Explore the vast range of titles available.

Scleroderma is a life-threatening autoimmune disease in need of more effective treatment. A randomized trial of myeloablative therapy followed by autologous CD34+ hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation showed outcomes that were superior to those with monthly cyclophosphamide.

In this trial, 1-year GVHD-free, relapse-free survival after stem-cell transplantation was 52.7% in the cyclophosphamide–tacrolimus–mycophenolate mofetil group and 34.9% in the tacrolimus–methotrexate group.

Findings of retrospective studies suggest that sorafenib maintenance post-transplantation might reduce relapse in patients with FLT3 internal tandem duplication (FLT3-ITD) acute myeloid leukaemia undergoing allogeneic haematopoietic stem-cell transplantation. We investigated the efficacy and tolerability of sorafenib maintenance post-transplantation in this population. We did an open-label, randomised phase 3 trial at seven hospitals in China. Eligible patients (aged 18–60 years) had FLT3-ITD acute myeloid leukaemia, were undergoing allogeneic haematopoietic stem-cell transplantation, had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0–2, had composite complete remission before and after transplantation, and had haematopoietic recovery within 60 days post-transplantation. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to sorafenib maintenance (400 mg orally twice daily) or non-maintenance (control) at 30–60 days post-transplantation. Randomisation was done with permuted blocks (block size four) and implemented through an interactive web-based randomisation system. The primary endpoint was the 1-year cumulative incidence of relapse in the intention-to-treat population. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02474290; the trial is complete. Between June 20, 2015, and July 21, 2018, 202 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to sorafenib maintenance (n=100) or control (n=102). Median follow-up post-transplantation was 21·3 months (IQR 15·0–37·0). The 1-year cumulative incidence of relapse was 7·0% (95% CI 3·1–13·1) in the sorafenib group and 24·5% (16·6–33·2) in the control group (hazard ratio 0·25, 95% CI 0·11–0·57; p=0·0010). Within 210 days post-transplantation, the most common grade 3 and 4 adverse events were infections (25 [25%] of 100 patients in the sorafenib group vs 24 [24%] of 102 in the control group), acute graft-versus-host-disease (GVHD; 23 [23%] of 100 vs 21 [21%] of 102), chronic GVHD (18 [18%] of 99 vs 17 [17%] of 99), and haematological toxicity (15 [15%] of 100 vs seven [7%] of 102). There were no treatment-related deaths. Sorafenib maintenance post-transplantation can reduce relapse and is well tolerated in patients with FLT3-ITD acute myeloid leukaemia undergoing allogeneic haematopoietic stem-cell transplantation. This strategy could be a suitable therapeutic option for patients with FLT3-ITD acute myeloid leukaemia. None.

CMV infection is a common complication in patients undergoing hematopoietic-cell transplantation. The incidence of CMV infection was 23 percentage points lower with prophylactic letermovir, a CMV–terminase complex inhibitor, than with placebo, with only low-level toxic effects.

Autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (ASCT) improves survival in multiple myeloma (MM). However, many individuals are unable to collect optimal CD34 + hematopoietic stem and progenitor cell (HSPC) numbers with granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) mobilization. Motixafortide is a novel cyclic-peptide CXCR4 inhibitor with extended in vivo activity. The GENESIS trial was a prospective, phase 3, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter study with the objective of assessing the superiority of motixafortide + G-CSF over placebo + G-CSF to mobilize HSPCs for ASCT in MM. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients collecting ≥6 × 10 6 CD34 + cells kg –1 within two apheresis procedures; the secondary endpoint was to achieve this goal in one apheresis. A total of 122 adult patients with MM undergoing ASCT were enrolled at 18 sites across five countries and randomized (2:1) to motixafortide + G-CSF or placebo + G-CSF for HSPC mobilization. Motixafortide + G-CSF enabled 92.5% to successfully meet the primary endpoint versus 26.2% with placebo + G-CSF (odds ratio (OR) 53.3, 95% confidence interval (CI) 14.12–201.33, P  < 0.0001). Motixafortide + G-CSF also enabled 88.8% to meet the secondary endpoint versus 9.5% with placebo + G-CSF (OR 118.0, 95% CI 25.36–549.35, P  < 0.0001). Motixafortide + G-CSF was safe and well tolerated, with the most common treatment-emergent adverse events observed being transient, grade 1/2 injection site reactions (pain, 50%; erythema, 27.5%; pruritis, 21.3%). In conclusion, motixafortide + G-CSF mobilized significantly greater CD34 + HSPC numbers within two apheresis procedures versus placebo + G-CSF while preferentially mobilizing increased numbers of immunophenotypically and transcriptionally primitive HSPCs. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT03246529 The phase 3 GENESIS trial reports the superiority of the novel CXCR4 inhibitor motixafortide with G-CSF in mobilizing hematopoietic progenitor cells for autologous stem cell transplantation in multiple myeloma.

