| Literature DB >> 32582204 |
Estefanía García-Guerrero1, Belén Sierro-Martínez1, Jose Antonio Pérez-Simón1.
Abstract
Multiple myeloma (MM) remains an incurable disease regardless of recent advances in the field. Therefore, a substantial unmet need exists to treat patients with relapsed/refractory myeloma. The use of novel agents such as daratumumab, elotuzumab, carfilzomib, or pomalidomide, among others, usually cannot completely eradicate myeloma cells. Although these new drugs have had a significant impact on the prognosis of MM patients, the vast majority ultimately become refractory or can no longer be treated due to toxicity of prior treatment, and thus succumb to the disease. Cellular therapies represent a novel approach with a unique mechanism of action against myeloma with the potential to defeat drug resistance and achieve long-term remissions. Genetic modification of cells to express a novel receptor with tumor antigen specificity is currently being explored in myeloma. Chimeric antigen receptor gene-modified T-cells (CAR T-cells) have shown to be the most promising approach so far. CAR T-cells have shown to induce durable complete remissions in other advanced hematologic malignancies like acute lymphocytic leukemia (ALL) and diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL). With this background, significant efforts are underway to develop CAR-based therapies for MM. Currently, several antigen targets, including CD138, CD19, immunoglobulin kappa (Ig-Kappa) and B-cell maturation antigen (BCMA), are being used in clinical trials to treat myeloma patients. Some of these trials have shown promising results, especially in terms of response rates. However, the absence of a plateau is observed in most studies which correlates with the absence of durable remissions. Therefore, several potential limitations such as lack of effectiveness, off-tumor toxicities, and antigen loss or interference with soluble proteins could hamper the efficacy of CAR T-cells in myeloma. In this review, we will focus on clinical outcomes reported with CAR T-cells in myeloma, as well as on CAR T-cell limitations and how to overcome them with next generation of CAR T-cells.Entities:
Keywords: CAR T-cell; allogeneic CAR T-cell; antigen escape; myeloma; soluble protein; toxicities
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32582204 PMCID: PMC7290012 DOI: 10.3389/fimmu.2020.01128
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Immunol ISSN: 1664-3224 Impact factor: 7.561
Characteristics of T-cell products generated in each clinical trial.
| CD138 | NCT01886976 ( | 4-1BB | No selection | IFN-Y + IL-2 | Lentiviral vector | 32 |
| CD19 | NCT02135406 ( | 4-1BB | No selection | NR | Lentiviral vector | 10.1 |
| kappaLC | NCT00881920 ( | CD28 | No selection | IL-2/IL-7 + IL-15 | Retroviral vector | 82 (IL-2)/ 89 (IL-7 + IL-15) |
| BCMA | NCT02215967 ( | CD28 | No selection | IL-2 | Retroviral vector | 44.38 |
| BCMA | NCT02546167 ( | 4-1BB | NR | IL-2 | Lentiviral vector | 17.47 |
| BCMA | NCT02658929 ( | 4-1BB | No selection | IL-2 | Lentiviral vector | 85 CD4+ (42–98) |
| BCMA | NCT03090659 ( | CD28 | T cell selection | IL-2 | Lentiviral vector | NR |
| BCMA | NCT03430011 ( | 4-1BB | NR | NR | Lentiviral vector | NR |
| BCMA | NA ( | 4-1BB | NR | NR | Retroviral vector | NR |
| BCMA | NCT03338972 ( | 4-1BB | Positive selection CD4/CD8 | NR | Lentiviral vector | NR |
| BCMA | NCT03288493 ( | 4-1BB | NR | NR | Transposon-based piggy- Bac system | NR |
| BCMA | NCT03274219 ( | 4-1BB | No selection | IL-2, PI3K inhibitor | Lentiviral vector | NR |
PBMCs, peripheral blood mononuclear cells; INF-γ, interferon gamma; IL, interleukin; NR, not reported; NA, non-applicable; PI3K, phosphoinositide 3 kinase.
