality AML Care and Treatment

 
How can you access the best care and treatment for YOUR AML? Dr. Daniel Pollyea, an AML expert, discusses the importance of patient education, including understanding the available treatment options for AML, how test results may impact care, and he shares advice for advocating for yourself.
 
Dr. Daniel Pollyea is Clinical Director of Leukemia Services in the Division of Medical Oncology, Hematologic Malignancies and Blood and Marrow Transplant at University of Colorado Cancer Center. Learn more about Dr. Pollyea.
 

Related Resources:

Choosing Therapy | How Are AML Treatment Goals Determined?

Choosing Therapy | How Are AML Treatment Goals Determined?

Expert Overview | AML Treatment Options and Phases of Therapy

Expert Overview | AML Treatment Options and Phases of Therapy

What Are AML Inhibitor Therapies and How Do They Work? 

What Are AML Inhibitor Therapies and How Do They Work?

Transcript: 

Katherine Banwell:

Hello and welcome, I’m your host Katherine Banwell. Thanks for joining us for another webinar in the Patient Empowerment Network’s Elevate Series. The goal of these programs is to help AML patients and care partners feel educated and informed when making decisions with their healthcare team.  

Before we get into the discussion, please remember that 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. Daniel Pollyea. Welcome. Thank you so much for being with us. Would you introduce yourself?  

Dr. Daniel Pollyea:

Yes, thanks so much for having me. I’m Dan Pollyea and I work at the University of Colorado where I lead the leukemia team.  

Katherine Banwell:

Thank you so much for joining us today. As part of this new series we’re learning more about researchers like you. You’re on the frontlines of advancing AML care. What led you here and why is it important to you? 

Dr. Daniel Pollyea:

I think my path is everyone’s, is distinct and a bit different.  

In short, I think working in AML is one of the most exciting areas in medicine that a person can be in right now. It’s this incredible intersection between delivering potentially curative treatments to patients and sort of harnessing the most unbelievable research-driven sort of drug development, new therapies to patients. So, it’s just a really, really exciting time for all of us who work in the AML field because of all that those opportunities bring to bear. 

Katherine Banwell:

Let’s start by having you define AML for the audience. 

Dr. Daniel Pollyea:

AML, acute myeloid leukemia, it’s a type of a cancer.  You can think of it as a cancer of the bone marrow, and it’s the likely result of several abnormalities, or sometimes I call them mistakes that can occur in stem cells or a stem cell in the bone marrow. And those mistakes that occur, most times, we don’t understand why they happen.

In most cases, they’re completely out of a person’s control. This isn’t something that comes on because it runs in a family in most cases, or because of something somebody did or didn’t do. These appear to be pretty random events that occur. But these mutations that occur in these sort of stem cells in the bone marrow cause a cell to become a cancer cell.  

And over a course of a variable amount of time, these can evolve and develop into this condition, AML. 

Katherine Banwell:

Okay, thank you for that. Health literacy, which is defined by the ability to find, understand, and use information for health-related decisions, is essential. Would you expand on the term “health literacy” and why it’s important to accessing quality AML care? 

Dr. Daniel Pollyea:

Yeah. So, I think health literacy in our field is a challenge, because these are acute conditions that come on oftentimes very quickly. And these are not diseases that are top of mind. Most people don’t know somebody who’s had this. They’re not common; only about 30,000 people every year in the United States will have AML. So, it’s very hard to have any sort of background in this.  

And for most patients because of the pace at which this disease occurs, it can be very difficult to sort of read up on it before meeting with a provider or an expert or a specialist. So, there’s a lot of challenges or barriers to health literacy. But like anything, the more a person knows, the more sort of empowered they can be, the more ability they have to ask questions and seek care at sort of the optimal place.  

What I find often is that health literacy is best harnessed by a patient’s team; so, in other words, their support system, their family and friends. Because it’s so much to deal with in such rapid succession, to get this diagnosis and to usually be feeling very poorly. To also be expected to sort of have read the most relevant literature and come armed with that information is often too much at the beginning.  

So, in the beginning, I think it’s best to leave that to your support system, and then as time goes on and as you start treatment, get comfortable, health literacy in our field, it becomes a more prevalent issue. And I think that when patients learn the most about how the field has evolved and where we are, the better that they can potentially do.  

Katherine Banwell:

Well, that leads us perfectly into my next question. What resources do you suggest for boosting knowledge about AML? 

Dr. Daniel Pollyea:

AML is like so many fields in medicine, but probably more so, moving so quickly that sort of the usual Google search is not going to, in most cases, bring up the most important, the most relevant information.  

So, I think that there are some organizations out there that do a really good job of educating patients. The Leukemia & Lymphoma Society is one. They have a good website.  

They have people you can contact, and they have really good information that’s available to patients and their families. That’s where I typically recommend people start. And then from there, based on our interest in education level and things like that, there can be other resources. But I think The Leukemia & Lymphoma Society’s a great place to start. 

Katherine Banwell:

Okay. Newly diagnosed patients and their care partners are often overwhelmed, as you mentioned earlier. What advice do you give them at their first appointment? 

Dr. Daniel Pollyea:

Right. So, this is a huge challenge. Anybody in the situation would be feeling like this. So, first of all, it’s sort of like, it’s okay to feel like this. It’s normal. 

It would be unnatural to not be overwhelmed with what you’re going through; that’s an important message. And then, I think there’s this period of time between diagnosis and a plan that is particularly anxiety-provoking. And so, as your doctor and their team sort of sorts through the necessary information to get a plan together, just know that that this a very anxiety-provoking time when you’re being told that you have a really significant and serious disease, and we don’t have a plan yet.

So, making sure that you sort of comfort yourself during that period, knowing that that his temporary and that is potentially the worst anxiety you will feel, I think, can be helpful. And then, from there once the plan is sort of in place and enacting it, it really is just focusing on short-term goals.  

So, instead of thinking three steps ahead and how’s the transplant going to work, in the early days, focusing on “Okay, how am I going to get into a remission?” and “How am I going to feel day-to-day? How can I feel as best I can day-to-day? What’s the best path to a remission?” And then, once you sort of meet the goal of remission, “Okay, what’s next? How are we going to cure this?” So, thinking through sort of in short bites, I think, is best. 

Katherine Banwell:

Are there other key questions that they should be asking their doctor or their healthcare team? 

Dr. Daniel Pollyea:

Yeah. Depending on the situation, this is a disease that can be cured; and so, from the first day, asking “Is that a possibility for me? Is there a curative plan for me, and what might that look like?” I think is an important question to ask from the beginning.  

Making sure you communicate your goals and your wishes, how you define quality of life, what that means to you. And in that way, that can really help inform your doctor and their team to put together a plan that sort of is most customized to you.  

Katherine Banwell:

That makes sense. Excuse me. When it comes to choosing AML therapy, it’s important to work with your healthcare team to identify what will be best for you. Would you walk us through the factors that are considered when choosing therapy for AML? 

Dr. Daniel Pollyea:

Sure, yeah. So, we now have options in treatments for this disease and for decades, that wasn’t the case. This was a one-size-fits-all type of disease. And in the last eight years, that has completely changed. 

So, there are approaches and diagnosis that vary between very intensive chemotherapy and less intensive treatments. What we call “targeted therapies” in some cases can be considered or be appropriate.  

And so, having a sense, after learning a little bit about this, of how much would you be willing to tolerate an intensive chemotherapy regimen and all the risks inherent in that, if that’s even being presented as an option, and if so, what does that look like? And if not, hey, what are the other options if that sort of doesn’t sound like something that you would be willing to accept? So, I think those kind of probing questions.  

 First, asking yourself and then sort of translating that into your treatment team, into “Hey, this is sort of how I define quality of life.  

And these are some red lines that I wouldn’t cross,” that can really help the healthcare team because, again, this is not one-size-fits-all anymore. We do have several options to consider at the time of diagnosis.  

Katherine Banwell:

What other factors would you take into consideration? Do you look at age and overall health and fitness, test results? 

Dr. Daniel Pollyea:

Absolutely. So, the relevant factors at the time of diagnosis would be, as you described, age, to some extent. And there’s no magic cutoff. “When a person is a certain age, this is no longer a treatment.” But age just gives us guidelines. Other comorbidities, other disease that you may be dealing with, things in your past, organ dysfunction; all those things are really, highly considered.  

