Bond, David A.

7006 Background: Rituximab maintenance (RM) after first-line (1L) bendamustine and rituximab (BR) in MCL did not improve progression-free survival in the MAINTAIN trial (Rummel et al, ASCO 2016) but was associated with improved survival outcomes in a North American observational study (Martin et al, JCO 2023). We sought to examine the potential benefit of RM after BR using a large observational cohort from 26 US academic centers. Methods: Patients with MCL who received 1L BR (without stem cell transplant) outside of clinical trials were included. At the landmark of 3 months after the end of BR, patients who achieved a complete response (CR) or partial response (PR) to BR and had no evidence of progressive disease (PD) or second-line (2L) therapy were deemed eligible for RM. Event-free survival (EFS) was defined as time from landmark to progression, relapse, retreatment, or death. EFS2 was defined as time from landmark to progression, relapse, or retreatment following 2L therapy or death. RM was not considered a line of therapy for either endpoint. OS was defined as time from landmark to death. Survival analysis was done with Kaplan-Meier methods and Cox regression models adjusting for sex and simplified MIPI. Results: Among 796 patients who received 1L BR in 2007-2020, 693 achieved a CR or PR. At the 3-month post-BR landmark, 613 had no evidence of PD, among whom 318 (52%) received RM and 295 did not. The RM group was younger (median age 70 vs 72, p = 0.010) and more predominantly male (78% vs 69%, p = 0.047). There was no statistical difference in stage, simplified MIPI, histology (blastoid or pleomorphic vs classic), Ki-67, TP53 alteration, complex karyotype, year of BR start, or best response to BR between the two groups. The median follow-up after the 3-month post-BR landmark was 61.3 months (95% CI 62.6-70.4). The median number of doses of RM was 10 (IQR 5-12). RM was associated with improved EFS (median 47.1 vs 29.7 months, adjusted HR 0.59, 95% CI 0.48-0.73), EFS2 (median 89.1 vs 48.3 months, adjusted HR 0.63, 95% CI 0.50-0.81), and OS (median 136.1 vs 74.3 months, adjusted HR 0.57, 95% CI 0.44-0.75) (all p values < 0.001). In patients with CR to 1L BR (n=527), 271 (51%) received RM, for a median of 11 (IQR 6-12) doses. In this subgroup, RM was associated with improved EFS (median 60.6 vs 31.5 months, adjusted HR 0.56, 95% CI 0.44-0.71), EFS2 (median 89.1 vs 48.3 months, adjusted HR 0.62, 95% CI 0.48-0.81), and OS (median 136.1 vs 75.6 months, adjusted HR 0.59, 95% CI 0.44-0.79) (all p values < 0.001). Analysis in patients with PR to 1L BR was limited by the sample size (n=86, 47 received RM). The numeric differences in median EFS (20.8 vs 11.5, log-rank p = 0.370), EFS2 (48.9 vs 30.3, log-rank p = 0.210) and OS (87.3 vs 46.9, log-rank p = 0.067) were not statistically significant. Conclusions: In this large multicenter study, RM after 1L BR was associated with improved EFS and OS, supporting its use in routine practice for patients with newly diagnosed MCL.