A study in patients with chronic GVHD evaluated three doses of axatilimab, a colony-stimulating factor 1 receptor antibody. The lowest dose appeared to maximize response with the fewest adverse effects.

PD-1 blockade via pembrolizumab monotherapy has shown antitumour activity and toxicity in patients with relapsed or refractory classical Hodgkin lymphoma. Here, we present interim analyses from the KEYNOTE-204 study evaluating pembrolizumab versus brentuximab vedotin for relapsed or refractory classical Hodgkin lymphoma. In this randomised, open-label, phase 3 study, patients aged 18 years or older with relapsed or refractory classical Hodgkin lymphoma with measurable disease and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1 who were ineligible for or had relapsed after autologous haematopoietic stem-cell transplantation (HSCT) were enrolled at 78 hospitals and cancer centres in 20 countries and territories. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) with an interactive voice response system to pembrolizumab 200 mg intravenously every 3 weeks or brentuximab vedotin 1·8 mg/kg intravenously every 3 weeks. Randomisation was stratified by previous autologous HSCT and status after front-line therapy. Results from the second interim analysis are presented here, with a database cutoff of Jan 16, 2020. The dual primary endpoints assessed in the intention-to-treat population were progression-free survival as assessed by blinded independent central review, and overall survival (not analysed at this interim analysis). Safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of the study drug. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02684292. Recruitment for this trial is closed. Between July 8, 2016, and July 13, 2018, 151 patients were randomly assigned to pembrolizumab and 153 to brentuximab vedotin. After a median time from randomisation to data cutoff of 25·7 months (IQR 23·4–33·0), median progression-free survival was 13·2 months (95% CI 10·9–19·4) for pembrolizumab versus 8·3 months (5·7–8·8) for brentuximab vedotin (hazard ratio 0·65 [95% CI 0·48–0·88]; p=0·0027). The most common grade 3–5 treatment-related adverse events were pneumonitis (six [4%] of 148 patients in the pembrolizumab group vs one [1%] of 152 patients in the brentuximab vedotin group), neutropenia (three [2%] vs 11 [7%]), decreased neutrophil count (one [1%] vs seven [5%]), and peripheral neuropathy (one [1%] vs five [3%]). Serious treatment-related adverse events occurred in 24 (16%) of 148 patients receiving pembrolizumab and 16 (11%) of 152 patients receiving brentuximab vedotin. One treatment-related death due to pneumonia occurred in the pembrolizumab group. Pembrolizumab showed statistically significant and clinically meaningful improvement in progression-free survival compared with brentuximab vedotin, with safety consistent with previous reports. These data support pembrolizumab as the preferred treatment option for patients with relapsed or refractory classical Hodgkin lymphoma who have relapsed post-autologous HSCT or are ineligible for autologous HSCT. Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp (a subsidiary of Merck & Co, Inc, Kenilworth, NJ, USA). For the Portuguese translation of the Article see Supplementary Materials section.