And also, sort of your own attitude toward “Hey, would I be okay with a month-long stay in the hospital or is that something that there’s no sort of outcome that that would be okay for me to withstand?” But then, the other huge part of this are things that are sort of, at diagnosis, unknown to you and unknown to your doctor for a little bit. And those are disease factors. So, what are the mutations that make up your disease? What’s making your disease tick? And now, just with normal clinical care, we have unbelievable access to this information. We can essentially learn within a week or two every relevant mutation that’s contributing to your disease.                       

And that helps us tremendously with respect to prognostication, sure, but also treatment selection because there are some treatments that will work, we think, better with certain disease biology, and other treatments that will work less well.  

And we even have targeted therapies; so, based on particular mutations or other abnormalities, sort of a rationally designed therapy for exactly that disease biology. So, that is also a huge part of treatment selection, and we call those disease factors. 

Katherine Banwell:

Why is molecular testing important following an AML diagnosis?

Dr. Daniel Pollyea:

Right. So, this basically just gets into what we were just discussing. So, that molecular testing is the testing that will tell us all the mutations that make up your disease biology. And so, that is crucial for prognostication, but also treatment selection.  

And frankly, also when thinking about how to potentially cure your disease, those will be factors taken into account to make decisions that are pretty significant, such as should you receive a bone marrow transplant at some point in the future or not. And the reason it’s so crucial to get this done at diagnosis is, after diagnosis, we start a treatment, and hopefully we put your disease into a remission.

And at that point, we no longer have access to your disease cells. They’re gone, or they’re too low to even measure. And so, we need to get this information at diagnosis so that we can have it later on so that we can really understand your disease and make the best treatment plan for you.  

Katherine Banwell:

Right. We’ve covered this in past programs, but I think it’s worth reiterating. Would you define induction and consolidation therapy for the audience? 

Dr. Daniel Pollyea:

Yeah. So, traditionally when we only had intensive chemotherapy treatments, induction meant “Let’s get your disease under control.” That’s the first sort of line of treatment. “Let’s induce a remission.” That’s where that comes from. 

And then, consolidation meant “Let’s do more stuff, more chemotherapy to consolidate that remission,” or you can think of it as maintain that remission, deepen that remission. All those are sort of the same adjectives there. So, induction was step one. Consolidation was step two. We’ve retained a lot of this language into a time when we don’t only have intensive chemotherapy. So, we’ll still use the word induction sometimes to mean “Let’s get your disease under control, even if it’s not with intensive chemotherapy.” So, admittedly that can be very confusing, but if someone uses it in that manner, that what they’re talking about is “Let’s get your disease under control.”  

And consolidation still meant “Let’s deepen your remission” or “Let’s prolong your remission.” So, those are the general terms. They’re very much linked to intensive chemotherapy, which we still use, but it’s not all we use anymore.  

So, I think it has gotten confusing, and it’s perfectly reasonable to be confused about that terminology.  

Katherine Banwell:

Would you share an overview of the types of therapy for AML, and how do you decide which patient gets what?  

Dr. Daniel Pollyea:

Yeah. Because things are very different at relapse too, but at diagnosis, the options still are intensive chemotherapy, which is a regimen that hasn’t changed much in several decades really, 50 years.  

And then, there are other treatments. There’s a treatment called venetoclax (Venclexta) that we pair with a low-intensity chemotherapy treatment, either azacitidine (Vidaza), decitabine (Dacogen), or something called low-dose cytarabine (Cytosar U). Those are the three sort of partners for venetoclax.  

And then, there’s a targeted therapy against leukemia cells that have an IDH1 mutation that’s called ivosidenib (Tibsovo) that we also give with low-dose chemotherapy. So, in most cases those are the sort of three general options. That last treatment that’s targeted against IDH1, we typically preserve that for older patients or those that really are not good candidates for intensive chemotherapy but who have that IDH1 mutation, which is only somewhere around 10  percent of AML patients.

And then, so then the main decision then is “Do we give intensive chemotherapy, or do we give the venetoclax regimen?” And our policy is sort of, if we think we can cure you within intensive chemotherapy, and there’s certain disease biology subtypes that can be cured potentially with intensive chemotherapy, then that would be our first choice for you.  

If we don’t think we can cure you with intensive chemotherapy, if you don’t have that disease biology or if you do but you’re just not a candidate for that type of an approach, that’s when we give the venetoclax regimen. 

Katherine Banwell:

Are there other targeted therapies that you use?  

Dr. Daniel Pollyea:

Yes. So, venetoclax is a targeted therapy against Bcl-2. Unlike some of these other gene mutations, you don’t have to have something; there’s no mutation in Bcl-2 that you need to be a candidate for venetoclax. We give venetoclax pretty much to any potential AML patients. Genomically-targeted therapies:  you mentioned FLT3. Before I mentioned IDH1. There’s also one for IDH2. We hope there’s a couple more of these coming. Where these are approved, for the most part, at the moment, are in the relapse setting.  

So, a patient who receives a treatment, and then either doesn’t respond or responds and then relapses, that’s typically where we bring in these genomically-targeted therapies. There’s an exception for IDH1 that, like I said, can be used now in the upfront treatment setting. But for the most part, these genomically-targeted therapies are relevant in relapse disease. 

Katherine Banwell:

When would you use stem cell transplant?  

Dr. Daniel Pollyea:

So, stem cell transplant for the majority of AML patients is still the only potential way to cure this disease. And so, a stem cell transplant is something that we give for that purpose. It’s something that we really reserve for people whose disease is in a remission. So, nobody comes in at diagnosis and goes right into a stem cell transplant; that wouldn’t work. So, you first have to achieve a remission with any number of one of the combinations of things that we’ve already discussed.  

But once the patient is in a remission and doesn’t have a curative strategy with, like, intensive chemotherapy or some other approach and is a good candidate for a transplant, which is a whole other sort of set of circumstances that has to be considered, that’s patients who we offer a transplant for. 

Katherine Banwell:

Okay. What about new and emerging treatments?  

Dr. Daniel Pollyea:

So much that’s really exciting here. So, we’ve had several new approvals. We have a new FLT3 inhibitor that we can use for newly diagnosed patients who have a FLT3 mutation and who are getting intensive chemotherapy. We have, even now, a new therapy that’s given as a maintenance treatment. It’s called oral azacitidine or Onureg, which is really exciting as well.  

But I think the next sort of big thing in the field is going to be a targeted therapy for another subset of patients who are defined by the presence of a gene mutation, NPM1, but also by a chromosomal abnormality, something we call KMT2A. But these patients have disease that’s potentially amenable to what we call a menin inhibitor. And there are several companies with menin inhibitors. These therapies are getting pretty far along. We expect approval potentially soon for at least one of them. And then, I think these are going  to have a big impact on the field for those patients who have that type of disease.

Katherine Banwell:

Oh, that’s exciting news. Where do clinical trials fit in? 

Dr. Daniel Pollyea:

So, clinical trials are crucial for everything that we’re trying to do. We don’t make any progress without clinical trials. So, that’s the field as a whole. We don’t move forward. We don’t get any of these new treatments without clinical trials 

On an individual patient level, clinical trials are also really important because, for many patients we are still not doing as well as we want to be doing with this disease. We’ve made progress, but there’s still a lot of room for improvement. And so, for an individual patient, getting access to another therapy that, although we admit we don’t quite know yet whether it may be helpful but might be helpful, I think, is a really compelling situation to potentially consider participating because it is a guarantee you will help the field; and it’s a guarantee you will help every patient that comes after you through participation in clinical trial.  

But all these clinical trials are also designed to help you; to help you in a situation where we as a field don’t feel like we’re doing well enough. So, clinical trials, totally crucial if we’re going to continue making progress.  

And clinical trials are the reason why these last 10 years we have had such just dramatic improvement in availably of all these new therapies because literally thousands of patients have chosen to participate. 

Katherine Banwell:

How can patients find clinical trials that might be right for them? 

