Pourdehnad, Michael

e19046 Background: While outcomes in pts with R/R FL have improved with current SOC treatments (Tx), there remains a need for safe, efficacious, and convenient Tx options. GOLCA is a potential, first-in-class, oral CELMoD designed for Tx of lymphoma, with preferential distribution to lymphoid organs and enhanced activity in lymphoma cell lines. GOLCA induces rapid and deep degradation of Ikaros and Aiolos, leading to direct cell killing and immunomodulatory activity. GOLCA + R was well tolerated and effective in heavily pretreated pts in the two-part Ph 1/2 study, CC-99282-NHL-001. Here, we provide longer f/u in pts with R/R FL from Part B of the study. Methods: Pts with R/R FL with ≥2 prior lines of Tx (≥1 if prior anti-CD20 Tx) received GOLCA orally, once daily at 0.2 mg (n=22) or 0.4 mg (n=38) ± R for up to 2 y or until progressive disease (PD)/unacceptable toxicity. Primary endpoints included safety and RP2D determination; secondary endpoints are preliminary efficacy and PK. Results: As of September 15, 2025, 60 pts were enrolled. In 0.2 and 0.4 mg groups, median prior Tx lines were 3 and 3, 32% and 32% had prior lenalidomide (LEN), 27% and 29% had prior T-cell–redirecting Tx (CAR T and/or bispecific antibody) and 32% and 32% were refractory to last regimen. Tx is ongoing in 6 (27%) and 17 (45%) pts at 0.2 and 0.4 mg, respectively; discontinuations (d/c) were mostly due to PD. Neutropenia, an on-target side effect of GOLCA, was the most common grade 3/4 Tx-emergent adverse event (TEAE) occurring in 59% and 68% of pts at 0.2 and 0.4 mg, followed by anemia (9% and 16%) and febrile neutropenia (9% and 8%). Median time to resolution of neutropenia was 8 days. Dose reductions occurred in 14% and 37% of pts at 0.2 and 0.4 mg, most commonly due to neutropenia (5% and 21%) and febrile neutropenia (5% and 5%). No d/c or deaths were from GOLCA-related TEAEs. Non-hematologic TEAEs were infrequent and mostly low grade. In efficacy-evaluable pts (GOLCA 0.2 and 0.4 mg + R, n=22 and n=36), median f/u was 14.03 months (mo), overall response rate (ORR) was 77% (complete response rate [CRR], 41%) at 0.2 mg, and 97% (CRR, 78%) at 0.4 mg. In the 0.4 mg group, responses were consistent in high-risk subsets including pts with prior LEN (ORR, 100%; CRR, 75%) and/or T-cell–redirecting Tx (ORR, 91%; CRR, 64%). GOLCA 0.4 mg + R demonstrated durable responses (median DOR, 9.17 mo; 91% of pts who achieved a CR remained in CR at cutoff). Conclusions: With longer f/u, GOLCA + R demonstrated promising efficacy with durable responses and no new safety signals. The 0.4 mg group had higher ORR and CRR than 0.2 mg, including in pts with prior LEN-based and/or T-cell–redirecting Tx, with a manageable safety profile at both doses. The results support the development of GOLCA + R as a fixed-duration, chemotherapy-free outpatient Tx in the Ph 3 GOLSEEK-4 study in 2L+ FL (NCT06911502). Clinical trial information: NCT03930953 .

