Undetectable measurable residual disease (uMRD) is achievable in patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) with the BCL2-inhibitor venetoclax alone or combined with the Bruton’s tyrosine kinase inhibitor ibrutinib. This phase 2, multicenter, MRD-driven study was designed to discontinue treatment upon reaching uMRD4 (<10−4) in patients with relapsed/refractory CLL receiving venetoclax monotherapy or after the addition of ibrutinib. Primary end point of the study was proportion of uMRD4 with venetoclax ± ibrutinib. Secondary end points were overall response rate, partial response, complete response, progression-free survival, duration of response, overall survival, and safety of venetoclax ± ibrutinib. Patients with uMRD4 at Cycle 12 Day 1 discontinued venetoclax. MRD+ patients added ibrutinib and continued both drugs up to Cycle 24 Day 28/uMRD4/progression/toxicity. After Cycle 24 Day 28, MRD+ patients continued ibrutinib. Thirty-eight patients (29% with TP53 aberrations; 79% with unmutated IGHV) started venetoclax. Overall response rate with venetoclax was 36 (95%) of 38 patients (20 complete; 16 partial response). Seventeen patients (45%) with uMRD4 at Cycle 12 Day 1 discontinued venetoclax. Nineteen (55%) MRD+ subjects added ibrutinib. After a median of 7 months (range, 3-10 months) of combined treatment, 16 (84%) of 19 achieved uMRD4, thus stopping both drugs. Two MRD+ patients at Cycle 24 Day 28 continued ibrutinib until progression/toxicity. After a median follow-up of 36.5 months, median progression-free survival was not reached; 10 patients progressed (4 restarted venetoclax, 3 without treatment need, 2 developed Richter transformation, and 1 dropped out). Seven (22%) of 32 patients remain uMRD4 after 3 years of follow-up. Neutropenia was the most frequent grade 3 to 4 adverse event; no grade 5 events occurred on study. This sequential MRD-guided approach led to uMRD4 in 33 (87%) of 38 patients, with venetoclax monotherapy or combined with ibrutinib, delivering treatment combination only in a fraction, and ultimately identifying the few patients benefiting from continuous therapy. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as # NCT04754035.

We are currently witnessing a dramatic shift in our approach to the treatment of B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma (B-NHL). In the evolving clinical landscape, novel treatments for this clinically heterogeneous disease span a wide range of interventions, encompassing targeted agents, cell therapy approaches, and novel monoclonal antibodies (NMABs). Among these, the latter are likely to exert the most profound impact due to their distinctive high efficacy and versatile applicability. NMABs represent a heterogeneous group of agents, including naked antibodies, immunotoxins, and T-cell-engaging molecules. In recent times, several NMABs have either gained regulatory approval or are on the verge of introduction into clinical practice, addressing multiple therapeutic indications and treatment regimens. Their anticipated impact is expected to be broad, initially in the context of relapsed/refractory (R/R) disease and subsequently extending to early treatment lines. The scope of this review is to provide a comprehensive overview of the biological characteristics, clinical properties, efficacy, and toxicity profiles of NMABs that have recently been introduced or are nearing integration into clinical practice.

We report the long-term results of a randomized trial (GITMO, AML-R2), comparing 1:1 the combination of busulfan and cyclophosphamide (BuCy2, n = 125) and the combination of busulfan and fludarabine (BuFlu, n = 127) as conditioning regimen in acute myeloid leukemia patients (median age 51 years, range 40–65) undergoing allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. With a median follow-up of 6 years, significantly better non-relapse mortality (NRM) was confirmed in BuFlu recipients, which is sustained up to 4 years after transplant (10% vs. 20%, p = 0.0388). This difference was higher in patients older than 51 years (11% in BuFlu vs. 27% in BuCy2, p = 0.0262). The cumulative incidence of relapse, which was the first cause of death in the entire study population, did not differ between the two randomized arms. Similarly, the leukemia-free survival (LFS) and overall survival (OS) were not different in the two cohorts, even when stratifying patients per median age. Graft-and relapse-free survival (GRFS) in BuFlu arm vs. the BuCy2 arm was 25% vs. 20% at 4 years and 20% vs. 17% at 10 years. Hence, the benefit gained by NRM reduction is not offsets by an increased relapse. Leukemia relapse remains a major concern, urging the development of new therapeutic approaches.