Malignant cells of classical Hodgkin's lymphoma are characterised by genetic alterations at the 9p24.1 locus, leading to overexpression of PD-1 ligands and evasion of immune surveillance. In a phase 1b study, nivolumab, a PD-1-blocking antibody, produced a high response in patients with relapsed and refractory classical Hodgkin's lymphoma, with an acceptable safety profile. We aimed to assess the clinical benefit and safety of nivolumab monotherapy in patients with classical Hodgkin's lymphoma after failure of both autologous stem-cell transplantation and brentuximab vedotin. In this ongoing, single-arm phase 2 study, adult patients (aged ≥18 years) with recurrent classical Hodgkin's lymphoma who had failed to respond to autologous stem-cell transplantation and had either relapsed after or failed to respond to brentuximab vedotin, and with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score of 0 or 1, were enrolled from 34 hospitals and academic centres across Europe and North America. Patients were given nivolumab intravenously over 60 min at 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks until progression, death, unacceptable toxicity, or withdrawal from study. The primary endpoint was objective response following a prespecified minimum follow-up period of 6 months, assessed by an independent radiological review committee (IRRC). All patients who received at least one dose of nivolumab were included in the primary and safety analyses. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02181738. Among 80 treated patients recruited between Aug 26, 2014, and Feb 20, 2015, the median number of previous therapies was four (IQR 4–7). At a median follow-up of 8·9 months (IQR 7·8–9·9), 53 (66·3%, 95% CI 54·8–76·4) of 80 patients achieved an IRRC-assessed objective response. The most common drug-related adverse events (those that occurred in ≥15% of patients) included fatigue (20 [25%] patients), infusion-related reaction (16 [20%]), and rash (13 [16%]). The most common drug-related grade 3 or 4 adverse events were neutropenia (four [5%] patients) and increased lipase concentrations (four [5%]). The most common serious adverse event (any grade) was pyrexia (three [4%] patients). Three patients died during the study; none of these deaths were judged to be treatment related. Nivolumab resulted in frequent responses with an acceptable safety profile in patients with classical Hodgkin's lymphoma who progressed after autologous stem-cell transplantation and brentuximab vedotin. Therefore, nivolumab might be a new treatment option for a patient population with a high unmet need. Ongoing follow-up will help to assess the durability of response. Bristol-Myers Squibb.

Background Steroid-resistant (SR) acute graft-versus-host disease (aGVHD) lacks standard second-line treatment. Mesenchymal stromal cells (MSCs) have potential efficacy in SR aGVHD. We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of MSCs combined with basiliximab and calcineurin inhibitor as second-line therapy for SR aGVHD. Methods A randomized phase 3 trial involved 203 SR aGVHD patients at nine centers in China (September 2014–March 2019). Participants were randomized at a 1:1 ratio to receive second-line therapy with ( n  = 101) or without ( n  = 102) MSCs. The primary endpoint was the overall response (OR) at day 28. Secondary and safety endpoints included durable OR at day 56, failure-free survival, overall survival (OS), chronic GVHD (cGVHD), infection, hematological toxicity and relapse. Results Of 203 patients, 198 (97.5%; mean age, 30.1 years; 40.4% women) completed the study. The OR at day 28 was higher in the MSC group than the control group (82.8% [82 patients] vs. 70.7% [70]; odds ratio, 2.00; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.01–3.94; P  = 0.043). The durable OR at day 56 was also higher in the MSC group (78.8% [78 patients] vs. 64.6% [64]; odds ratio, 2.02; 95% CI, 1.08–3.83; P  = 0.027). The median failure-free survival was longer in the MSC group compared with control (11.3 months vs. 6.0 months; hazard ratio (HR) 0.68; 95% CI, 0.48–0.95, P  = 0.024). The 2-year cumulative incidence of cGVHD was 39.5% (95% CI, 29.3–49.4%) and 62.7% (51.4–72.1%) in the MSC and control groups (HR 0.55, 95% CI, 0.36–0.84; P  = 0.005). Within 180 days after study treatments, the most common grade 3 and 4 adverse events were infections (65 [65.7%] in the MSC group vs. 78 [78.8%] in the control group) and hematological toxicity (37 [37.4%] vs. 53 [53.5%]). The 3-year cumulative incidence of tumor relapse was 10.1% (95% CI, 5.2–17.1) and 13.5% (7.5–21.2%) in the MSC and control groups, respectively (HR 0.75, 95% CI, 0.34–1.67, P  = 0.610). Conclusions MSCs plus second-line treatments increase the efficacy of SR aGVHD, decrease drug toxicity of second-line drugs and cGVHD without increasing relapse, and are well-tolerated. MSCs could be recommended as a second-line treatment option for aGVHD patients. Trial registration clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT02241018. Registration date: September 16, 2014, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02241018 .