Abstract Introduction While outcomes in patients with R/R FL have improved with T-cell–redirecting treatments (e.g. CAR T-cell therapy, bispecific antibodies), there remains an unmet need for safe, efficacious, and more convenient chemotherapy-free treatment options (Caridà et al, Eur J Haematol. 2025). GOLCA is a potential, first-in-class, oral CELMoD agent designed for the treatment of lymphoma, with preferential distribution to lymphoid organs and enhanced activity in lymphoma cell lines. GOLCA drives the closed, active conformation of cereblon to induce rapid and deep degradation of Ikaros and Aiolos, leading to direct cell killing (agnostic of cell of origin) and immunomodulatory activity. In the two-part, multicenter, first-in-human Phase 1/2 study (CC-99282-NHL-001; NCT03930953), GOLCA was well tolerated and effective in patients with R/R FL (Cordoba et al, ICML 2025, #441). Here, we provide longer follow-up in patients with R/R FL from Part B of the study. Methods Patients with R/R FL with ≥ 2 prior lines of therapy (≥ 1 in Part B if prior anti-CD20 therapy) were included in the study. Patients received GOLCA monotherapy orally, once daily at different dosing schedules in Part A. In Part B, GOLCA was dosed at 0.2 or 0.4 mg (14 days on/14 days off) ± R. Total GOLCA treatment duration was up to 2 years or until progressive disease (PD)/unacceptable toxicity. Primary objectives included safety and recommended Phase 2 dose determination. Results As of April 3, 2025, a total of 72 patients with R/R FL were enrolled: 12 in Part A (GOLCA monotherapy) and 60 in Part B Cohort D (22 received GOLCA 0.2 mg + R; 38 received GOLCA 0.4 mg + R). Patients were heavily pre-treated. Median number of prior treatments was 4.5 (range, 2–6) in Part A and 3 (range, 1–12) in Part B Cohort D. Approximately one-third of the treated patients were exposed to prior T-cell–redirecting therapy, approximately one-third had prior lenalidomide (len) exposure, and approximately one-third were refractory to the last regimen received. At the time of data cutoff, in Part A, 4 patients completed 2 years of GOLCA, remaining in remission at last follow-up; 8 discontinued due to PD. In Part B Cohort D, 41% of patients treated with 0.2 mg and 63% with 0.4 mg were ongoing. PD was the most common reason for discontinuation. In the safety evaluable population (n = 60; GOLCA 0.2 or 0.4 mg + R), neutropenia, an on-target side effect of GOLCA, was the most common grade 3/4 treatment-emergent adverse event (TEAE) and occurred in 65% of patients, followed by anemia (13%) and febrile neutropenia (8%). Serious AEs related to GOLCA occurred in 22% of patients, most commonly infections (17%) and febrile neutropenia (7%); pulmonary embolism occurred in 1 patient with 0.2 mg. The most common causes of GOLCA interruption in the overall safety population were infections (32%) and neutropenia (18%). Dose reductions were mostly due to neutropenia (10%) and febrile neutropenia (5%). No discontinuations or deaths occurred from GOLCA-related TEAEs. Non-hematologic TEAEs were infrequent and mostly low grade, with the most common being gastrointestinal disorders (7%). In the efficacy evaluable patients (n = 56; GOLCA 0.2 or 0.4 mg + R) at a median follow-up of 10.8 months, the overall response rate (ORR) was 89% (complete response rate [CRR], 61%). With 0.2 mg, ORR was 81% (CRR, 43%) and with 0.4 mg, ORR was 94% (CRR, 71%). In the 0.4-mg group, responses were consistent in high-risk subsets, including patients with prior len (ORR, 100%; CRR, 73%) and/or T-cell–redirecting therapy (ORR, 91%; CRR, 64%). With GOLCA 0.4 mg, 10 patients had response lasting > 12 months, including 5 with prior T-cell–redirecting therapy and 6 with prior len. Conclusions With additional follow-up, GOLCA + R continued to show promising efficacy with durable responses and no new safety signals. A higher ORR/CRR and similar tolerability were observed with GOLCA 0.4 mg + R vs GOLCA 0.2 mg + R, including in patients with prior len-based and/or T-cell–redirecting treatment. These data support continued development of GOLCA 0.4 mg + R as a fixed-duration, chemotherapy-free, outpatient option in the ongoing Phase 3 GOLSEEK-4 study in 2L+ FL (NCT06911502).

