Antibody Response to SARS-CoV-2 Vaccination in Patients Following Allogeneic Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation

Vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 have been rapidly approved. Although pivotal studies were conducted in healthy volunteers, little information is available on the safety and efficacy of mRNA vaccines in immunocompromised patients, including recipients of allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (allo-HCT). Here we used a novel assay to analyze patient- and transplantation-related factors and their influence on immune responses to SARS-CoV-2 vaccination over an extended period (up to 6 months) in a large and homogenous group of allo-HCT recipients at a single center in Switzerland. We examined longitudinal antibody responses to SARS-CoV-2 vaccination with BNT162b2 (BioNTech/Pfizer) and mRNA-1273 (Moderna) in 110 allo-HCT recipients and 86 healthy controls. Seroprofiling recording IgG, IgA, and IgM reactivity against SARS-CoV-2 antigens (receptor-binding domain, spike glycoprotein subunits S1 and S2, and nucleocapsid protein) was performed before vaccination, before the second dose, and at 1, 3, and 6 months after the second dose. Patients were stratified to 3 groups: 3 to 6 months post-allo-HCT, 6 to 12 months post-allo-HCT, and >12 months post-allo-HCT. Patients in the 3 to 6 months and 6 to 12 months post-allo-HCT groups developed significantly lower antibody titers after vaccination compared with patients in the >12 months post-allo-HCT group and healthy controls (P < .001). Within the cohort of allo-HCT recipients, patients age >65 years (P = .030), those receiving immunosuppression for prevention or treatment of graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) (P = .033), and patients with relapsed disease (P = .014) displayed low humoral immune responses to the vaccine. In contrast, the intensity of the conditioning regimen, underlying disease (myeloid/lymphoid/other), and presence of chronic GVHD had no impact on antibody levels. Antibody titers achieved the highest levels at 1 month after the second dose of the vaccine but waned substantially in all transplantation groups and healthy controls over time. This analysis of long-term vaccine antibody response is of critical importance to allo-HCT recipients and transplant physicians to guide treatment decisions regarding revaccination and social behavior during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic.

Phase 2 study of MGTA-145 + plerixafor for rapid and reliable hematopoietic stem cell (HSC) mobilization for autologous transplant in multiple myeloma

8023

Background: MGTA-145 (GroβT), a CXCR2 agonist, has shown promising activity for HSC mobilization with plerixafor in pre-clinical models and healthy volunteers. Methods: This phase 2 single center study evaluates HSC mobilization with MGTA-145 + plerixafor and same day apheresis in patients with multiple myeloma. Patients received plerixafor 0.24 mg/kg (0.16 mg/kg if renal dysfunction) SQ, followed 2 hours later by MGTA-145 (0.03 mg/kg) IV over 3-10 minutes and apheresis within 30 minutes. Mobilization was repeated for a second day if day 1 yield was < 6 x 106 CD34+ cells/kg. This interim analysis reports on mobilization in 10 patients (of 25 planned), including safety cohort of first 6 patients completing transplant. Primary endpoint is collection of 2 x 106 CD34+ cells/kg. Results: Median age was 63 years (range: 46-68), 50% were female, 22% had ISS stage 3 & 50% had high-risk FISH. Induction therapy was VRD in 7 and daratumumab + VRD in 3 patients; median induction duration: 4 months (3-6) & median lenalidomide exposure: 6 cycles (4-6), with > VGPR in 70%. Median total stem cell yield (CD34+ cells/kg x 106) was 7.1 (3-16.2), day 1 yield was 5.4 (1.1-16.2) & yield per apheresis session was 4 (1.1-16.2). 100% of patients met the primary endpoint of collecting sufficient HSCs in < 2 days of mobilization + apheresis to proceed to transplant (2 x 106 CD34+ cells/kg). Secondary endpoints of 4 and 6 x 106 CD34+ cells/kg in < 2 days were met in 90% & 80% patients. 30% patients underwent 1 apheresis, while 70% underwent 2 sessions. MGTA-145 was well tolerated. At least 1 adverse event (AE) was seen in 90% of patients, 20% had grade 2 AEs (anemia, hypokalemia) and 20% had grade 3 AEs (worsening of baseline grade 3 anemia; hypocalcemia); all resolved. Acute & transient bone pain was seen in 40% of patients (back-2, hip-1, sternum-1), all grade 1, all on day 1, & resolved without intervention after 6 minutes (3-10). All 6 patients in the safety cohort have completed transplant with melphalan 200 mg/m2. Median of 4.1 (3.4-5.6) x 106 CD34+ cells/kg were infused. All patients have engrafted timely (DiPersio Blood 2009); median time to neutrophil engraftment: 12 days (11-13) & platelet engraftment: 17 days (16-19). Apheresis graft analysis is available in these 6 patients. Grafts with MGTA-145+plerixafor showed high enrichment for CD90+CD45RA- among CD34+ cells, a CD34 subset of long term engrafting HSCs (median: 31% of CD34+ cells, 27-52), higher than seen with G-CSF (6%, Goncalves TCT 2021). 67% of grafts were minimal residual disease negative with next generation flow cytometry. Conclusions: This is the first study to evaluate the novel regimen of MGTA-145 + plerixafor for same day stem cell mobilization & collection in myeloma/hematologic malignancies, with 100% efficacy in interim analysis and the first to demonstrate successful engraftment in patients with cells collected with this GCSF free regimen. Clinical trial information: NCT04552743.

[Diagnostic Errors in Medicine]

The recognition of diagnostic errors in everyday practice can help improve patient safety. The most common diagnostic errors are the cognitive errors, followed by system-related errors and no fault errors. The cognitive errors often result from mental shortcuts, known as heuristics. The rate of cognitive errors can be reduced by a better understanding of heuristics and the use of checklists. The autopsy as a retrospective quality assessment of clinical diagnosis has a crucial role in learning from diagnostic errors. Diagnostic errors occur more often in primary care in comparison to hospital settings. On the other hand, the inpatient errors are more severe than the outpatient errors.