Kekre, Natasha

ZUMA-12 is a multicenter phase 2 study evaluating axicabtagene ciloleucel (axi-cel) autologous anti-CD19 chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy as part of first-line treatment for high-risk large B-cell lymphoma (LBCL). In the primary efficacy analysis (n = 37; median follow-up, 15.9 months), axi-cel demonstrated a high rate of complete responses (CR; 78%) and a safety profile consistent with prior experience. Here, we assessed updated outcomes from ZUMA-12 in 40 treated patients after ≥3 years of follow-up. Eligible adults underwent leukapheresis, lymphodepleting chemotherapy, and axi-cel infusion (2 × 106 CAR T cells/kg). Investigator-assessed CR, objective response, survival, safety, and CAR T-cell expansion were assessed. The CR rate among response-evaluable patients (n = 37) increased after the primary analysis to 86% (95% confidence interval [CI], 71%-95%), with a 92% objective response rate. After a median follow-up of 47.0 months (range, 37.1-57.8 months), 36-month estimates (95% CI) of duration of response and event-free, progression-free, and overall survival were 81.8% (63.9%-91.4%), 73.0% (55.6%-84.4%), 75.1% (57.5%-86.2%), and 81.1% (64.4%-90.5%), respectively. In total, 4 patients had new malignancies, 2 occurring after the data cutoff of the primary analysis; none were axi-cel–related. Eight patients died on study, 2 of whom died from nonrelapse mortality causes. After long-term follow-up, axi-cel demonstrated a high durable response rate, with no new safety signals after the primary analysis, suggestive of an effective first-line therapy with curative intent in high-risk LBCL. Further assessments are needed to determine its benefit vs standard of care. This trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov, as NCT03761056.

PURPOSE Allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) improves outcomes for patients with AML harboring an internal tandem duplication mutation of FLT3 ( FLT3-ITD) AML. These patients are routinely treated with a FLT3 inhibitor after HCT, but there is limited evidence to support this. Accordingly, we conducted a randomized trial of post-HCT maintenance with the FLT3 inhibitor gilteritinib (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02997202 ) to determine if all such patients benefit or if detection of measurable residual disease (MRD) could identify those who might benefit. METHODS Adults with FLT3-ITD AML in first remission underwent HCT and were randomly assigned to placebo or 120 mg once daily gilteritinib for 24 months after HCT. The primary end point was relapse-free survival (RFS). Secondary end points included overall survival (OS) and the effect of MRD pre- and post-HCT on RFS and OS. RESULTS Three hundred fifty-six participants were randomly assigned post-HCT to receive gilteritinib or placebo. Although RFS was higher in the gilteritinib arm, the difference was not statistically significant (hazard ratio [HR], 0.679 [95% CI, 0.459 to 1.005]; two-sided P = .0518). However, 50.5% of participants had MRD detectable pre- or post-HCT, and, in a prespecified subgroup analysis, gilteritinib was beneficial in this population (HR, 0.515 [95% CI, 0.316 to 0.838]; P = .0065). Those without detectable MRD showed no benefit (HR, 1.213 [95% CI, 0.616 to 2.387]; P = .575). CONCLUSION Although the overall improvement in RFS was not statistically significant, RFS was higher for participants with detectable FLT3-ITD MRD pre- or post-HCT who received gilteritinib treatment. To our knowledge, these data are among the first to support the effectiveness of MRD-based post-HCT therapy.

