See More from Evolve CAR T-Cell Therapy

Related Resources:

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

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

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.