Phase 2 trial of ixazomib, cyclophosphamide, and dexamethasone for previously untreated light chain amyloidosis

Immunoglobulin light chain amyloidosis: 2024 update on diagnosis, prognosis, and treatment

DISEASE OVERVIEW

Immunoglobulin light chain amyloidosis is a clonal, nonproliferative plasma cell disorder in which fragments of immunoglobulin light or heavy chain are deposited in tissues. Clinical features depend on organs involved but can include heart failure with preserved ejection fraction, nephrotic syndrome, hepatic dysfunction, peripheral/autonomic neuropathy, and "atypical smoldering multiple myeloma or MGUS."

DIAGNOSIS

Tissue biopsy stained with Congo red demonstrating amyloid deposits with apple-green birefringence is required for the diagnosis of AL amyloidosis. Organ biopsy is not required in 85% of patients. Verification that amyloid is composed of immunoglobulin light chains is mandatory. The gold standard is laser capture mass spectroscopy.

PROGNOSIS

N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP or BNP), serum troponin T(or I), and difference between involved and uninvolved immunoglobulin free light chain values are used to classify patients into four stages; 5-year survivals are 82%, 62%, 34%, and 20%, respectively.

THERAPY

All patients with a systemic amyloid syndrome require therapy to prevent deposition of amyloid in other organs and prevent progressive organ failure. Current first-line therapy with the best outcome is daratumumab, bortezomib, cyclophosphamide, and dexamethasone. The goal of therapy is a ≥VGPR. In patients failing to achieve this depth of response options for consolidation include pomalidomide, stem cell transplantation, venetoclax, and bendamustine.

FUTURE CHALLENGES

Delayed diagnosis remains a major obstacle to initiating effective therapy prior to the development of end-stage organ failure. Trials of antibodies to deplete deposited fibrils are underway.

Cardiac Toxicity in the Treatment of Light Chain Amyloidosis: Systematic Review of Clinical Studies

BACKGROUND

Light chain amyloidosis (AL) is a progressive and a fatal disease that primarily affects cardiac tissue. Although the current approach to anti-amyloidosis treatments has managed to reduce amyloidosis morbimortality, the dynamics of cardiac adverse events are unknown.

OBJECTIVE

to provide evidence about reported cardiac toxicity during treatment of AL amyloidosis through a systematic review of the literature.

METHODS

A search was performed for registered clinical trials on ClinicalTrials.gov filtered for AL amyloidosis up to December 31, 2022. Studies were filtered by those that reported intervention in patients with AL amyloidosis and that had reported adverse events. The type of study, the intervention performed, and the frequency of reported cardiac adverse events were discriminated from each trial.

RESULTS

25 clinical trials were analyzed, representing a population of 1,542 patients, among whom 576 (38.95%) adverse events were reported, 326 being serious (SAE) and 242 nonserious (nSAE). The most frequent SAEs were cardiac failure, atrial fibrillation, and cardiac arrest, while the most frequent nSAEs were palpitations, atrial fibrillation, and sinus tachycardia.

CONCLUSION

cardiac toxicity during treatment for amyloidosis seems common, and it is important to evaluate the relationship of therapies with its occurrence.

Emerging therapeutic avenues in cardiac amyloidosis

Cardiac Amyloidosis (CA) is a toxic infiltrative cardiomyopathy occurred by the deposition of the amyloid fibres in the extracellular matrix of the myocardium. This results in severe clinical complications such as increased left ventricular wall thickness and interventricular stiffness, a decrease in left ventricular stroke volume and cardiac output, diastolic dysfunction, arrhythmia, etc. In a prolonged period, this condition progresses into heart failure. The amyloid fibres affecting the heart include immunoglobulin light chain (AL - amyloidosis) and transthyretin protein (ATTR - amyloidosis) misfolded amyloid fibres. ATTRwt has the highest prevalence of 155 to 191 cases per million while ATTRv has an estimated prevalence of 5.2 cases per million. The pathological findings and therapeutic approaches developed recently have aided in the treatment regimen of cardiac amyloidosis patients. In recent years, understanding the pathophysiology of amyloid fibres formation and mechanistic pathways triggered in both types of cardiac amyloidosis has led to the development of new therapeutic approaches and agents. This review focuses on the current status of emerging therapeutic agents in clinical trials. Earlier, melphalan and bortezomib in combination with alkylating agents and immunomodulatory drugs were used as a standard therapy for AL amyloidosis. Tafamidis, approved recently by FDA is used as a standard for ATTR amyloidosis. However, the emerging therapeutic agents under development for the treatment of AL and ATTR cardiac amyloidosis have shown a potent and rapid effect with a safety profile.

Enriching single-arm clinical trials with external controls: possibilities and pitfalls

For the past decade, it has become commonplace to provide rapid answers and early patient access to innovative treatments in the absence of randomized clinical trials (RCT), with benefits estimated from single-arm trials. This trend is important in oncology, notably when assessing new targeted therapies. Some of those uncontrolled trials further include an external/synthetic control group as an innovative way to provide an indirect comparison with a pertinent control group. We aimed to provide some guidelines as a comprehensive tool for (1) the critical appraisal of those comparisons or (2) for performing a single-arm trial. We used the example of ciltacabtagene autoleucel for the treatment of adult patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma after 3 or more treatment lines as an illustrative example. We propose a 3-step guidance. The first step includes the definition of an estimand, which encompasses the treatment effect and the targeted population (whole population or restricted to single-arm trial or external controls), reflecting a clinical question. The second step relies on the adequate selection of external controls from previous RCTs or real-world data from patient cohorts, registries, or electronic patient files. The third step consists of choosing the statistical approach targeting the treatment effect defined above and depends on the available data (individual-level data or aggregated external data). The validity of the treatment effect derived from indirect comparisons heavily depends on careful methodological considerations included in the proposed 3-step procedure. Because the level of evidence of a well-conducted RCT cannot be guaranteed, the evaluation is more important than in standard settings.