Published clinical trials of CAR T-cell therapy in multiple myeloma.
| CD138 | NCT01886976 ( | 1/2 | 5 | PCD/CP/VAD | 0.756 × 107 (median) | 10 | NR | 80% fever (G3) | SD (4) PD (1) | NR | NA |
| CD19 | NCT02135406 ( | 1 | 10 | Mel + ASCT | 1–5 × 107 | 6 | NR | CRS (G1) (1) Intestinal GVHD (1) Mucositis (1) | sCR (1) VGPR (6) PR (2) | 200.8 days | NA |
| kappaLC | NCT00881920 ( | 1 | 7 | Cy (4) or none (3) | 0.92 × −1.9 × 108 cells/m2 | 4 | NR | Lymphopenia (G3) (1) No CRS | SD (4) NR (3) | NA | NA |
| BCMA | NCT02215967 ( | 1 | 24 | Cy + Flu | 0.3 × −9 × 106 | 9.5 | NR | 38% CRS (grade 3–4) 44% CRS (grade 1–2) Neurotoxicity (1) | 81% ORR sCR (2) VGPR (9) PR (4) | 31 weeks | 1 BCMA−progression |
| BCMA | NCT02546167 ( | 1 | 25 | Cy or none | 1–5 × 107 or 1–5 × 108 | 7 | NR | 88% CRS (G ≥ 3: 8 patients) 32% neurotoxicity | ORR (48%) cohort 1 (44%), cohort 2 (20%), cohort 3 (64%) | 65, 57, 125 days (cohort 1, 2, or 3) | No BCMA- clones found |
| BCMA | NCT02658929 ( | 1 | 33 | Cy + Flu | 50 × 150 × 450 × and 800 × 106 | 7-8 | 11.3 | 70% CRS (grade 1–2) 6% CRS (grade 3) 42% neurotoxicity | ORR (85%), ≥ CR (45%) sCR (36%) | 11.8 months | NR |
| BCMA | NCT03090659 ( | 1 | 57 | Cy | 0.07–2.1 × 106 | 3 | 12 | 83% CRS (grade 1–2) 7% CRS (grade 3) Neurotoxicity (grade 1) (1) | 88% ORR (68% CR 5% VGPR 14% PR) | 15 mo (<40% BCMA+) 11 mo (>40% BCMA+) | NR |
| BCMA | NCT03430011 ( | 1/2 | 44 | Cy + Flu | 50 × or 150 × 106 | 7 | 2.6 | 80% CRS (G≥3 9%) 25% neurotoxicity (G≥3 7%) | 82% ORR (27% CR) | NA | No relapses reported |
| BCMA | NA ( | 1 | 11 | Cy or Flu + Cy | 72 × 137 × 475 × 818 × 106 | 6 | NR | 40% CRS (G1-2) 20% CRS (G3) 10% neurotoxicity (G2) | 64% ORR | NA | No relapses reported |
| BCMA | NCT03338972 ( | 1 | 7 | Cy + Flu | 5 × or 15 × 107 | 8 | 3.7 | 86% CRS (G ≤ 2) No neurotoxicity | 100% ORR | NA | 1 BCMA− relapse |
| BCMA | NCT03288493 ( | 1/2 | 23 | Cy + Flu | 0.75 × −15 × 106 | 6 | 137 days | 9,5% CRS (G1-2) 4.8% neurotoxicity (G2) | 63% ORR | NA | NR |
| BCMA | NCT03274219 ( | 1 | 22 | Cy + Flu | 150 × 450 × 800 × 1200 × 106 | 7 | 23 weeks | 59% CRS (5G1, 7G2, 1G3) 23% neurotoxicity (1G1, 2G2, 1G3, 1G4) | 83% ORR | NR | NA |
PCD, pomalidomide-cyclophosphamide-dexamethasone; CP, chlorambucil-prednisone; VAD, vincristine-doxorubicin-dexamethasone; PD, partial disease; Cy, cyclophosphamide; Flu, fludarabine; G, grade; Mel, melphalan; ASCT, autologous stem cell transplantation; NR, not reported; NA, non-applicable.
Figure 1CAR T-cell limitations. The diagram shows the current limitations of this therapeutic modality in multiple myeloma. Strategies to overcome these limitations are listed.
Figure 2Multi-targeted CAR T-cell approaches. (A) Co-administration: involves production of two separate CAR T-cell products infused together or sequentially. (B) Bicistronic CAR T-cells: consist of the expression of two different CARs on the same T-cell. (C) Tandem CAR T-cells: consist of encoding two different scFv antibodies on same chimeric antigen receptor protein using a single vector.