Reevaluating Immune Modulation Strategies in Myelodysplastic Syndromes

In a critical reassessment of immune-based treatment strategies for myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS), experts at the European Hematology Association’s (EHA) 2025 Congress in Milan have called for a significant shift in clinical trial methodologies and patient selection criteria. Current immune therapies for MDS have largely fallen short, prompting a reevaluation of endpoints, patient characteristics, and timing concerning treatment interventions.
Historically, MDS represents a heterogeneous group of clonal disorders characterized by ineffective hematopoiesis, leading to cytopenias and potential progression to acute myeloid leukemia (AML). According to Dr. Elena Riboldi, a medical writer and science communicator, immune dysregulation is increasingly recognized as a pivotal factor in the pathogenesis of MDS, suggesting that modulating immune responses within the bone marrow could modify disease trajectories. Despite this biological rationale, clinical outcomes have been disappointing.
Currently, only a few therapies targeting immune activation, including antithymocyte globulin and lenalidomide, have received approval for MDS. A growing array of investigational treatments, such as cytokine inhibitors and immune checkpoint inhibitors, are under study but have yet to yield substantial results. For instance, Dr. Anne Sophie Kubasch from the University Medical Hospital Leipzig, Germany, presented findings from the phase 2 CANFIRE trial and the LUCAS trial, both of which failed to meet primary endpoints of hematologic improvement, yet some patients reported perceived clinical benefits.
Kubasch indicated that the rigid criteria established by the International Working Group (IWG) for measuring treatment efficacy may not adequately capture the nuanced responses associated with immunomodulatory therapies. "Current IWG endpoint criteria are too rigid for immune modulation trials," Kubasch noted. She advocated for a more flexible approach that incorporates patient-reported outcomes and quality-of-life metrics, suggesting a composite endpoint that includes hematologic trends and biomarkers.
Another critical aspect of the discussion centered on patient selection. Kubasch referenced a transcriptomic study involving 183 MDS patients that identified immune subtypes based on gene expression. She raised concerns that many trials may be enrolling patients from the moderate immune cluster (MIC), which could contribute to the lack of positive outcomes. Implementing a stratified approach for patient inclusion based on immune activation profiles could enhance the efficacy of future trials.
Dr. Valeria Santini, an associate professor of hematology at the University of Florence Medical School, emphasized the dynamic nature of immune dysfunction in MDS. She stated that immune profiles can evolve throughout the disease, necessitating a reevaluation of immunosuppressive therapy's role. Santini's analysis of historical literature revealed instances of complete remission in select patients, underscoring the potential for tailored approaches in immunotherapy.
Dr. Lionel Adès, a hematology professor at Saint-Louis Hospital in Paris, raised concerns about the timing of immunomodulatory treatments. He argued that administering these therapies too late in the disease course might diminish their effectiveness. Adès pointed to the i4MDS Consortium, which seeks to deepen the understanding of MDS immunobiology, and highlighted the STIMULUS MDS 2 study's subgroup analysis that suggested potential benefits for female patients receiving the TIM-3 immune checkpoint inhibitor, sabatolimab.
As the field of MDS treatment evolves, the implications of these discussions could lead to more personalized and effective treatment strategies. The experts’ insights underscore the urgency of adapting clinical trial designs to better capture the complexity of immune responses in MDS. The refinement of patient selection criteria, endpoints, and treatment timing could ultimately improve outcomes for patients suffering from this challenging group of disorders.
With ongoing research and refinement of treatment strategies, there is cautious optimism within the medical community regarding the future of immune modulation in myelodysplastic syndromes. Continued collaboration and investigation into the nuanced biology of MDS will be essential for developing successful therapies that address the unique challenges posed by this disease.
Advertisement
Tags
Advertisement