In separate, live virtual events, Jonathan L. Kaufman, MD, and Morie A. Gertz, MD, MACP, discussed concerns about using chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy for a patient with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma who is experiencing rapid disease progression.
CASE SUMMARY
Eight years ago, a 63-year-old man received a diagnosis of multiple myeloma (IgGκ). He lived in a rural community. Recently, he presented with penta-refractory disease progression after 4 prior lines of therapy that included autologous stem cell transplant, 2 proteasome inhibitors, 2 immunomodulatory drugs, and 1 anti-CD38 antibody. He had hypertension controlled with lisinopril. His ECOG performance status was 1.
KAUFMAN: If I think about getting CAR T-cell therapy, if I think you as a patient need CAR T cells today, the best-case scenario is it happens in 3 or 4 months. That’s where we are today. [I hope] a year from now, we won’t be there…. It’s the logistics; although ideally maybe we like the efficacy, and we like the one-and-done nature of it—patients can come back to you and don’t have to have continuous therapy—it’s just not happening yet.
The way I think about it, for the patients with rapidly progressing disease, there’s no way that you can get lucky to have CAR T-cell therapy in [those] patients; you need bridging therapy. Then the more indolent relapse, where you see the relapse coming and you don’t stop therapy, that’s the patient who maybe can get a CAR T-cell slot 3 months from now.
Patient preference is important [for choosing next-line therapy]. When I talk to patients about it, some patients love the idea of one-and-done. Other patients don’t like how intense CAR T-cell therapy is and are OK with the ongoing therapy; they don’t like getting T cells collected, waiting the month, all those things. [Then there’s the] convenience logistics about getting it done—going to an academic center, getting the CAR T cells, coming back, and living a long, beautiful life. Performance status is critical. The way I lean is that [for patients with] better performance status, I can wait a bit and maybe that patient is right for CAR T cells.
GERTZ: Most CAR T-cell therapy mandates anywhere [state] that your [patient stays] 1 month at a medical center. So there’s no commute; they’re there, they get a hotel room, etc. CAR T-cell therapy would be a reasonable option, although for me, cyclophosphamide is a very common bridging therapy once they’re accepted.
Supply chain has limited access to commercial CAR T-cell therapy…it’s a real pain. Patients can sometimes wait months, and many of them don’t have months to wait. A significant cause of death is death on the waiting list, waiting to get availableCAR T-cell therapy.
The National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines [recommend] bendamustine, cyclophosphamide, or bendamustine combinations and then, [after 4 prior lines of therapy], CAR T cells, an antibody-drug conjugate, and the bispecific antibody teclistamab [Tecvayli]. You still have the option to use selinexor [Xpovio]. At this point, reimbursement hasn’t been a big problem, but it’s a hard drug to use.
Ilson Examines Chemoimmunotherapy Regimens for Metastatic Gastroesophageal Cancers
December 20th 2024During a Case-Based Roundtable® event, David H. Ilson, MD, PhD, discussed the outcomes of the CheckMate 649, CheckMate 648, and KEYNOTE-859 trials of chemoimmunotherapy regimens in patients with upper GI cancers.
Read More
Participants Discuss Frontline Immunotherapy Followed by ADC for Metastatic Cervical Cancer
December 19th 2024During a Case-Based Roundtable® event, Ramez N. Eskander, MD, and participants discussed first and second-line therapy decisions for a patient with PD-L1–positive cervical cancer in the frontline metastatic setting.
Read More
Oncologists Discuss a Second-Generation BTK for Relapsed/Refractory CLL
December 18th 2024During a Case-Based Roundtable® event, Daniel A. Ermann, MD, discussed evaluation and treatment for a patient with relapsed chronic lymphocytic leukemia after receiving venetoclax and obinutuzumab.
Read More