High-dose melphalan plus autologous stem-cell transplantation (ASCT) is the standard approach in transplant-eligible patients with newly diagnosed myeloma. Our aims were to compare consolidation with high-dose melphalan plus ASCT versus chemotherapy (cyclophosphamide and dexamethasone) plus lenalidomide, and maintenance with lenalidomide plus prednisone versus lenalidomide alone. We did an open-label, randomised, multicentre, phase 3 study at 59 centres in Australia, Czech Republic, and Italy. We enrolled transplant-eligible patients with newly diagnosed myeloma aged 65 years or younger. Patients received a common induction with four 28-day cycles of lenalidomide (25 mg, days 1–21) and dexamethasone (40 mg, days 1, 8, 15, and 22) and subsequent chemotherapy with cyclophosphamide (3 g/m2) followed by granulocyte colony-stimulating factor for stem-cell mobilisation and collection. Using a 2 × 2 partial factorial design, we randomised patients to consolidation with either chemotherapy plus lenalidomide (six cycles of cyclophosphamide [300 mg/m2, days 1, 8, and 15], dexamethasone [40 mg, days 1, 8, 15, and 22], and lenalidomide [25 mg, days 1–21]) or two courses of high-dose melphalan (200 mg/m2) and ASCT. We also randomised patients to maintenance with lenalidomide (10 mg, days 1–21) plus prednisone (50 mg, every other day) or lenalidomide alone. A simple randomisation sequence was used to assign patients at enrolment into one of the four groups (1:1:1:1 ratio), but the treatment allocation was disclosed only when the patient reached the end of the induction and confirmed their eligibility for consolidation. Both the patient and the treating clinician did not know the consolidation and maintenance arm until that time. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival assessed by intention-to-treat. The trial is ongoing and some patients are still receiving maintenance. This study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01091831. 389 patients were enrolled between July 6, 2009, and May 6, 2011, with 256 eligible for consolidation (127 high-dose melphalan and ASCT and 129 chemotherapy plus lenalidomide) and 223 eligible for maintenance (117 lenalidomide plus prednisone and 106 lenalidomide alone). Median follow-up was 52·0 months (IQR 30·4–57·6). Progression-free survival during consolidation was significantly shorter with chemotherapy plus lenalidomide compared with high-dose melphalan and ASCT (median 28·6 months [95% CI 20·6–36·7] vs 43·3 months [33·2–52·2]; hazard ratio [HR] for the first 24 months 2·51, 95% CI 1·60–3·94; p<0·0001). Progression-free survival did not differ between maintenance treatments (median 37·5 months [95% CI 27·8–not evaluable] with lenalidomide plus prednisone vs 28·5 months [22·5–46·5] with lenalidomide alone; HR 0·84, 95% CI 0·59–1·20; p=0·34). Fewer grade 3 or 4 adverse events were recorded with chemotherapy plus lenalidomide than with high-dose melphalan and ASCT; the most frequent were haematological (34 [26%] of 129 patients vs 107 [84%] of 127 patients), gastrointestinal (six [5%] vs 25 [20%]), and infection (seven [5%] vs 24 [19%]). Haematological serious adverse events were reported in two (2%) patients assigned chemotherapy plus lenalidomide and no patients allocated high-dose melphalan and ASCT. Non-haematological serious adverse events were reported in 13 (10%) patients assigned chemotherapy plus lenalidomide and nine (7%) allocated high-dose melphalan and ASCT. During maintenance, adverse events did not differ between groups. The most frequent grade 3 or 4 adverse events were neutropenia (nine [8%] of 117 patients assigned lenalidomide plus prednisone vs 14 [13%] of 106 allocated lenalidomide alone), infection (eight [8%] vs five [5%]), and systemic toxicities (seven [6%] vs two [2%]). Non-haematological serious adverse events were reported in 13 (11%) patients assigned lenalidomide plus prednisone versus ten (9%) allocated lenalidomide alone. Four patients died because of adverse events, three from infections (two during induction and one during consolidation) and one because of cardiac toxic effects. Consolidation with high-dose melphalan and ASCT remains the preferred option in transplant-eligible patients with multiple myeloma, despite a better toxicity profile with chemotherapy plus lenalidomide. Celgene.