Background: Richter Transformation (RT) refers to the development of an aggressive lymphoma in the setting of chronic lymphocytic leukemia/small lymphocytic lymphoma (CLL/SLL). Small molecule inhibitors (SMI), such as the Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitors (BTKi) and BCL2 inhibitors (BCL2i), have revolutionized the treatment of CLL/SLL. Prior studies evaluated outcomes of patients (pts) with RT in an era where chemoimmunotherapy (CIT) was typically used to treat CLL/SLL. Now that SMI are standard of care, fewer pts with CLL/SLL receive CIT, therefore we sought to determine which variables predict survival in pts who developed RT without prior CIT exposure for CLL/SLL. Methods: We conducted an international multicenter retrospective study of pts from 11 academic centers. Pts with RT occurring as large B-cell lymphoma who did not previously receive CIT (e.g., fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, bendamustine, chlorambucil) for their CLL/SLL were included. We collected pt, disease, and treatment (tx) characteristics. RT was categorized into 3 groups: “Concurrent RT,” defined as RT and CLL/SLL diagnosed simultaneously (within 3 months [mos]); “RT w/o prior CLL/SLL tx,” defined as RT and CLL/SLL diagnosed &gt;3 mos apart with the CLL/SLL never treated; and “RT with prior non-CIT tx for CLL/SLL” defined as having received prior CLL/SLL tx. Overall survival (OS) was measured from RT diagnosis (Dx) and estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Cox regression model was used to identify prognostic factors associated with OS. Results: 242 pts were identified. At CLL/SLL Dx, 66% of pts had unmutated IGHV, 37% had del17p/ TP53 disruption, and 20% had trisomy 12. At RT Dx, 56% of the RT with prior non-CIT tx for CLL/SLL group had a del17p/ TP53 disruption versus 27% for the concurrent RT group and 18% for the RT w/o prior CLL/SLL tx groups. Median time from CLL/SLL Dx to RT Dx was 47 mos (range 3-394) for RT w/o prior CLL/SLL tx and 46 mos (range 4-218) for RT with prior non-CIT tx for CLL/SLL. Pts with prior non-CIT tx for CLL/SLL received a median of 1 (range 1-5) prior tx. 86% of pts previously received a BTKi or a BCL2i for tx of CLL/SLL (54% BTKi only, 5% BCL2i only, 27% both). The remaining 14% had been treated with an anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody (MoAb), steroids, lenalidomide, radiation, or alemtuzumab. 85% of pts developed RT while on active tx with SMI. Median age at RT Dx was 69 years (range 37-92). At RT Dx, 38% and 21% of pts had del17p/ TP53 disruption, and trisomy 12 in CLL/SLL tissue, respectively. At RT Dx, there was no difference in highest SUV on PET (median 16, range 2.9-65.6), LDH (median 325, range 103-8162, ULN range 180-271), largest lymph node in diameter (median 4.9 cm, range 0-17.1), Ki-67 (median 80%, range 5%-100%), rate of GCB subtype (27%), presence of MYC translocation (20%), or CLL/SLL and RT clonal relationship (81%) for those pts tested amongst the 3 groups ( Table). The most common 1 st line tx for RT was CIT with or w/o radiation and/or steroids (76%), followed by CIT plus SMI (13%), SMI single agent or combination (7%), and other (4%, which includes anti-CD20 MoAb). Median follow-up from RT Dx was 42.3 mos; the median OS for the entire cohort was 25.8 mos (95% CI: 16.8-49.1). Pts with RT after non-CIT tx for CLL/SLL had a significantly worse OS (median 8.2 mos [95% CI: 5.6-14.3]) than pts with concurrent RT (median 46.3 mos [95% CI: 23.8-96.9]) and RT w/o prior CLL/SLL tx (median 63.5 mos [95% CI: 28.3-70.3]) ( Figure). From an exploratory univariable analysis, we found RT after non-CIT tx for CLL/SLL compared to concurrent RT (HR 2.32 [95% CI: 1.55-3.46]), RT Dx age (HR for 5-year increase 1.14 [95% CI: 1.05-1.23]), del17p/ TP53 disruption (HR 2.27 [95% CI: 1.45-3.56]), and LDH (HR for 2-fold increase 1.37 [95% CI: 1.20-1.58]) were prognostic for worse OS. Conclusions: This is the largest cohort of pts who developed RT having received only SMI with no CIT for their CLL reported, thus reflecting the current treatment landscape. Despite being CIT-naïve, pts in our series who received tx for their CLL/SLL and then developed RT had a short OS, underscoring the need to develop better therapies for these pts. In contrast, as in other published analyses (Wang Haematologica 2020), pts w/o prior tx for CLL/SLL had more favorable outcomes, with a median OS of approximately 5 years. Further analysis to determine PFS and OS by tx for RT for pts who have been treated with SMI for their CLL/SLL is ongoing.

