Blood and Marrow Transplant Clinical Trials Network Study 1102 heralds a new era in hematopoietic cell transplantation in high-risk myelodysplastic syndromes: Challenges and opportunities in implementation

Transplantation and Cellular Therapy for Older Adults-The MSK Approach

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Hematologic malignances more commonly affect older individuals and often present with advanced, higher risk disease than younger patients. Allogeneic and autologous hematopoietic cell transplantation is well-established treatment modalities with curative potential following either frontline treatments for these diseases or salvage therapy in the relapsed or refractory setting. More recently, novel cellular immunotherapy such as chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy has been shown to lead to high response rate and durable remission in many patients with advanced blood cancers.

RECENT FINDINGS

Given unique characteristics of older patients, how best to deliver these higher-intensity and time sensitive treatment modalities for them remains challenging. Moreover, their short-term and potential long-term impact on their functional status, cognitive status, and quality of life may be significant considerations for many older patients. All these issues contributed to the lack of access and significant underutilization of these potential curative treatment strategies. In this review, we present up to date evidence to support potential benefits of transplantation and cellular therapy for older adults, their steady improving outcomes, and most importantly, highlight the use of geriatric assessment to help select appropriate older patients and optimize them prior to and following transplantation and cellular therapy. We specifically describe our approach at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center and encouraging early results from its implementation.

How do we improve the translation of new evidence into the practice of hematopoietic cell transplantation and cellular therapy?

The field of hematopoietic cell transplantation and cell therapy (HCT/CT) is advancing rapidly to bring an ever-expanding collection of potentially curative therapies to patients with malignant and non-malignant diseases. The impact of these therapies depends on our ability to implement them as new evidence becomes available to advance the quality of care. There is often a long delay between evidence development and adoption of therapies based on that evidence into clinical practice. In this review, we describe the potential factors based on an implementation framework that could act as facilitators or barriers to adoption of therapies in the context of HCT/CT. We highlight two examples, the first to showcase the efforts to improve the efficiency of adoption of new findings and accelerate improvement in care of HCT/CT patients and the second to discuss the challenges in real world implementation of chimeric antigen receptor T cell therapy. We conclude by reviewing strategies to improve translation of evidence and ways to measure their success.

Evaluating complete remission with partial hematologic recovery (CRh) as a response criterion in myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS)

Myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) treated with DNMTI therapy have responses according to the 2006 IWG response criteria. CR responses have had the strongest association with OS. Recently, CR with partial hematologic recovery (CRh; i.e. blasts <5%, ANC > 500, platelets > 50) has been evaluated in AML, but its relevance is unknown in MDS. We identified adult patients with MDS treated with DNMTIs. We assessed best overall response to therapy according to IWG 2006 criteria, and subsequently identified patients meeting CRh criteria from the subgroup with SD or mCR. We evaluated duration of therapy and overall survival according to response. We identified 311 patients with MDS who received treatment between 2007 and 2018. The median age at the time of therapy was 69 years (range 23-91). Median follow up was 60 months. According to IWG 2006, responses included CR (n = 43, 14%), PR (n = 2, 1%), mCR (n = 57, 18%), SD (n = 149, 48%) and PD (n = 60, 19%). 79 patients (25%) achieved HI. A total of 62 patients (20%) met CRh criteria leading to reclassification of mCR (now n = 26, 8%) or SD (now n = 118, 38%). Patients achieving CR had similar time on therapy (median 8.1mo) compared to CRh (median 6mo, HR 1.4, 95% CI 0.9-2.0), and longer than other responses (p < 0.001). OS varied according to response; median OS was similar between CR (23.3mo) and CRh (25mo, HR 1.28 [0.79-2.08]), which was longer than those with mCR (17.2mo, HR 1.71 [0.96-3.05]), SD (16.3mo, HR 1.61 [1.04-2.48]), and PD (8.7mo, HR 3.04 [1.91-4.83]) (p < 0.001). OS associations with CR/CRh were confirmed in multivariable analysis accounting for allogeneic transplant. MDS patients who achieve a CRh response had similar survival and duration on therapy as patients who achieve CR response and superior to other IWG responses. These data support further evaluation of CRh into future response criteria and clinical trials.