Several new drugs are progressively improving the life span of patients with B-cell chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). However, the rapidly evolving standard of care precludes robust assessments of the incremental clinical value of further innovative drugs. Therefore, we systematically reviewed comparative evidence on newly authorized CLL drugs, as reported by standard and network meta-analyses (MA) published since 2016. Overall, 17 MAs addressed the relative survival or safety of naïve and/or refractory/relapsed (R/R) CLL patients. In R/R patients, therapies including BTK- and BCL2-inhibitors reported progression free survival (PFS) hazard ratios ranging from 0.08 to 0.24 (versus chemotherapy) and a significant advantage in overall survival (OS). In naïve patients, the PFS hazard ratios associated with four recent chemo-free therapies (obinutuzumab- and/or acalabrutinib-based) ranged from 0.11 to 0.61 versus current standard treatments (STs), without a significant OS advantage. Ten MAs addressed the risk of cardiovascular, bleeding, and infective events associated with BTK inhibitors, with some reporting a different relative safety in naïve and R/R patients. In conclusion, last-generation therapies for CLL consistently increase PFS, but not OS, and minimally decrease safety, as compared with STs. Based on available evidence, the patient-customized adoption of new therapies, rather than universal recommendations, seems desirable in CLL patients.

Even if allogeneic stem cell transplantation (allo-SCT) is curative for a minority of patients with multiple myeloma (MM), the patients who have relapsed after allo-SCT can experience long-term survival, suggesting a synergy between anti-myeloma drugs administered after allo-SCT and donor T cells. We retrospectively evaluated the outcome of MM patients reported to the "Gruppo Italiano Trapianto Midollo Osseo e Terapia Cellulare" (GITMO) network, who underwent allo-SCTs between 2009 and 2018 in order to identify predictors for long-term outcome in the whole population (242 patients) and for prolonged overall survival (OS) after relapse in the subgroup of relapsed patients (118 patients). At a median follow-up of 40.9 months after allo-SCT median OS and progression free survival (PFS) of the whole population were respectively 39.4 and 19.0 months from allo-SCT. The cumulative incidence (CI) of non-relapse mortality (NRM) was 10.3 % at one year and 27.6% at five years. Grade 2-4 acute GVHD CI was 19.8% and 5-year CI of moderate or severe chronic GVHD was 31.8%. In the multivariate model older age at transplant (p=0.020), treatment with more than 2 lines of therapy before allo-SCT (p=0.003) and transplant from unrelated or haploidentical donor (p=0.025) were significant factors associated with reduced OS. Relapse after allo-SCT occurred in 118 (59%) patients at a median of 14.3 months (IQR 7.2-26.9). Twenty (17%) received only steroids, radiotherapy or supportive care, 41 (35%) received 1 line, 23 (19%) 2 lines and 34 patients (29%) 3 or 4 lines of salvage treatment. Nine patients were exclusively treated with chemotherapy, 9 received at least one salvage treatment including immunomodulating agents (Imids), 43 patients were treated with at least one rescue therapy including proteasome inhibitors (PIs) and 37 patients received at least one salvage treatment including monoclonal antibodies (33 daratumumab, 1 elotuzumab, 1 isatuximab, 2 belantamab). Median OS of relapsed patients was 38.5 months from allo-SCT and 20.2 months from relapse. In multivariate analysis, OS after relapse was significantly prolonged in patients with a longer time to relapse after allo-SCT (time to relapse 6-24 months p=0.016; time to relapse ≥ 24 months p< 0.001) and in those who had received at least 3 salvage treatment lines (p<0.036) and donor lymphocyte infusions (DLI) (p=0.020). In our study, patients transplanted in early phases of disease and with HLA identical sibling donors had the best chance of long-term survival. Late relapse after allo-SCT, multiple courses of salvage treatment and the association with DLI could allow long disease control in patients who experienced relapse after allo-SCT.