Background: Event-free survival at 24 months (EFS24) after frontline immunochemotherapy (IC) is an important endpoint in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma and follicular lymphoma, and patients who achieve EFS24 have similar survival compared to age- and sex-matched general population. The role of EFS24 in predicting subsequent survival has not been established in mantle cell lymphoma (MCL), possibly due to perceived poor survival historically. In the last decade, the outcomes of MCL are improving in the evolving treatment landscape. In this international multicenter study, we investigated conditional survival and cause of death in patients with MCL who achieved EFS24 after frontline IC in the older and more recent eras. Methods: Outcomes after frontline IC were evaluated in 5 independent cohorts that included over 3000 patients in total: Mayo/Iowa MER prospective cohort, BC Cancer retrospective population-based cohort, US 12-center retrospective cohort, Swedish Lymphoma Registry, and Danish National Lymphoma Registry. For each cohort, 2 treatment eras were defined based on cohort-specific shifts in treatment patterns (Table 1). Overall survival (OS) after diagnosis and after achieving EFS24 were compared to the background age- and sex-matched general population using a standardized mortality ratio (SMR). Cumulative incidences of cause-specific deaths were analyzed using a competing risk model. Results: In the MER cohort, patients treated in Era M1 (2002-2009; n=147) and Era M2 (2010-2015; n=153) both had inferior OS compared to the general US population. A lower SMR in Era M2 vs M1 (2.25 vs 3.46) suggests a narrower gap in OS compared to the general US population. Lymphoma was the leading cause of death in both eras. In Era M1, patients who achieved EFS24 still had inferior OS compared to the general US population (SMR=2.40, 95% CI 1.76-3.19), and lymphoma remained the leading cause of death. For patients in Era M2 who achieved EFS24, the difference in OS compared to the general US population was not statistically significant with current follow-up (SMR=1.43, 95% CI 0.93-2.09), and lymphoma was no longer the leading cause of death (Table 2). In the BC cohort, patients treated in Era B2 (6/2013-2019; n=188) vs Era B1 (2003-5/2013; n=250) had a narrower gap in OS compared to the general British Columbia population (SMR 4.53 vs 6.69). Lymphoma was the leading cause of death in both eras. For patients achieving EFS24, the gap in OS was narrower in Era B2 vs B1 (SMR 3.56 vs 4.99). After achieving EFS24, lymphoma was the single leading cause of death for patients in Era B1 but not in Era B2 (Table 2). In the US 12-center cohort, patients treated in Era U1 (2002-2011; n=312) and Era U2 (2012-2016; n=417) both had inferior OS compared to the general US population (SMR 2.68 and 2.92, respectively). In patients who achieved EFS24, with current follow up, the difference in OS compared to the general US population was statistically significant in Era U1 (SMR=2.01, 95% CI 1.50-2.64) but not in Era U2 (SMR=1.44, 95% CI 0.82-2.34). Lymphoma was not the leading cause of death after achieving EFS24 (Table 2). In the Swedish cohort, the gap in OS compared to the general Swedish population was narrower in Era S2 (2013-2018; n=439) vs S1 (2006-2012; n=442), both after frontline IC (SMR 4.8 vs 5.4) and after achieving EFS24 (SMR 2.6 vs 3.4). After achieving EFS24, lymphoma was the leading cause of death for patients in Era S1 but not in Era S2 (Table 2). In the Danish cohort, patients treated in Era D2 (2014-2020; n=370) vs Era D1 (2004-2013; n=461) had a slightly narrower gap in OS compared to the general Danish population (SMR 1.90 vs 2.10). For patients who achieved EFS24, those in Era D1 still had inferior OS compared to the general Danish population (SMR=1.44, 95% CI 1.22-1.68), but the OS difference compared to the general Danish population in Era D2 was not statistically significant (SMR=1.27, 95% CI 0.92-1.72) with current follow-up (Table 2). Cause of death data were not available in this cohort. Conclusion: Survival in patients with MCL who achieved EFS24 after frontline IC improved in the more recent treatment era and moved closer to the background expected survival. After achieving EFS24, lymphoma-related mortality was no longer the leading cause of death in the more recent era. EFS24 following frontline treatment may become a critical endpoint for predicting subsequent outcomes in patients with MCL in the modern era.