Dr. Daniel Pollyea:

So, back to The Leukemia & Lymphoma Society. They can be really helpful in guiding this. Asking your doctor, “Hey, are there any clinical trials her or at any other center that I should be considering?” And then, people who are interested in just going to the source. Every clinical trial that is available is registered at clinicaltrials.gov. And so, going to clinicaltrials.gov and then putting in some keywords like “acute myeloid leukemia,” you’ll see every clinical trial that’s available.  

Katherine Banwell:

Oh, that’s excellent. I’d also like to add for our viewers that if you’re interested in learning more about AML care and treatment, PEN has a number of resources available to you.  

You can find these at powerfulpatients.org/AML or by scanning the QR code on your screen.  

So, Dr. Pollyea, when choosing a therapy what questions should patients be asking their healthcare team about a treatment plan? 

Dr. Daniel Pollyea:

So, at the time of diagnosis I think it’s a reasonable question to say, “Is my disease amenable to a cure? Can I be potentially cured?” and “Is this treatment part of a plan for a cure?” If that is possible, then I would want to be walked through the steps that that’s going to executed. And if it’s not possible for me to be cured, then I would like to discuss what is the treatment plan that could potentially give me the longest duration of a remission and the best quality of life. And so, that’s the conversation that I think is important to have.  

And then, everything that we discuss comes into play there; an individual’s sort of appropriateness for intensive chemotherapy versus less intensive regimens, and also the disease biology and what that maybe make them a candidate for.  

Katherine Banwell:

Are there certain symptoms or side effects a patient should share with their care team? 

Dr. Daniel Pollyea:

Yeah. So, we have a very, very sort liberal request that really anything, it should be shared. We have a 24/7 number to call with one of us on-call at all times. So, it’s very difficult for a patient to kind of be able to appreciate, when they’re going through such dramatic changes, “Hey, is this expected or not?” So, we really emphasize oversharing concerns about symptoms.  

All these drugs have very different side effect profiles, and some of them are common and some of them are less common. The disease itself can cause symptoms and clinical issues. So, instead of really trying to educate yourself in an impossible way on what could be or is not related, it’s better just to ask.  

Katherine Banwell:

What is the role of a care partner when someone is in active treatment? 

Dr. Daniel Pollyea:

Having a care partner is crucial. This is physically and mentally extraordinarily stressful on the body and on the mind. Having that support person for those purposes is really important. Having that person be an advocate for a patient to ask those questions that may not be getting asked, to reframe questions to get the best answers is really, really important.  

And then, there’s the more mundane things; just getting patients to their appointments and kind of keeping their morale up and those things. So, there’s data and research on this that patients with caregivers, they have better outcomes. When it comes to a transplant, a caregiver is not an option. You must have a caregiver. And the importance of that will be sort of relayed to you in the context of a discussion about a transplant. But a caregiver in the setting of a transplant is so important that it is a requirement to even be considered for that.  

Katherine Banwell:

Sounds like that’s vital. I’d like to get to a few audience questions that we received before the program. Chris sent in this question: I would like to hear more about mutations found during molecular testing. Are there new AML drugs in trials for other less common mutations? 

Dr. Daniel Pollyea:

Great question. So, at the moment, what we have clinically available are targeted therapies for patients with FLT3 mutations, IDH1, and IDH2 mutations.  

And there are about 50 different genes that can be mutated in AML, and so that’s a small slice of the pie. Those are relatively common mutations, but still, small slice of the pie. A lot of the very uncommon or less common gene mutations we don’t have great paths to targeted therapies for them. And is that just we never will? I don’t think necessarily, but I think those can be really challenging. Not every mutation is amenable to a targeted therapy, at least as far as we know now. The one that’s coming, that we’re hopeful about is NPM1, which may be able to be targeted with one of those menin inhibitors that we talked about. So, that’s the next big one up.  

And that will probably constitute 40 percent of patients that have one of those mutations that I listed. But research is ongoing to kind of try and dig into this more. What I will say is that the AML research community is so fantastic that every lead is being pursued, and there is a lab somewhere in the world whose focus is on whatever small, even the most least common AML mutation; that’s somebody’s focus. 

And so, if there were to be promising therapies developed for even rare mutations, I assure you, the field would take those forward and figure out a way to do those clinical trials and to get to approval if it’s appropriate. So, but I think that’s where the landscape is right now. 

Katherine Banwell:

This question comes from Rita: Outside of changes in bloodwork, what are signs that AML is returning? 

Dr. Daniel Pollyea:

Great question.  

So, this can be a really tough one, and bloodwork is what we sorta hang our hat on. There are some times that patients sort of have clinical symptoms that proceed changes in bloodwork. I will say, I find that to be pretty uncommon. But some of the things that are pretty rare but might happen, would be leukemic involvement of the skin; so, it would appear as a rash. Some people might have some fatigue that comes on before the blood counts really change. That’s also pretty rare.

And then, if this disease were to work its way into any other organ or tissue in the body, and that’s rare, it’s possible that that could present with clinical signs and symptoms before a blood count change. But for the most part, the blood counts are really early sign that something is changing, and typically we’ll see that before any clinical signs.   

Katherine Banwell:

Thank you for that, Dr. Pollyea, and those were great questions. Please continue to send them to question@powerfulpatients.org, and we’ll work to get them answered on future programs. So, as we close out the program, Dr. Pollyea, what would you like to leave the audience with? Why are you hopeful that about the future of AML care and treatment?  

Dr. Daniel Pollyea:

Well, we’ve made unbelievable progress in just the last 10 years. And so, just looking into the future, I see nothing stopping that progress. So, it’s really exciting to think about where we’ll be two, five, 10 years from now. We never could have envisioned 10 years ago where we are now in terms of the therapies we have, how active and effective they are, and the impact that it’s had on patients.  

Again, just so proud to be part of this community, both on the patient care side and on the research side. It’s such a committed group of people, working around the clock on this disease to figure it out and to make some improvements. For all those reasons, I’m just super hopeful that we’ll just keep making progress, and I see no signs of anything slowing down. 

Katherine Banwell:

That’s a promising outlook to leave our audience with. Dr. Pollyea, thank you so much for joining us today. 

Dr. Daniel Pollyea:

Thanks so much for having me. 

Katherine Banwell:

And thank you to all of our collaborators. To learn more about AML and to access tools to help you become a proactive patient, visit powerfulpatients.org. I’m Katherine Banwell. Thanks for being with us today.  

Elevate | Expert Advice for Accessing Quality AML Care and Treatment Resource Guide

Download Resource Guide

PEN-208_ElevateAML_Guide_091824F

Download Resource Guide

See More from ELEVATE AML

Expert Overview | AML Treatment Options and Phases of Therapy

Expert Overview | AML Treatment Options and Phases of Therapy from Patient Empowerment Network on Vimeo.

What are the treatment options and phases of therapy for AML? Dr. Gail Roboz discusses the various therapies available to treat AML and to maintain remission, the timing of these therapies, and novel treatment approaches offered. 

Dr. Gail Roboz is director of the Clinical and Translational Leukemia Programs and professor of medicine at Weill Cornell Medicine and the New York Presbyterian Hospital. Learn more about Dr. Roboz.
 

Related Resources:

Choosing Therapy | How Are AML Treatment Goals Determined?

Choosing Therapy | How Are AML Treatment Goals Determined?

What Key Testing Occurs Following an AML Diagnosis?

What Key Testing Occurs Following an AML Diagnosis?

What Are AML Inhibitor Therapies and How Do They Work? 

What Are AML Inhibitor Therapies and How Do They Work?

Transcript: 

Katherine Banwell:

Dr. Roboz, would you provide a brief explanation of the phases of therapy for AML?  

Dr. Gail Roboz:

Yeah. So, here, too, I have to say that it’s more confusing than it used to be for the following reasons. So, historically and currently, we typically talk about induction as the first therapy that you’re going to get to get into remission. 

Then, the treatment paradigm is you do something to get into remission; do some treatment to get into remission. After that, in the realm of post-remission therapy, there are different things that can happen. There can be something called consolidation, which might be another round of chemotherapy. Some patients get consolidation, some patients don’t. After consolidation, there can be a transplant.  

So, you get into remission, you may or may not get a little bit of what’s called consolidation chemotherapy, and then go on to a transplant. 

