search.noResults

search.searching

saml.title
dataCollection.invalidEmail
note.createNoteMessage

search.noResults

search.searching

orderForm.title

orderForm.productCode
orderForm.description
orderForm.quantity
orderForm.itemPrice
orderForm.price
orderForm.totalPrice
orderForm.deliveryDetails.billingAddress
orderForm.deliveryDetails.deliveryAddress
orderForm.noItems
CLINICAL DEVELOPMENT IN ONCOLOGY C


himeric antigen receptor (CAR)-T cell therapies have always carried a risk of causing secondary malignancies, but


until now that risk has been somewhat theoretical. In the last two months, since the FDA launched an investigation into the risk of developing secondary cancers following the administration of CAR-T cell therapies, a volley of safety updates has increased the scrutiny of these innovative therapies. One month after the FDA opened its


investigation, Johnson and Johnson and Legend Biotech reported data from the Phase II CARTITUDE-1 trial (NCT03548207) showing that myeloid neoplasms occurred in 10 out of 97 patients following treatment with its CAR-T cell therapy Carvykti (ciltacabtagene autoleucel; cilta-cel). Nine of these 10 patients died after developing myeloid neoplasms. In December, the companies added a boxed warning stating the risk of developing secondary hematological malignancies following treatment with Carvykti. Then, on 19 January, the FDA sought to add


boxed warnings for secondary T-cell malignancies to all approved CAR-T therapies, including Carvykti. A few days later, the agency updated the proposed label for Gilead Sciences’ CAR-T treatment Tecartus (brexucabtagene autoleucel) to a general class-wide boxed warning instead of the specific warning that was previously issued. While there is potential for correlation, there is not enough information to infer any causation, says Dr. Bruce Levine, Barbara and Edward Netter Professor in Cancer Gene Therapy at the Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania. Levine is credited as a co-inventor of the first CAR-T to get an FDA nod: Novartis’s Kymriah (tisagenlecleucel). “Although there have been cases with T-cell lymphomas and other secondary T-cell malignancies, some of these were positive for the CAR transgene and there are multiple unknowns.”


Difficulty in defining a causal relationship Dr. Rahul Banerjee, oncologist and assistant professor at Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, explains that many of the patients who have developed secondary T-cell malignancies in the CARTITUDE-1 trial have been on other treatments that are known to predispose patients to secondary cancers, including


“Although there have been cases with T-cell lymphomas and other secondary T-cell malignancies, some of these were positive for the CAR transgene and there are multiple unknowns”


chemotherapies like lenalidomide, bendamustine, and fludarabine. Given the fact that these patients may have received other therapies in prior years that could be coming to the forefront, it is hard to say what effects are due to a CAR-T and what are not, he adds. Banerjee highlights a discussion surrounding


this issue at the premier haematology meeting—American Society of Hematology (ASH) Annual Meeting & Exposition—which took place in December 2023, shortly after the news of the FDA investigation broke. In the case of one patient from the Phase III CARTITUDE-4 study (NCT04181827) with relapsed/refractory (R/R) multiple myeloma being treated with Carvykti, a CAR-T cell lymphoma was observed. However, Banerjee says it appeared as if the cells were potentially predisposed and destined to become a T-cell lymphoma, even before CAR-T therapy was administered. In that particular case, those T-cells had many risk factors, including a genetic predisposition that probably meant that they were destined to become T-cell lymphoma cells in that patient’s lifetime, Banerjee adds. Levine says longer survival because of


patients receiving CAR-T therapies creates an “immortal time bias” in this specific population. Often, patients receiving CAR-T therapies are in the R/R setting and have no other good options. However, “patients are now surviving, and we don’t know the frequency of secondary malignancies that would ordinarily occur in this population,” Levine adds.


Clinical Trials in Oncology | 23


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44