Multiple CD19-directed therapies are available for the treatment of relapsed and refractory (R/R) DLBCL, including CAR T cells, tafasitamab/lenalidomide (TL), and loncastuximab tesirine (lonca-T) (Sermer D., Blood Rev 2023). However, there are few data available on the efficacy of sequential CD19-directed therapies. We performed a retrospective study evaluating all patients with R/R LBCL treated consecutively with TL at 11 institutions from 8/2020 to 8/2022, identifying 178 patients. In this study, we specifically evaluate outcomes in patients who received anti-CD19 therapy prior to or after TL. The primary outcome of interest was progression-free survival (PFS) in TL recipients who previously received CD19-directed CAR T therapy, with overall response rate (ORR), complete response rate (CRR), and overall survival (OS) also evaluated. Outcomes of lonca-T and CAR T after TL therapy were evaluated. Data on CD19 expression was assessed on biopsies after TL; this was determined locally using flow cytometry or immunohistochemistry per institutional protocols. In subgroup analyses, ORR and CRR were compared using Fisher's exact test. PFS and OS were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method, with differences tested using the log-rank test. Of 178 patients who received TL, 52 had received prior anti-CD19 CAR T therapy, at a median of 7.4 months before TL (Table 1). Median PFS was lower in prior CAR T recipients (1.6 mo, 95% CI 1.1-2.5) vs no prior CAR T (2.1 mo, 95% CI 1.8-3.2), with hazard ratio 1.46 (p = 0.04; Figure 1). Best ORR was lower in patients with prior CAR T exposure (15% vs 33%, p = 0.02) though CRR was not significantly different (15% vs 18%, p = 1.0). We specifically evaluated TL outcomes based on prior response to CAR T, given the previously identified association of refractory disease with poor TL outcomes (Qualls D et al., presented at ASH 2022). Of 19 patients who had progressive disease more than 6 months after CAR T, ORR and CRR to TL therapy were 31.6% (all responses were CRs); in 33 patients with refractory disease (less than CR or relapse within 6 months) after CAR T, ORR and CRR to TL were significantly lower, at 6.1% (p = 0.04). Median PFS after TL was shorter in CAR-refractory than CAR-relapsed disease, at 1.4 vs 3.5 months (HR 2.2, p = 0.02). Of 88 patients who received therapy after TL, 20 (23%) received lonca-T and 14 (16%) received CAR T. Data on survival and initiation of new treatment after CAR T or lonca-T was available, but response and progression data after CAR T or lonca-T therapy is pending. These data allowed an estimate of OS and event-free survival (EFS), defined as survival without initiation of a new treatment after CAR T or lonca-T. With a median 3.9 months' follow-up, median EFS after CAR T administration was 3.7 months (95% CI, 0.9 - 6.5), and median OS was 8.1 months (95% CI, 0.6 - 15.7). In patients who received lonca-T, with median 2.7 months' follow-up from initiation, median EFS was 2.8 months (95% CI, 0.9 - 4.7), and median OS was 3.5 months (95% CI, 1.2 - 5.7). When comparing CAR T and lonca-T to polatuzumab vedotin- or chemotherapy-based therapies after TL, there were no significant differences in OS or EFS. In patients who discontinued TL, 24 had a biopsy a median of 18 days after the last dose of tafasitamab. Of these, 13 (54%) were CD19-positive and 11 (46%) were CD19-negative. All samples obtained more than 21 days after tafasitamab (6/6) were CD19-positive, while 46% obtained within 21 days were CD19-positive. These time-dependent findings may reflect “epitope masking” by tafasitamab rather than CD19 loss, reflecting other recent reports (Fitzgerald K., Leuk Lym 2022; Duell J., Leuk Lym 2022). In patients receiving TL after CAR T, responses and PFS were lower than in patients without prior CAR T therapy; however, with disease that was not refractory to prior CAR T, results were similar to patients who had not had prior CAR T. This may reflect that refractory disease, regardless of prior therapy, is associated with shorter PFS, though the possibility of CD19-mediated mechanisms of resistance remains. Modest EFS and OS were seen in patients receiving CAR T therapy or lonca-T after already receiving TL, though this may also reflect the high-risk disease characteristics of this cohort. Overall, in a high-risk, real-world cohort of TL-treated patients, these data suggest that some patients may benefit from subsequent CD19-directed therapies, but better therapeutic options are needed.