However, sometimes either after the transplant or after chemotherapy before ever getting or instead of ever getting a transplant, there might be ongoing treatment in a lower intensity ongoing basis that is called maintenance.  

So, you’ve got to think about it as induction as what happens first, consolidation is something that happens when you’re in remission, and then maintenance usually refers to ongoing therapy that is different from consolidation. 

It’s usually lower intensity, easier to take, oral types of treatment that may go on and on. And just to be incredibly confusing, it’s different from something like breast cancer, where often the patients are given, “You get six cycles of this, and then you’re done.” From AML, there’s actually often not that type of an obvious plan right out of the gate for the patient. 

The answer will be, “It depends.” It depends. It depends how your treatment looks at this point in time. It depends how you look at this point in time. 

So then, the patients say, “Well, aren’t you going to cure me of this? What are you doing? Aren’t you going to get rid of it?” So, historically, there are some patients who get cured with chemotherapy. They get chemotherapy to get into remission, they get some chemotherapy afterwards, and there’s a cure rate for some patients with that. The majority of patients who are cured with AML get an allotransplant, or a transplant from somebody else. 

Then there’s a whole group of patients where we’re asking the question now, is it possible to get those patients beyond five years – so in oncology, five years is typically defined as cure. Can we get some patients with ongoing therapy to that past-five-year mark without a transplant? That’s in the zone of the ‘coming soon.’ Don’t have a ton of patients in that group right now, but hopefully we will. 

Katherine Banwell:

You’ve mentioned some various treatment types that are used to treat AML. Can you share a brief overview of available treatments? 

Dr. Gail Roboz:

So, the terminology that we use is a little bit annoying, because it is a little bit general. We say intensive and not intensive. 

But historically, intensive chemotherapy referred to a combination of generally two types of agents, cytarabine (Cytosar-U) and an anthracycline, which is a class of chemotherapy, that either just those two together or in combination with sometimes a third or a fourth drug usually keeps people in the hospital for around a month. Not that the chemotherapy takes that long, but the treatment gets rid of basically a lot of cells in the bone marrow, good guys and bad guys, and it takes about three weeks for those normal cells to recover. 

So, a standard intensive induction for AML is often around three to four weeks in the hospital, somewhere between three and five or so days of chemotherapy up front, depending on exactly what the protocol is. The classic regimen is actually still called 3+7, three days of one drug, seven of the other. But there are many variations of that that work. 

The chemo is then stopped, the patient hangs out in the hospital, very frequently getting transfusions and antibiotics, and we wait for the bone marrow to recover.  

Another current path that many patients are getting – almost all older patients, with ‘older’ being defined not by a specific age cutoff, but often 75 and older, almost everybody agrees no longer gets the classic chemotherapy that I just described. At some institutions, that 75 is going down, and even 70 and 65 and above are getting a new type of therapy, mostly because the new type of therapy is working pretty well. That is a combination of something called a hypomethylating agent.  

Drugs like azacitidine (Vidaza, Onureg) or decitabine (Dacogen) in combination with a pill that has changed the landscape of AML more than any other called venetoclax (Venclexta). Venetoclax is a drug that is not exclusively used for AML. 

It actually was originally approved for another type of leukemia. But I think that not many people would argue with the statement that what has changed absolutely the face of AML treatment has been this drug, because it’s a BCL2 inhibitor. What it does is it actually – cancer cells and leukemia cells in particular are very, very good at staying alive.  

They don’t undergo cell death, they don’t want to die, and venetoclax brings down their forcefield so that those cells can actually undergo apoptosis and die. 

Venetoclax in combination with azacitidine or decitabine has transformed the care of the disease, because many patients older than 65 – and the median age of diagnosis of AML is around 68 to 70. So, many patients never were well enough to have the intensive therapy. They weren’t going into remission, and they weren’t having prolonged survival often beyond a few months. 

But now, those patients do actually much better with the combination of aza [azacitidine] and venetoclax. So typically, the induction path is going to be deciding who gets an intensive therapy backbone, usually associated with long hospitalization. Who gets a less intensive backbone – by the way, that is often associated with just the same hospitalization. So, that’s why I don’t love the term ‘low intensity,’ because that implies that it doesn’t work.  

It does, and it also implies that you’re not going to be in the hospital. You probably will, because in the same way as for the more so-called intensive therapies, getting into remission involves getting rid of bone marrow cells and waiting for the normal ones to recover. Even if you are a patient who is getting the venetoclax combined with the azacitidine or decitabine, which is typically called low intensity, you may very well be in the hospital for a month. 

Because depending on where you live and who your family is and how sick you might be, you will probably want us to watch you carefully during that first month, but it’s worth it. Because if you have a good chance of getting into remission, remission is what makes life better and life longer. So, we want to get patients into remission, even if it means upfront time in the hospital. 

Choosing Therapy | How Are AML Treatment Goals Determined?

Choosing Therapy | How Are AML Treatment Goals Determined? from Patient Empowerment Network on Vimeo.

How are AML treatment goals determined? Dr. Gail Roboz explains the collaborative decision-making process between patients and clinicians when exploring treatment options, important questions to ask about AML treatment goals, and the objectives of the first phase of treatment.

Dr. Gail Roboz is director of the Clinical and Translational Leukemia Programs and professor of medicine at Weill Cornell Medicine and the New York Presbyterian Hospital. Learn more about Dr. Roboz.
 

 

Related Resources:

What Key Testing Occurs Following an AML Diagnosis?

What Key Testing Occurs Following an AML Diagnosis?

Expert Overview | AML Treatment Options and Phases of Therapy

Expert Overview | AML Treatment Options and Phases of Therapy

What Are AML Inhibitor Therapies and How Do They Work? 

What Are AML Inhibitor Therapies and How Do They Work?

Transcript: 

Katherine Banwell:

When it comes to choosing therapy for AML, it’s important to work with your healthcare team to identify what will work best for you, the patient. So, I’d like to know how you define shared decision-making.  

Dr. Gail Roboz:

The problem with AML sometimes is that it can be such an acute, emergency-type of presentation and urgent decision-making that I think your question is almost right out of the gate for some patients that will, “Wait, I don’t even have a minute, here. How do I build a team, do the research, look online if people are telling me that I’m in the middle of an emergency?”  

That isn’t always the case for acute leukemia, but it sometimes is. I think that what happens in AML in particular for patients is a building of knowledge and a building of the team, and figuring out, first of all, where am I when I am being told this diagnosis, and is it really an emergency? Do I have to make decisions really right now, because is it life-threatening today, I don’t have time to look around? Or do I have a minute to pause and get more information? 

I definitely feel that with the Internet era and with so much connection between doctors and teams, there is much more ability to reach out instantaneously for doctors, too, to get advice on a patient who might be in a smaller hospital that doesn’t have AML experience. But I think that the first thing is to try to figure out very, very quickly, what needs to happen to me as a patient immediately, and what can wait a minute, so that I can figure out what am I being told, and what are my options? 

Katherine Banwell:

Right, right. It can be confusing for patients, just finding out this new information. Part of making care decisions is setting goals. What are AML treatment goals, and how are they determined?   

Dr. Gail Roboz:

I would say that leaving cure on the table from the beginning is always a good place to start, because you want to figure out, first of all, what am I dealing with? What are the actual options?  

But when AML strikes, and a patient who has multiple medical conditions or comorbidities that are truly compromising function independently of the diagnosis of AML, that’s going to be a special path of what is actually reasonable for someone who is terribly medically ill or otherwise frail right from the beginning? That can be defining goals, but I think from the beginning, the best thing is to leave everything on the table. What can actually be done to make me better, first of all, to get me out of my immediate trouble? What can be done to make me better, and if I’m getting better, well, I like that, how do I stay there?  

What can be done to hang on to the state of ‘better,’ which is sometimes defined as remission? In AML, the goal is to get the bone marrow working again, functioning again, get rid of the acute emergency problem, if there is one, which there may or may not be in acute leukemia. 

Sometimes it’s truly an emergency, and sometimes it isn’t. But once I get better, can I stay there? What is required to keep me with a working bone marrow for as long as possible?  