Introduction: GOLCA is a potential first-in-class CELMoDTM agent for the treatment of lymphoma, purposefully designed to target the proteins Ikaros/Aiolos to produce dual immunomodulatory and anti-tumor activity, with preferential distribution to lymphoid organs. Pharmacodynamic data in pts with R/R FL show that, combined with RTX, the immunomodulatory effects of GOLCA are significantly increased (Chavez et al, EHA 2024, #1132). GOLCA as monotherapy (mono) and + RTX has been shown to be well-tolerated and effective in pts with R/R DLBCL (Chavez et al, ASH 2023, #4496) and R/R FL (Chavez et al, EHA 2024, #1132). Here, we report 30 mo follow up of pts with R/R FL who received GOLCA mono, and updated safety/efficacy of GOLCA + RTX from the ongoing Phase 1/2 CC-99282-NHL-001 study (NCT03930953). Methods: Pts with R/R FL with ≥ 2 prior lines of therapy (L) received GOLCA mono at different dosing schedules during part A (dose exploration) and GOLCA ± RTX at 0.2 mg or 0.4 mg days (d) 1-14 every 28 d (q28d) in part B (dose expansion). Total treatment duration with GOLCA was up to 2 years or until progressive disease or unacceptable toxicity, whichever occurred first. The efficacy-evaluable population consisted of pts completing ≥ 1 cycle of GOLCA and having baseline tumor assessment and ≥ 1 post-baseline tumor assessment or clinical progression or disease-related death. Results: As of May 31, 2024, 63 pts with R/R FL have enrolled: GOLCA mono (n = 19) at various dosing schedules and GOLCA + RTX at 0.2 mg (n = 22) or 0.4 mg (n = 22) on d1-14 q28d schedule. The median time from diagnosis to first dose of GOLCA was 68 mo (range, 23-136) and 59 mo (range, 15-309) in GOLCA mono and + RTX cohorts, respectively. The median number of prior therapies received was 4 (range, 2-11), and 3 (range, 1-12) in GOLCA mono and + RTX cohorts, respectively. In the GOLCA mono and + RTX cohorts, 9/19 (47%) and 13/43 (30%) pts had received prior lenalidomide (len)-based therapy, with 5/9 and 7/13 having len-refractory disease, respectively. In the GOLCA + RTX cohort, 10/43 (23%) had prior CAR T cell therapy and 6/43 (14%) had prior anti-CD20xCD3 bispecific antibody with or without CAR T cell therapy. In the GOLCA + RTX-treated safety population (n = 43), the incidence of treatment emergent adverse events (TEAEs) was similar across 0.2 and 0.4 mg dose levels (DL). The most frequent grade (G) 3+ TEAEs were neutropenia (44%) and anemia (12%). The incidence of febrile neutropenia was 7%. Serious adverse events occurred in 30% of pts, with febrile neutropenia and pneumonia being the most common, in 2 pts (5%) each, as well as pulmonary embolism in 1 pt. Neutropenia led to GOLCA dose interruption in 4 pts (9%) and dose reduction in 1 pt (2%). No pts discontinued treatment because of GOLCA-related TEAEs. Non-hematological TEAEs (e.g., GI toxicity, rash, fatigue) were all low-grade (except 1 pt with G3 fatigue). There were no new safety signals identified for GOLCA mono (part A) at the 30-mo follow up period. In the efficacy-evaluable population, at a median follow up of 6 mo (range 3-18), the ORR and CRR in the GOLCA + RTX cohort (n = 29) were 57% and 29% at 0.2 mg dose (n = 14) and 93% and 67% at 0.4 mg dose (n = 15), respectively. The median time to response was 2 mo (first response assessment). At the 0.4 mg DL of GOLCA + RTX, consistent responses were seen in pts at 2L/3L and 4L+, including in those with prior exposure to len-based therapies and/or T-cell-redirecting therapy. At the 0.4 mg DL, 12/14 (86%) pts remained in response at the time of data cut-off. In pts receiving GOLCA mono across different dose schedules in part A (n = 12), ORR and CRR were 67% and 42%, respectively. Responses were durable, with median DOR of 22 mo (range, 2-51) at a median follow up of 30 mo. 33% of pts (4/12) have completed 2 yrs of protocol defined GOLCA treatment and remain in response at the 1 yr post-treatment follow-up period, without requiring any intervening treatment. Conclusions: GOLCA 0.4 mg + RTX was well tolerated and highly active in heavily pre-treated pts with R/R FL, including those with prior exposure to len-based therapies and/or T-cell-redirecting therapies. Treatment with fixed-duration GOLCA mono led to durable responses including a subset of pts remaining treatment free, without progression at extended follow up. These data further support development of GOLCA + RTX as a fixed-duration, chemotherapy-free, outpatient treatment option in pts with R/R FL, and also pts with newly diagnosed advanced stage FL (NCT06425302).