Background: Bendamustine and rituximab (BR) is a standard-of-care first-line (1L) therapy for older or unfit patients with mantle cell lymphoma (MCL). The SHINE trial compared BR with rituximab maintenance plus ibrutinib vs placebo in patients ≥65 years old and showed that the ibrutinib arm had significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS; median 80.6 vs 52.9 months) but similar overall survival (OS; 57% vs 55% at 7 years) compared to the placebo arm. Whether sequential treatment with BR in 1L and a Bruton's tyrosine kinase inhibitor (BTKi) in second-line (2L) can result in a similar cumulative PFS compared to 1L BR plus BTKi combination therapy is unknown. To provide insight to this question, we modeled observational data to evaluate MCL outcomes after 1L BR and 2L BTKi therapy in the BTKi era. Methods: Patients with MCL who received 1L BR with or without rituximab maintenance in 2014-2020 at one of the 27 participating centers were included. Exclusion criteria included participation in the SHINE or ECHO trials, any additional 1L therapy other than BR (with or without rituximab maintenance), and stem cell transplant consolidation after 1L BR. Baseline characteristics, treatment, and follow-up data were abstracted by chart review. Event-free survival (EFS) was defined as time from index line treatment start to the first event (progression, relapse, retreatment, or death). OS was defined as time from index line treatment start to death. Using an intention-to-treat (ITT) framework, EFS2 was defined as time from 1L BR start to progression, relapse, or retreatment following 2L BTKi treatment or death. Patients who received a non-BTKi treatment at 2L were censored for EFS2 at 2L treatment start; living patients without an event following 1L BR or 2L BTKi were censored for EFS2 at last follow-up. Results: A total of 618 patients with MCL who received 1L BR in 2014-2020 were included. The median age was 71 (IQR 65-76) years, and 447 (72%) were male. 59 (11%) patients had an ECOG PS ≥2, 566 (93%) had stage III-IV disease, and simplified MIPI was low in 105 (21%), intermediate in 200 (39%), and high in 202 (40%) patients. The median follow-up following 1L BR start was 57.4 (95% CI 53.8-63.2) months. Response data were available in 580 patients, and the best ORR was 92% (79% complete response [CR] and 13% partial response [PR]). 258 (42%) patients received rituximab maintenance. As of last follow-up, 255 patients were alive and in remission after 1L BR, 92 patients died without 2L therapy, and 271 patients received a 2L therapy. The median EFS was 34.1 (95% CI 31.0-40.0) months. The median OS was 97.8 (95% CI 81.2-NA) months, the 5-year OS rate was 58.6% (95% CI 54.4-63.2), and the 7-year OS rate was 56.7% (95% CI 52.4-61.5) (Fig 1). Among the 271 patients who started a 2L treatment, 203 (75%) received a BTKi at 2L - 101 (50%) ibrutinib, 76 (37%) acalabrutinib, and 26 (13%) zanubrutinib. The median follow-up following 2L BTKi start was 38.5 (95% CI 31.3-45.1) months. Response data were available in 171 patients, and the best ORR was 64% (36% CR, 28% PR). The median EFS was 10.7 (95% CI 7.7-14.0) months, and the median OS was 24.8 (95% CI 17.3-33.1) months with 2L BTKi therapy (Fig 2). By ITT analysis, the median EFS2 following 1L BR and 2L BTKi was 72.1 (95% CI 56.7-97.8) months (Fig 1). A subset analysis of patients aged ≥65 years (n=471; 198 [42%] received rituximab maintenance) showed similar results. The median EFS with 1L BR was 32.7 (95% CI 29.1-36.3) months. The median OS was 81.5 (95% CI 65.0-NA) months, and the 7-year OS rate was 53.3% (95% CI 48.3-58.7). 208 patients received a 2L therapy, 163 (79%) with a BTKi. The median EFS was 11.5 (95% CI 7.6-15.8) months, and the median OS was 21.0 (95% CI 14.0-29.6) months with 2L BTKi therapy. By ITT analysis, the median EFS2 following 1L BR and 2L BTKi was 58.0 (95% CI 50.2-77.0) months. Conclusion: In this multicenter retrospective study, initiation of 1L BR (with or without rituximab maintenance) resulted in a 7-year OS of 57%. Median EFS2 for sequential 1L BR and 2L BTKi was 72.1 months. In context, the SHINE study reported a median PFS of 80.6 months in the BR (with rituximab maintenance) plus ibrutinib arm and a 7-year OS of 57% in the ibrutinib arm and 55% in the placebo arm, where 39% of patients received a BTKi in 2L. Within the constraints of observational data, our results provide support for sequential use of BR in 1L and BTKi in 2L for patients with MCL.