But once you are starting to sort through the diagnosis, you realize that saying that somebody has acute myeloid leukemia is not telling me nearly enough information. This is a disease that is what we call biologically heterogeneous, which means there are lots of different forms. It’s like saying you’re sick. What exactly does that mean? There are lots of things that can make you sick. There are lots of different subtypes of AML, and fairly quickly in most institutions, we start getting back some information specifically on the subtype and biological characteristics of the disease.  

This can be very, very important in the initial treatment planning, and depending on where you are, the information that you get back can sometimes take 24 hours, 48 hours, 72 hours, a week. So, you start learning very quickly though that, “If I’m not in a complete emergency that requires instantaneous treatment, can I get back more information about the biological subtype of the disease so that I can start treatment planning of what is my best option right out of the gate?” That’s usually called induction, or the first therapy that you’re going to get with the goal, ‘getting rid of leukemia cells and getting into remission.’ That’s part one, and then everything that comes after that is about keeping you in remission.   

But for the initial goal, what is the therapy that the patient needs to get to get into remission? In order to figure that out, the good news is there are a lot of different ways to slice and dice getting into remission, and actually, it used to be such a weighty decision. 

Now, I would actually encourage people to – not relax, you can never use the word ‘relax’ with acute leukemia. But there are several different induction strategies for most patients that would be okay.  

So, even if you get started with one strategy and you hear five days later that another doctor might do something different, there are a lot of ways to safely get into remission. I think everybody should be pleased about the fact that we’re doing much better than we used to for patients across the board, all the way from children to much older adults, to safely getting people into remission. 

Katherine Banwell:

So, what sort of factors then do you take into consideration when you’re choosing a therapy? 

Dr. Gail Roboz:

So, out of the gate, there are the patients that I think I referred to earlier who truly, truly are in situations based on their other diseases that there are certain treatments we would just cross out right out of the gate. 

If there are patients with very, very severely compromised cardiac or renal or lung function or are terribly ill from other conditions, AML doctors will right out of the gate for those patients eliminate certain treatments. But absent that scenario, what we try to look for is the biology of the disease. Not look at the age, not look at the comorbidities unless they are so severe that they make obvious certain choices. 

But rather, what I like to do is say, “What kind of AML is this, and what is the best treatment that I have to get this patient into remission?” And then ask the question, “can this particular patient handle this therapy?” Sometimes, these days, there actually may be more than one route to get to remission depending on the biology of the disease, and then, if that’s the case, then I can start getting picky and look at the individual patient. Where does the patient live? Who’s the patient’s family? What other diseases has the patient been treated for?  

Is there something that I can use? If I have a choice, if there are a couple of different things that might work, how do I fit the treatment to best take care of the needs of this particular patient? If I don’t have choices, then my question is, “Okay, how do I get this patient through my one therapy that I think is the truly, truly best option?” 

Elevate | What You Should Know About Your Role in AML Treatment and Care Decisions Resource Guide

Download Resource Guide

PEN-208_ElevateAML_Guide_053024_F

Download Resource Guide

See More from ELEVATE AML

Elevate | What You Should Know About Your Role in AML Treatment and Care Decisions

Elevate | What You Should Know About Your Role in AML Treatment and Care Decisions from Patient Empowerment Network on Vimeo.

How can you elevate your AML care and treatment? AML expert Dr. Gail Roboz discusses the importance of participating in AML treatment decisions, reviews key factors that may impact therapy options, and shares advice for advocating for yourself.
 
Dr. Gail Roboz is director of the Clinical and Translational Leukemia Programs and professor of medicine at Weill Cornell Medicine and the New York Presbyterian Hospital. Learn more about Dr. Roboz.
 

Related Resources:

FLT3 inhibitors for AML Update

Thriving With AML | Advice for Setting Goals and Making Treatment Decisions

Thriving With AML | Advice for Setting Goals and Making Treatment Decisions

Expert Advice | Managing AML Symptoms and Treatment Side Effects

Expert Advice | Managing AML Symptoms and Treatment Side Effects

Transcript: 

Katherine Banwell:

Hello, and welcome. I’m your host, Katherine Banwell. It’s no secret that the quality-of-care patients receive can vary, and patients who are educated about their condition and involved in their care may have improved outcomes. That’s why the Patient Empowerment Network created the Elevate series, to help AML patients and their care partners feel well-informed when making treatment decisions with their healthcare team. 

In today’s program, an AML expert will join us to share 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. Gail Roboz. Dr. Roboz, would you please introduce yourself? 

Dr. Gail Roboz:

Absolutely. Thank you so much for having me. My name is Gail Roboz. I’m a professor of medicine and director of the clinical and translational leukemia programs at Weill Cornell Medicine and the NewYork-Presbyterian Hospital in New York City. Thank you again for having me. 

Katherine Banwell:

Well, thank you so much for joining us today. We really appreciate it. I’d like to start by discussing your role as a researcher. You’re on the frontlines for advancements in the AML field. What led you here, and why is it important to you? 

Dr. Gail Roboz:

So, I’m actually asked that question quite frequently, because AML is a challenging, difficult, scary disease, and people don’t necessarily assume that somebody in medical school would gravitate toward it. 

But I have to say that what is incredibly fascinating back then and now about leukemia is the continuous access to the disease. Patients will maybe giggle or groan as I’m saying that, because you can get a blood sample really anytime. You can even get a bone marrow sample anytime, although patients don’t enjoy that so much. 

But from a research perspective, it is absolutely extraordinary to be dealing with a disease where you can, in real time, truly run back and forth to a laboratory and see what’s happening, what is the new drug or the old drug doing, what’s happening with the patient, and I would say that from a fascination of a medical student perspective that grabbed me then and still does today.  

Katherine Banwell:

When it comes to choosing therapy for AML, it’s important to work with your healthcare team to identify what will work best for you, the patient. So, I’d like to know how you define shared decision-making.  

Dr. Gail Roboz:

The problem with AML sometimes is that it can be such an acute, emergency-type of presentation and urgent decision-making that I think your question is almost right out of the gate for some patients that will, “Wait, I don’t even have a minute, here. How do I build a team, do the research, look online if people are telling me that I’m in the middle of an emergency?”  

That isn’t always the case for acute leukemia, but it sometimes is. I think that what happens in AML in particular for patients is a building of knowledge and a building of the team, and figuring out, first of all, where am I when I am being told this diagnosis, and is it really an emergency? Do I have to make decisions really right now, because is it life-threatening today, I don’t have time to look around? Or do I have a minute to pause and get more information? 

I definitely feel that with the Internet era and with so much connection between doctors and teams, there is much more ability to reach out instantaneously for doctors, too, to get advice on a patient who might be in a smaller hospital that doesn’t have AML experience. But I think that the first thing is to try to figure out very, very quickly, what needs to happen to me as a patient immediately, and what can wait a minute, so that I can figure out what am I being told, and what are my options?  

Katherine Banwell:

Right, right. It can be confusing for patients, just finding out this new information. Part of making care decisions is setting goals. What are AML treatment goals, and how are they determined?   

Dr. Gail Roboz:

I would say that leaving cure on the table from the beginning is always a good place to start, because you want to figure out, first of all, what am I dealing with? What are the actual options?   

But when AML strikes, and a patient who has multiple medical conditions or comorbidities that are truly compromising function independently of the diagnosis of AML, that’s going to be a special path of what is actually reasonable for someone who is terribly medically ill or otherwise frail right from the beginning? That can be defining goals, but I think from the beginning, the best thing is to leave everything on the table. What can actually be done to make me better, first of all, to get me out of my immediate trouble? What can be done to make me better, and if I’m getting better, well, I like that, how do I stay there?  

What can be done to hang on to the state of ‘better,’ which is sometimes defined as remission? In AML, the goal is to get the bone marrow working again, functioning again, get rid of the acute emergency problem, if there is one, which there may or may not be in acute leukemia. 

Sometimes it’s truly an emergency, and sometimes it isn’t. But once I get better, can I stay there? What is required to keep me with a working bone marrow for as long as possible? 

But once you are starting to sort through the diagnosis, you realize that saying that somebody has acute myeloid leukemia is not telling me nearly enough information. This is a disease that is what we call biologically heterogeneous, which means there are lots of different forms. It’s like saying you’re sick. What exactly does that mean? There are lots of things that can make you sick. There are lots of different subtypes of AML, and fairly quickly in most institutions, we start getting back some information specifically on the subtype and biological characteristics of the disease.  