AbstractThe multicenter, phase Ib CC‐122‐DLBCL‐001 dose‐expansion study (NCT02031419) explored the cereblon E3 ligase modulator (CELMoD) agent avadomide (CC‐122) plus rituximab in patients with relapsed/refractory (R/R) diffuse large B‐cell lymphoma (DLBCL) or follicular lymphoma (FL). Patients received avadomide 3 mg/day 5 days on/2 days off plus rituximab 375 mg/m2 on day 8 of cycle 1, day 1 of cycles 2 through 6, and day 1 of every third subsequent cycle for 2 years. Primary endpoints were safety and tolerability; preliminary efficacy was a secondary endpoint. A total of 68 patients were enrolled (DLBCL [n = 27], FL [n = 41; 31 lenalidomide‐naïve, 10 lenalidomide‐treated]). Median age was 62 years (range, 33–84 years), and patients had received a median of 3 (range, 1–8) prior regimens. Among patients with DLBCL, 66.7% had primary refractory disease (partial response or less to initial therapy). Among patients with FL, 65.9% were rituximab‐refractory at study entry and 10.0% were lenalidomide‐refractory. The most common any‐grade avadomide‐related adverse events (AEs) were neutropenia (63.2%), infections/infestations (23.5%), fatigue (22.1%), and diarrhea (19.1%). The most common grade 3/4 avadomide‐related AEs were neutropenia (55.9%) infections/infestations (8.8%), and febrile neutropenia (7.4%). In patients with DLBCL, overall response rate (ORR) was 40.7% and median duration of response (mDOR) was 8.0 months. In patients with FL, ORR was 80.5% and mDOR was 27.6 months; response rates were similar in lenalidomide‐naïve and ‐treated patients. Avadomide plus rituximab was well tolerated, and preliminary antitumor activity was observed in patients with R/R DLBCL and FL, including subgroups with typically poor outcomes. These results support further investigation of novel CELMoD agents in combination with rituximab in R/R DLBCL and FL.

Diffuse large B-cell lymphoma is a heterogeneous disease, commonly described by cell-of-origin (COO) molecular subtypes. We sought to identify novel patient subgroups through an unsupervised analysis of a large public dataset of gene expression profiles from newly diagnosed de novo DLBCL patients, yielding two biologically distinct subgroups characterized by differences in the tumor microenvironment. Pathway analysis and immune deconvolution algorithms identified higher B-cell content and a strong proliferative signal in subgroup A and enriched T-cell, macrophage, and immune/inflammatory signals in subgroup B, reflecting similar biology to published DLBCL stratification research. A gene expression classifier, featuring 26 gene expression scores, was derived from the public dataset to discriminate subgroup A (classifier-negative, immune-low) and subgroup B (classifier-positive, immune-high) patients. Subsequent application to an independent series of diagnostic biopsies and replicated the subgroups with immune cell composition confirmed via immunohistochemistry. Avadomide, a CRL4CRBN E3 ubiquitin ligase modulator, demonstrated clinical activity in relapsed/refractory DLBCL patients, independent of COO subtypes. Given the immunomodulatory activity of avadomide and need for a patient selection strategy, we applied the gene expression classifier to pretreatment biopsies from relapsed/refractory DLBCL patients receiving avadomide (NCT01421524). Classifier-positive patients demonstrated an enrichment in response rate and progression-free survival of 44% and 6.2 months versus 19% and 1.6 months for classifier-negative patients (HR=0.49 [0.280, 0.86]; P=.0096). The classifier was not prognostic for R-CHOP or salvage immunochemotherapy. The classifier described here discriminates DLBCL tumors based on tumor and non-tumor composition and has potential utility to enrich for clinical response to immunomodulatory agents including avadomide.

Abstract Introduction:The prognosis is poor for patients with follicular lymphoma (FL) who experience early relapse within 2 years of initial diagnosis and for those who are double refractory to both rituximab and chemotherapy (Casulo et al. J Clin Oncol 2015). Avadomide, a cereblon-modulating agent that promotes degradation of the hematopoietic transcription factors Aiolos and Ikaros, is being examined in this setting. Avadomide demonstrated promising clinical activity in combination with obinutuzumab or rituximab in relapsed or refractory (R/R) diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) and FL (Michot et al. Blood 2017; Ribrag et al. Blood 2017). Herein, we report FL subgroup analyses for the avadomide plus rituximab combination (Arm D) of the CC-122 DLBCL-001 study in both lenalidomide-naïve and treated patients. Methods: CC-122-DLBCL-001 (NCT02031419) is aphase Ib dose escalation/expansion study of avadomide, CC-223, and CC-292 given orally as doublets, and as triplets in combination with rituximab, as well as avadomide plus rituximab doublets, in patients with R/R DLBCL or FL after ≥1 prior line of therapy. In the dose expansion phase of the study, patients received avadomide once daily (QD) for 5 days/week (5/7 d), with a fixed dose of intravenous rituximab 375 mg/m2/cycle (28-day cycle). The study endpoints were safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics, preliminary efficacy (overall response rate [ORR] and complete response [CR]), and blood pharmacodynamic markers of avadomide. Results: As of May 1, 2018, 37 patients with FL were enrolled in the Arm D expansion group, including 29 in cohort 1 (no prior lenalidomide) and 8 in cohort 2 (≥2 cycles of prior lenalidomide). Baseline patient characteristics were similar between the two cohorts. In the total FL population, the median age was 61 years (range, 41-81 years), 54% were male, and 