Abstract Mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) is a B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma; data indicate that blastoid and pleomorphic variants have a poor prognosis. We report characteristics and outcomes of patients with blastoid/pleomorphic variants of MCL. We retrospectively studied adults with newly diagnosed MCL treated from 2000 to 2015. Primary objectives were to describe progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Secondary objectives included characterization of patient characteristics and treatments. Of the 1029 patients with MCL studied, a total of 207 neoplasms were blastoid or pleomorphic variants. Median follow-up period was 82 months (range, 0.1-174 months); median PFS was 38 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 28-66) and OS was 68 months (95% CI, 45-96). Factors associated with PFS were receipt of consolidative autologous hematopoietic transplantation (auto-HCT; hazard ratio [HR], 0.52; 95% CI, 0.31-0.80; P &lt; .05), MCL International Prognostic Index (MIPI) intermediate (HR, 2.3; 95% CI, 1.2-4.3; P &lt; .02) and high (HR, 3.8; 95% CI, 2.0-7.4; P &lt; .01) scores, and complete response to induction (HR, 0.29 (95% CI, 0.17-0.51). Receipt of auto-HCT was not associated with OS (HR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.41-1.16; P = .16) but was associated with MIPI intermediate (HR, 5.7; 95% CI, 2.5-13.2; P &lt; .01) and high (HR, 10.8; 95% CI, 4.7-24.9; P &lt; .01) scores. We report outcomes in a large cohort of patients with blastoid/pleomorphic variant MCL. For eligible patients, receipt of auto-HCT after induction was associated with improved PFS but not OS. Higher MIPI score and auto-HCT ineligibility were associated with worse survival.

Abstract In this real-world evaluation of tafasitamab-lenalidomide (TL) in relapsed or refractory LBCL, patients receiving TL had higher rates of comorbidities and high-risk disease characteristics, and substantially lower progression-free survival and overall survival, compared with the L-MIND registration clinical trial for TL.

Abstract Time to progression of disease (POD) after first-line (1L) therapy is prognostic in mantle cell lymphoma (MCL), although studies have included a broad range of 1L, second-line (2L), and subsequent lines of therapy. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the factors predicting outcomes in patients with relapsed/refractory (R/R) MCL exclusively initiating 2L Bruton’s tyrosine kinase inhibitors (BTKis) after 1L rituximab-containing therapy. Patients were accrued from 8 international centers (7 main, 1 validation cohort). Multivariable models evaluating the association between time to POD and clinical/pathologic factors were constructed and converted into nomograms and prognostic indexes predicting outcomes in this population. A total of 360 patients were included, including 160 in the main cohort and 200 in the validation cohort. Time to POD, Ki67 ≥ 30%, and MCL International Prognostic Index (MIPI) were associated with progression-free survival (PFS2) and overall survival (OS2) from the start of 2L BTKis. C-indexes were consistently ≥0.68 in both cohorts. Web/application-based calculators based on nomograms and prognostic indexes to estimate PFS2 and OS2 were constructed. The 2L BTKi MIPI identifies 3 groups with distinct 2-year PFS2, including high risk (14%), intermediate risk (50%), and low risk (64%). Time to POD, Ki67, and MIPI are associated with survival outcomes in patients with R/R MCL receiving 2L BTKis. Simple clinical models incorporating these variables may assist in planning for alternative therapies such as chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy, allogeneic stem cell transplantation, or novel agents with alternative mechanisms of action.

Abstract In this multi-institutional retrospective study, we examined the characteristics and outcomes of 160 patients with high-grade B-cell lymphoma, not otherwise specified (HGBL-NOS)—a rare category defined by high-grade morphologic features and lack of MYC rearrangements with BCL2 and/or BCL6 rearrangements ("double hit"). Our results show that HGBL-NOS tumors are heterogeneous: 83% of patients had a germinal center B-cell immunophenotype, 37% a dual-expressor immunophenotype (MYC and BCL2 expression), 28% MYC rearrangement, 13% BCL2 rearrangement, and 11% BCL6 rearrangement. Most patients presented with stage IV disease, a high serum lactate dehydrogenase, and other high-risk clinical factors. Most frequent first-line regimens included dose-adjusted cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and etoposide, with rituximab and prednisone (DA-EPOCH-R; 43%); rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (R-CHOP; 33%); or other intensive chemotherapy programs. We found no significant differences in the rates of complete response (CR), progression-free survival (PFS), or overall survival (OS) between these chemotherapy regimens. CR was attained by 69% of patients. PFS at 2 years was 55.2% and OS was 68.1%. In a multivariable model, the main prognostic factors for PFS and OS were poor performance status, lactate dehydrogenase &gt;3 × upper limit of normal, and a dual-expressor immunophenotype. Age &gt;60 years or presence of MYC rearrangement were not prognostic, but patients with TP53 alterations had a dismal PFS. Presence of MYC rearrangement was not predictive of better PFS in patients treated with DA-EPOCH-R vs R-CHOP. Improvements in the diagnostic criteria and therapeutic approaches beyond dose-intense chemotherapy are needed to overcome the unfavorable prognosis of patients with HGBL-NOS.