This can be very, very important in the initial treatment planning, and depending on where you are, the information that you get back can sometimes take 24 hours, 48 hours, 72 hours, a week. So, you start learning very quickly though that, “If I’m not in a complete emergency that requires instantaneous treatment, can I get back more information about the biological subtype of the disease so that I can start treatment planning of what is my best option right out of the gate?” That’s usually called induction, or the first therapy that you’re going to get with the goal, ‘getting rid of leukemia cells and getting into remission.’ That’s part one, and then everything that comes after that is about keeping you in remission.  

But for the initial goal, what is the therapy that the patient needs to get to get into remission? In order to figure that out, the good news is there are a lot of different ways to slice and dice getting into remission, and actually, it used to be such a weighty decision. 

Now, I would actually encourage people to – not relax, you can never use the word ‘relax’ with acute leukemia. But there are several different induction strategies for most patients that would be okay.  

So, even if you get started with one strategy and you hear five days later that another doctor might do something different, there are a lot of ways to safely get into remission. I think everybody should be pleased about the fact that we’re doing much better than we used to for patients across the board, all the way from children to much older adults, to safely getting people into remission. 

Katherine Banwell:

Right. So, what sort of factors then do you take into consideration when you’re choosing a therapy? 

Dr. Gail Roboz:

So, out of the gate, there are the patients that I think I referred to earlier who truly, truly are in situations based on their other diseases that there are certain treatments we would just cross out right out of the gate.  

If there are patients with very, very severely compromised cardiac or renal or lung function or are terribly ill from other conditions, AML doctors will right out of the gate for those patients eliminate certain treatments. But absent that scenario, what we try to look for is the biology of the disease. Not look at the age, not look at the comorbidities unless they are so severe that they make obvious certain choices. 

But rather, what I like to do is say, “What kind of AML is this, and what is the best treatment that I have to get this patient into remission?” And then ask the question, “can this particular patient handle this therapy?” Sometimes, these days, there actually may be more than one route to get to remission depending on the biology of the disease, and then, if that’s the case, then I can start getting picky and look at the individual patient. Where does the patient live? Who’s the patient’s family? What other diseases has the patient been treated for?  

Is there something that I can use? If I have a choice, if there are a couple of different things that might work, how do I fit the treatment to best take care of the needs of this particular patient? If I don’t have choices, then my question is, “Okay, how do I get this patient through my one therapy that I think is the truly, truly best option?” 

Katherine Banwell:

Okay. I’d like to turn to test results for a moment. What sort of tests should be done following an AML diagnosis?  

Dr. Gail Roboz:

We often generally recommend a bone marrow biopsy, even if we know we can make the diagnosis from a blood test, because even though the bone marrow biopsy is not the most fun test in the world, it does offer better information for follow-up care than what you can get initially from the blood. 

So, every once in a while, we do have a patient for whom a bone marrow biopsy itself for whatever reason can’t be done. But almost always, we need a bone marrow biopsy, and on that biopsy, you’re going to look under the microscope and see what the cells look like. You’re going to get back standard testing, which is called flow cytometry, which is going to tell the difference between what are the different cells that you’re seeing under the microscope. 

But then you’re actually going to get progressively much more fancy testing, including things called chromosomes or cytogenetics, and then ultimately, the majority of patients, if at all possible, will be having mutational testing to identify certain subgroups of AML that benefit from very particular treatments. Next-generation sequencing, PCR, fusion proteins, FISH, cytogenetics, I can go on and on with all kinds of terminology that is very confusing, even to hematology fellows, let alone to patients.  

Usually, we use a combination of tests to decide, “Is this patient likely to be able to be cured with chemotherapy alone, or might this patient benefit from a stem cell transplant from somebody else after they go into remission?” 

That’s basically what the prognostic scoring systems used to be asking, but now it’s a lot more complicated than that. Because even in the favorable categories, even in the adverse categories, where there used to be very little subtlety, now there is a lot of subtlety. 

It’s all about defining getting into remission, and what do I give you once you’re in remission to keep you there? It’s no longer this windshield wiper thing of good, bad, transplant, no transplant. There’s a lot more to AML than there used to be. 

Katherine Banwell:

I’d like to add that if you, the viewer, are interested in learning more about AML testing and treatment, PEN has a number of resources available for you. You can find these at powerfulpatients.org/AML, or by scanning the QR code on your screen.  

Before we get into specific treatment types, Dr. Roboz, would you provide a brief explanation of the phases of therapy for AML? You mentioned induction therapy earlier. Would you tell us what that is? 

Dr. Gail Roboz:

Yeah. So, here, too, I have to say that it’s more confusing than it used to be for the following reasons. So, historically and currently, we typically talk about induction as the first therapy that you’re going to get to get into remission.  

Then, the treatment paradigm is you do something to get into remission; do some treatment to get into remission. After that, in the realm of post-remission therapy, there are different things that can happen. There can be something called consolidation, which might be another round of chemotherapy. Some patients get consolidation, some patients don’t. After consolidation, there can be a transplant.  

So, you get into remission, you may or may not get a little bit of what’s called consolidation chemotherapy, and then go on to a transplant. 

However, sometimes either after the transplant or after chemotherapy before ever getting or instead of ever getting a transplant, there might be ongoing treatment in a lower intensity ongoing basis that is called maintenance.  

So, you’ve got to think about it as induction as what happens first, consolidation is something that happens when you’re in remission, and then maintenance usually refers to ongoing therapy that is different from consolidation. 

It’s usually lower intensity, easier to take, oral types of treatment that may go on and on. And just to be incredibly confusing, it’s different from something like breast cancer, where often the patients are given, “You get six cycles of this, and then you’re done.” From AML, there’s actually often not that type of an obvious plan right out of the gate for the patient. 

The answer will be, “It depends.” It depends. It depends how your treatment looks at this point in time. It depends how you look at this point in time. 

So then, the patients say, “Well, aren’t you going to cure me of this? What are you doing? Aren’t you going to get rid of it?” So, historically, there are some patients who get cured with chemotherapy. They get chemotherapy to get into remission, they get some chemotherapy afterwards, and there’s a cure rate for some patients with that. The majority of patients who are cured with AML get an allotransplant, or a transplant from somebody else. 

Then there’s a whole group of patients where we’re asking the question now, is it possible to get those patients beyond five years – so in oncology, five years is typically defined as cure. Can we get some patients with ongoing therapy to that past-five-year mark without a transplant? That’s in the zone of the ‘coming soon.’ Don’t have a ton of patients in that group right now, but hopefully we will. 

Katherine Banwell:

You’ve mentioned some various treatment types that are used to treat AML. Can you share a brief overview of available treatments? 

Dr. Gail Roboz:

So, the terminology that we use is a little bit annoying, because it is a little bit general. We say intensive and not intensive. 

But historically, intensive chemotherapy referred to a combination of generally two types of agents, cytarabine (Cytosar-U) and an anthracycline, which is a class of chemotherapy, that either just those two together or in combination with sometimes a third or a fourth drug usually keeps people in the hospital for around a month. Not that the chemotherapy takes that long, but the treatment gets rid of basically a lot of cells in the bone marrow, good guys and bad guys, and it takes about three weeks for those normal cells to recover. 

So, a standard intensive induction for AML is often around three to four weeks in the hospital, somewhere between three and five or so days of chemotherapy up front, depending on exactly what the protocol is. The classic regimen is actually still called 3+7, three days of one drug, seven of the other. But there are many variations of that that work. 

The chemo is then stopped, the patient hangs out in the hospital, very frequently getting transfusions and antibiotics, and we wait for the bone marrow to recover.  

Another current path that many patients are getting – almost all older patients, with ‘older’ being defined not by a specific age cutoff, but often 75 and older, almost everybody agrees no longer gets the classic chemotherapy that I just described. At some institutions, that 75 is going down, and even 70 and 65 and above are getting a new type of therapy, mostly because the new type of therapy is working pretty well. That is a combination of something called a hypomethylating agent.  

Drugs like azacitidine (Vidaza, Onureg) or decitabine (Dacogen) in combination with a pill that has changed the landscape of AML more than any other called venetoclax (Venclexta). Venetoclax is a drug that is not exclusively used for AML. 