46% had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 1. The median number of prior systemic anticancer regimens was 3 (range, 1-8). At disease diagnosis, three patients (8%) had bulky disease (≥7 cm in single dimension) and 7 (19%) had high Follicular Lymphoma International Prognostic Index scores. Twenty-three patients (62%) were refractory to rituximab and 11 (30%) were double-refractory to rituximab and an alkylating agent. As of the data cutoff, 27 patients (71%) were ongoing and no evaluable patients had experienced a dose-limiting toxicity. The most common (≥10%) any-grade adverse events (AEs) were neutropenia (46%) and anemia (24%). Grade 3/4 AEs occurring in >1 patient were neutropenia (32%); fatigue, dizziness, and anemia (8% each); febrile neutropenia and diarrhea (5% each). Six patients (16%) experienced serious AEs related to study drugs. One patient died during the study (sepsis considered possibly related to study treatment). Avadomide dose reduction occurred in 7 (19%) patients. Among all FL patients, the ORR was 65% with 8 patients (22%) achieving a CR. Response rates appeared to be independent of prior lenalidomide treatment, with an ORR of 62% (CR=14%) in cohort 1 and an ORR of 75% (CR=50%) in cohort 2. The median follow up for progression-free survival (PFS) was 6.3 months and 49% of patients had <6 months of PFS follow up. In the total FL population, 6-month and 12-month PFS rates were 83 (95% CI, 64-93) and 66 (37-84), respectively. Conclusions: Avadomide combined with rituximab was well tolerated. AEs were generally consistent with the known safety profile of avadomide and toxicities associated with rituximab. Moreover, this combination showed promising efficacy in patients with R/R FL independent of prior treatment with lenalidomide. These findings support the role of avadomide plus an anti-CD20 antibody as a novel chemotherapy-free treatment for this difficult to treat patient population. Disclosures Nastoupil: TG Therappeutics: Research Funding; Karus: Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria; Merck: Honoraria, Research Funding; Juno: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Gilead: Honoraria; Janssen: Research Funding; Spectrum: Honoraria; Genentech: Honoraria, Research Funding. Ribrag:Amgen: Research Funding; Roche: Honoraria, Other: travel; epizyme: Consultancy, Honoraria; MSD: Honoraria; Infinity: Consultancy, Honoraria; NanoString Technologies: Consultancy, Honoraria; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel; Servier: Consultancy, Honoraria; pharmamar: Other: travel; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria; Incyte Corporation: Consultancy; argenX: Research Funding. Chavez:Novartis: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Humanigen: Consultancy; Merck: Research Funding; Kite: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Genentech: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Speakers Bureau. Witzig:Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Andorsky:AstraZeneca: Consultancy; Genentech: Consultancy; Celgene: Research Funding; CTI BioPharma: Consultancy, Research Funding. Corradini:Janssen: Honoraria, Other: Lecturer; Amgen: Honoraria, Other: Advisory Board & Lecturer; Gilead: Honoraria, Other: Advisory Board & Lecturer; Celgene: Honoraria, Other: Advisory Board & Lecturer; Roche: Honoraria, Other: Advisory Board & Lecturer; Takeda: Honoraria, Other: Advisory Board & Lecturer; Sanofi: Honoraria, Other: Advisory Board & Lecturer; Novartis: Honoraria, Other: Advisory Board & Lecturer; Abbvie: Honoraria, Other: Advisory Board & Lecturer; Sandoz: Other: Advisory Board. Flinn:ArQule: Research Funding; Agios: Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Research Funding; Calithera: Research Funding; BeiGene: Research Funding; Verastem: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Curis: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Forty Seven: Research Funding; Kite: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Verastem: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Portola: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Constellation: Research Funding; Forma: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding; Infinity: Research Funding. Sangha:Merck: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Lilly: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Lundbeck: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche/Genentech: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Astra Zeneca: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BI: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pfizer: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; AbbVie: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Uttamsingh:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Hagner:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Gandhi:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Chen:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Hege:Mersana: Equity Ownership, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; SITC: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership, Patents & Royalties: multiple; Arcus Biosicences: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Pourdehnad:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Kuruvilla:Celgene: Honoraria; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria; Lundbeck: Honoraria; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria; Abbvie: Consultancy; Merck: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Honoraria; Karyopharm: Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Princess Margaret Cancer Foundation: Research Funding; Leukemia and Lymphoma Society Canada: Research Funding.