It actually was originally approved for another type of leukemia. But I think that not many people would argue with the statement that what has changed absolutely the face of AML treatment has been this drug, because it’s a BCL2 inhibitor. What it does is it actually – cancer cells and leukemia cells in particular are very, very good at staying alive.  

They don’t undergo cell death, they don’t want to die, and venetoclax brings down their forcefield so that those cells can actually undergo apoptosis and die. 

Venetoclax in combination with azacitidine or decitabine has transformed the care of the disease, because many patients older than 65 – and the median age of diagnosis of AML is around 68 to 70. So, many patients never were well enough to have the intensive therapy. They weren’t going into remission, and they weren’t having prolonged survival often beyond a few months. 

But now, those patients do actually much better with the combination of aza [azacitidine] and venetoclax. So typically, the induction path is going to be deciding who gets an intensive therapy backbone, usually associated with long hospitalization. Who gets a less intensive backbone – by the way, that is often associated with just the same hospitalization. So, that’s why I don’t love the term ‘low intensity,’ because that implies that it doesn’t work.  

It does, and it also implies that you’re not going to be in the hospital. You probably will, because in the same way as for the more so-called intensive therapies, getting into remission involves getting rid of bone marrow cells and waiting for the normal ones to recover. Even if you are a patient who is getting the venetoclax combined with the azacitidine or decitabine, which is typically called low intensity, you may very well be in the hospital for a month. 

Because depending on where you live and who your family is and how sick you might be, you will probably want us to watch you carefully during that first month, but it’s worth it. Because if you have a good chance of getting into remission, remission is what makes life better and life longer. So, we want to get patients into remission, even if it means upfront time in the hospital. 

Katherine Banwell:

You mentioned one inhibitor as targeted therapy, but there are a couple of others. Would you briefly tell us about those? 

Dr. Gail Roboz:

So, over the years recently, we have identified certain specific targets in AML which are resulting in the addition of medications on these standard backbones. So, the target for venetoclax is something called BCL2, and actually, venetoclax probably makes all chemotherapy better. It’s kind of a controversial statement, but I’m going to stand by it. But in AML, it has been shown that the addition of venetoclax to lots of different backbones makes them work better. There are other things to hit, though.  

For example, there are patients with AML who have something called a FLT3, F-L-T-3 mutation. This mutation also has specific inhibitors that are FDA-approved drugs that target specifically the FLT3 mutation, and if you have one of those, your doctor may add on a FLT3 inhibitor to either a lower intensity or an intensive backbone. Similarly, there are agents called IDH inhibitors. There are IDH1 and IDH2 inhibitors. 

If I start getting into isocitrate dehydrogenase pathways on this webinar, I think everybody will click off, because it’s certainly bored all of the medical students in med school, and it’s pretty tough to understand. But the bottom line is it’s very cool stuff because that boring pathway in medical school that nobody really thought about too much is actually part of very, very, central cellular functions that are a vulnerability now that have been identified in leukemic cells that, if you hit them with these specific inhibitors, patients do better.  

Now, couple of things for patients. It doesn’t mean that it’s better to have a FLT3 or an IDH mutation because the targeted therapies are available. So, a lot of patients are disappointed when they don’t have mutations. I don’t want you to think in that way. It’s not that it’s better, it’s different.  

It identifies a different biology. If you have certain mutations, there are certain medications that may help you more.  

That’s why I think the patients are learning quickly, too, to ask the doc – they may not remember the letters of the alphabet soup, but “Do I have something about my AML that can get one of these targeted therapies added on?” I think is a good question to think about. “Do I have something about my disease that has a specific drug that we’ve already learned makes outcomes better?”  

Katherine Banwell:

There’s a new emerging therapy as well. Is it the menin inhibitor? 

Dr. Gail Roboz:

I think that, in understanding different targets and different pathways, it leads me to a general statement that if you can get yourself potentially onto a clinical trial at an academic center, that is something to consider right out of the gate. Because there is a lot, a lot, a lot going on in this field right now. 

What we are hoping, and the reason that I am talking to you about venetoclax and FLT3 inhibitors and IDH inhibitors, is because of all the patients who jumped onto those clinical trials and proved that those drugs are better. Some of them are my patients! I was fortunate on some of those early trials to have some real winners in patients who got onto the trials. They’re the ones who drove the success. 

So, for example, menin inhibitors, which are very, very exciting, targeted agents for NPM1 and KMT2A mutations and rearrangements – these are complicated to remember as a patient, but there’s a cool drug out there that might be for you. I think that patients who really think about asking the question wherever they are, the “Hey, I just got a diagnosis of AML. Is there a clinical trial that might look good for me?” I think is a great question to ask pretty much out of the gate. 

Katherine Banwell:

The symptoms of AML as well as the side effects of certain medications can vary greatly among patients. So, how do you approach symptom management with your patients? 

Dr. Gail Roboz:

Patients will giggle because I repeat this line. You have to be afraid of the disease, not the treatment. I think that if you read the package insert on a Tylenol, you’re certainly not going  to think you’re going to live for more than 20 minutes if you take one of those. You can certainly appreciate that, with chemotherapy drugs and including some of the novel agents that I’m talking about, if you read package inserts and look at some of the signs and symptoms and things that can happen, it’s extraordinarily overwhelming. 

I think that a lot of what I do for patients is I keep them close. Because if the patient is in the hospital or coming in very frequently in clinic, I think that that everyday assessment of, “What are you experiencing?” and “What can I tell you is the disease’s fault, and what can I tell you is the medication’s fault?” is so, so important. 

Especially in the newly diagnosed patients, where the disease is active. Of course, we want to try to minimize anything that we can do to make the process better for patients, more comfortable for patients, but there are certain things that we do tell people, “You’ve got to slug through this particular problem, because this is the disease’s fault.” This is different from a patient in remission, where they might be getting ongoing therapy with something, or we say, “Hey, wait a minute. You’d be feeling fine, except now you’re taking this medication. How do we minimize messing up quality of life in remission?” 

Because we want you to feel great when you’re in remission. I think the real answer of that is to have a really close collaboration with the healthcare team, and for the patients to really understand – I repeat this because it’s so important. What is the disease’s fault, and what is the treatment’s fault? If there’s something that is therapy-related, do I have a substitute or do I not have a substitute?  

Because if the drug is essential to get us where we need to go, well, what can we do to manage comfort and to manage symptoms until you get to the place where your marrow is working again? 

Katherine Banwell:

That’s great advice, Dr. Roboz. I would like to get to an audience question that we received prior to the program. This one comes from Johanna. “How can I better understand my lab test results? What questions should I be asking my provider about those results?”  

Dr. Gail Roboz:

One of the things that I would say to patients is to be careful when interpreting your own results, because I really am not exaggerating to say that patients have had absolute trauma looking at things that I look at it and say, “Oh, this looks great.” So, the first thing is, be careful being your own doctor. 

The second thing though is that the author of the question has to understand that there’s going to be a tsunami of data coming in with respect to AML treatment. Sometimes in the hospital on a daily basis when you’re in the middle of an induction, there is a true – tsunami is the right word – a deluge of data, and you have to work with your team to say, “What am I following here? What’s important at this phase in my treatment? What’s the number I’m looking at?” Patients sometimes tell me, “I don’t want to know any of this,” and I’m fine with that.  

I think it’s actually okay. Sometimes patients will say, “Give me guidance,” and I will be specific. Because you can actually have a leukemia induction patient where every single laboratory value is abnormal. They might be getting pushed to a device, in the morning, sitting in the hospital on your iPad, 50 abnormal results. You’re trying to battle back the disease and be positive and advocate for yourself, but there are 50 abnormal results in front of you. 

I think you have to really work with the team to say, “What am I looking at today? What are the numbers that are the really important ones? There are 50 abnormal ones here; everything is getting a yellow or a red light in this. How do I go through this?”  

And to appreciate, also, that at different points in the treatment, the beginning of treatment induction post-remission therapy, you’re looking for different things. So, work with your team so that you’re not assessing every single result with equivalent weight, because I think you’re going to stress yourself out.  

Katherine Banwell:

That’s great advice, Dr. Roboz. Thank you. As we close out the program, I’d like to find out what you would like to leave the audience with. Why are you hopeful? 

Dr. Gail Roboz:

AML is changing incredibly rapidly. And  I can tell you it is a lot more fun to be an AML doctor now than it used to be, with respect to what I am offering for patients. We have always fought really, really hard to have our wins, but we’re winning more. I do think that it is a complicated space to navigate for patients, but there is room for a lot of optimism. 

I think we are getting patients transplanted  –  patients that we never thought would ever go through a transplant or getting transplanted. Patients who never had a chance of even living more than six or eight months or living much longer than that. Is it perfect? No. Do we have as many cures as we want?  

No, but there’s a lot going on. I think if patients feel that excitement, they will also feel the need to ask about those clinical trials. Because I think that for a lot of patients, clinical trials is an area where they would be worried. They’re not sure that they want to. “I don’t want to be a guinea pig,” and yet here I can say in the AML space, one after another after another drug approvals in the last several years, with the patients on those trials being awfully happy that they participated. 

So, I think that it’s a very, very terrifying diagnosis. There’s nothing that I can do to take the sting out of that. But try to find yourself in an optimistic place with options that are being offered to the very, very, very best that we can do. There are patients who are listening, I’m sure, who have relapsed or refractory disease who are not feeling that optimism. 

I want to address you specifically, because we don’t have enough yet. We’re trying. When you have AML that has come back or come back multiply, that’s dangerous and difficult. But for those patients in particular, try really hard to get onto clinical trials. If the drugs that we have out there – if you’ve already taken them and they haven’t worked for you or if they’re not serving you well, if you’re in good shape and the drugs that we have aren’t good enough, well, let’s see if we can get you on something that’s investigational. 

Katherine Banwell:

Dr. Roboz, thank you so much for taking the time to join us today. 

Dr. Gail Roboz:

Thank you for having me. 

Katherine Banwell:

I also want to thank all of our collaborators. To learn more about AML and to access tools to help you become a proactive patient, visit powerfulpatients.org. I’m Katherine Banwell. Thanks for joining us today.  

Accessing Quality Myeloma Care | Advice for Overcoming Obstacles

Accessing Quality Myeloma Care | Advice for Overcoming Obstacles from Patient Empowerment Network on Vimeo.

How can you access the myeloma care that is best for YOU? Myeloma specialist Dr. Krina Patel shares advice for patients, including the importance of a second opinion and key questions to ask your doctor regarding your disease and treatment plan. 

Dr. Krina Patel is an Associate Professor in the Department of Lymphoma/Myeloma at The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center in Houston, Texas. Dr. Patel is involved in research and cares for patients with multiple myeloma. Learn more about Dr. Krina Patel.

Related Resources:

What Is the Role of Bispecific Antibody Therapies in Future Myeloma Care?

What Is the Role of Bispecific Antibody Therapies in Future Myeloma Care?

Key Advice for Myeloma Patients | Questions to Ask About a Care Plan

Elevate | What Role Can YOU Play in Your Myeloma Treatment and Care?

Elevate | What Role Can YOU Play in Your Myeloma Treatment and Care? 

Transcript:

Katherine:

What hurdles to patients face when accessing quality overall myeloma care and what can be done to get over these obstacles?  

Dr. Krina Patel:

I talk about this a lot. 

So, again I think the biggest problem for me is that because myeloma care changes so fast, which is a good thing that we have all these options and we have so many new therapies, it’s really hard for people who don’t do just myeloma to keep up. I don’t think I would be able to. I don’t do breast cancer. I don’t do other cancers, so when I take my boards every 10 years, I have to learn a lot to take those.

So, it’s just a part of the system that this the problem. So, I think if you’re seeing a local oncologist that sees five myeloma patients a year, they’re gonna be stuck on what was the treatment when they did it last time for that last patient, which again might be very different now because things change so fast. 

And so, again, you want to get to a doctor quickly, and I understand that. When people hear “cancer,” they’re like “I gotta get treatment. I gotta go fast.” But part of it is, if you need treatment quickly to get to your doctor. But then, try to make a second-opinion appointment done, even virtually because we can do that now after COVID; we have so many more options for that.  

And get that second opinion just to say “Is this the right therapy for me? Going forward, what should I do?” So, patients, “Should I get a stem cell transplant?” if you’re newly diagnosed or not. “What kinda maintenance should I be doing? Do I have high-risk disease or not? What are the nuances of my myeloma versus everybody else that we need to be careful about? Should we dose reduce?” There’s a lot of those types of hurdles. Patients, if they have kidney failure form their myeloma, we should be decreasing the dose of some of the medications; those types of things that really we can help with to make sure those outcomes are in the best. 

And that first treatment really does matter so that we can reverse as much as possible, for patients who have kidney involvement versus bone involvement, to decrease the pain really quickly. Do we need to get our radiation doctors involved to get radiation to help make sure you don’t get a fracture from a potential bone lesion. So, I think, again, I understand the urgency of seeing somebody, of getting diagnosed, and starting therapy.   

But quickly get to a second opinion so that they can help. And then, again, some of these patient advocacy groups are amazing for myeloma. And I think there’s just so much information there that you don’t want to get overwhelmed, but at the same time you want to start going a little bit at a time at those things so that you can learn more about what you need to be asking and doing.  

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.

Download Resource Guide

See More from Evolve Myeloma

Related Resources:

Self-Advocacy in Myeloma Care | Advice From an Expert

Self-Advocacy in Myeloma Care | Advice From an Expert

What Do You Need to Know When Considering CAR T-Cell Therapy?

What Do You Need to Know When Considering CAR T-Cell Therapy?

What Should Myeloma Patients Ask About Developing Research

What Should Myeloma Patients Ask About Developing Research?

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? 

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.

Download Resource Guide

See More from Evolve Myeloma

Related Resources:

Clinical Trials for Myeloma Treatment | Essential Information for Patients

Clinical Trials for Myeloma Treatment | Essential Information for Patients

Personalized Medicine for Myeloma Treatment | What Patients Should Know

Personalized Medicine for Myeloma Treatment | What Patients Should Know

What Should Myeloma Patients Ask About Developing Research

What Should Myeloma Patients Ask About Developing Research?

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. 

Navigating Anxiety and Stress Following Follicular Lymphoma Treatment

Navigating Anxiety and Stress Following Follicular Lymphoma Treatment from Patient Empowerment Network on Vimeo.

What are some ways for follicular lymphoma patients to cope with emotions after treatment? Cancer patient Lisa Hatfied shares coping methods and health lifestyle advice for dealing with stress and anxiety.

See More from START HERE Follicular Lymphoma

Related Resources:

What Are the Signs It Is Time to Treat Follicular Lymphoma

How Can I Manage Anxiety After Follicular Lymphoma Diagnosis

What To Do When Newly Diagnosed With Follicular Lymphoma


Transcript:

Lisa Hatfield:

After you are done with your follicular lymphoma treatment (including stopping any maintenance therapy), you may feel anxiety or stress and ask yourself “Well now what?” This range of emotions is normal. One woman  shared, “After a year in remission, dealing with the aftermath of follicular lymphoma has been tough. Initially, the news of remission brought euphoria and excitement that lasted the whole day. However, soon after, I found myself feeling numb—and then grappling with guilt for feeling that way.

You may feel similar to this woman or you may feel like the other shoe is about to drop (i.e. concerned about recurrence in the future). Here are some tips to help manage this stress and anxiety: 

  • Manage your expectations. Give yourself a break and set realistic expectations. After you stop maintenance therapy, you may not feel 100% back to normal right away so give yourself grace 
  • Research has shown that fear of recurrence can be reduced when your healthcare team is able to give people statistics about curability or remission length. Ask your healthcare team if you find comfort in statistics. 
  • Talk to a counselor and seek antidepressant or anti-anxiety medications
  • Exercise and relaxation techniques like meditation and mindfulness may also help
  • Continue healthy lifestyle factors, just like you did during treatment, including good diet/nutrition, getting enough sleep, etc. 
  • Join a support group designed to help people who have completed treatment. It can be helpful to hear what other people do to manage their anxiety/stress and know you are not alone in feeling this way. 

Sources: 


Share Your Feedback:

Create your own user feedback survey