Background: Axi-cel is an autologous anti-CD19 chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy approved for the treatment of relapsed/refractory (R/R) LBCL. ZUMA-12 (NCT03761056) is a Phase 2, multicenter, single-arm study of axi-cel as part of first-line treatment in patients with high-risk LBCL. In the primary efficacy analysis (n=37; median follow-up of 15.9 months), axi-cel demonstrated a high rate of investigator-assessed complete response (CR; 78%; 95% CI, 62-90) and an 89% objective response rate (ORR; 95% CI, 75-97). Axi-cel also had a manageable safety profile, with no new safety signals observed in the first-line setting (Neelapu et al. Nat Med. 2022). Here, we report updated efficacy and safety outcomes from ZUMA-12 in all patients treated with axi-cel after a median follow-up of ≥40 months. Methods: Eligible adults had high-risk LBCL, with MYC and BCL2 and/or BCL6 rearrangements (double- or triple-hit histology) per investigator or an International Prognostic Index (IPI) score ≥3, plus a positive interim PET per Lugano classification (Deauville score 4/5) after 2 cycles of an anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody and anthracycline-containing regimen. Patients underwent leukapheresis, followed by lymphodepleting chemotherapy (cyclophosphamide and fludarabine) on Days -5, -4, and -3, and a single axi-cel infusion of 2×10 6 CAR T cells/kg on Day 0. Per investigator discretion, non-chemotherapy bridging could be administered. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed CR rate per Lugano classification (Cheson et al. J Clin Oncol. 2014). Secondary endpoints included ORR, duration of response (DOR), event-free survival (EFS), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), safety, and levels of CAR T cells in blood and cytokines in serum. Results: As of May 3, 2023, 42 patients were enrolled and 40 were treated with axi-cel, with a median follow-up of 40.9 months (range, 29.5-50.2). In total, 37 patients were evaluable for response (centrally confirmed double- or triple-hit histology or IPI score ≥3). The CR rate was 86% (95% CI, 71-95), and 92% (95% CI, 78-98) of patients had an objective response. Patients with centrally confirmed double- or triple-hit histology (n=10) had a CR rate of 90%. Responses were ongoing in 73% of response-evaluable patients at data cutoff. Medians for DOR, EFS, PFS, and OS were not reached. The 36-month estimates for DOR, EFS (Figure 1), PFS, and OS (Figure 2) were 82%, 73%, 75%, and 81%, respectively. All treated patients (n=40) experienced adverse events (AEs) of any grade and 88% of patients had grade ≥3 AEs. Similar to the primary analysis, the most common any-grade AEs were pyrexia (100%), headache (70%), and neutrophil count decreased (55%). No new cases of cytokine release syndrome (CRS) or neurologic events of any grade occurred since the prior data cut and all cases of CRS and neurologic events reported were resolved by data cutoff. Prolonged cytopenias of any grade (present Day ≥30 post-infusion) occurred in 9 patients (n=7 neutrophil count decreased) and were resolved by data cutoff. There were 8 deaths due to progressive disease (n=5) and other causes not related to axi-cel (1 COVID-19, 1 esophageal adenocarcinoma, 1 septic shock on Days 350, 535, and 287 post axi-cel infusion, respectively). Two of the 8 deaths (1 progressive disease and 1 esophageal adenocarcinoma) occurred after the primary analysis. Among treated patients, post-infusion CAR T-cell expansion by peak and area under the curve was 36.9 cells/µL and 368.0 cells/µL×days, respectively, in those with ongoing responses at data cutoff (n=17), 45.1 cells/µL and 413.4 cells/µL×days in those who relapsed (n=6), and 34.7 cells/µL and 566.8 cells/µL×days in non-responders (n=3). Conclusion: In this updated analysis of ZUMA-12 with a median follow-up of ≥40 months, axi-cel demonstrated a high rate of durable responses and no new safety signals. Axi-cel may benefit patients exposed to fewer prior therapies and those with high-risk LBCL, a population with high unmet need and poor outcomes after standard first-line chemoimmunotherapy.

Abstract Background: High-risk LBCL is associated with poor prognosis after first-line anti-CD20 mAb-containing regimens, highlighting the need for novel treatments. Axi-cel, an autologous anti-CD19 chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy, is approved for treatment of relapsed/refractory (R/R) LBCL after ≥2 lines of systemic therapy. Here we report the primary analysis of ZUMA-12, a Phase 2, multicenter, single-arm study of axi-cel as part of first-line therapy in patients with high-risk LBCL. Methods: Eligible adults had high-risk LBCL, defined by histology (double- or triple-hit status [MYC and BCL2 and/or BCL6 translocations] per investigator) or an IPI score ≥3, plus a positive interim PET per Lugano Classification (Deauville score [DS] 4/5) after 2 cycles of an anti-CD20 mAb and anthracycline-containing regimen. Patients underwent leukapheresis and received conditioning chemotherapy (cyclophosphamide and fludarabine) followed by a single axi-cel infusion at 2×10 6 CAR T cells/kg. Non-chemotherapy bridging could be administered before conditioning per investigator discretion. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed complete response (CR) rate per Lugano. Secondary endpoints included objective response rate (ORR; CR + partial response), duration of response (DOR), event-free survival (EFS), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), incidence of adverse events (AEs), and levels of CAR T cells in blood and cytokines in serum. The primary analysis occurred after all treated patients had ≥6 months of follow-up. Results: As of May 17, 2021, 42 patients were enrolled and 40 were treated with axi-cel. Median age was 61 years (range, 23-86); 68% of patients were male, 63% had ECOG 1, 95% had stage III/IV disease, 48% had DS4, 53% had DS5, 25% had double- or triple-hit status per central assessment, and 78% had IPI score ≥3. A total of 37 patients had centrally confirmed double- or triple-hit histology or an IPI score ≥3 and were evaluable for response, with 15.9 months of median follow-up (range, 6.0-26.7). The CR rate was 78% (n=29; 95% CI, 62-90); 89% of patients had an objective response, and median time to initial response was 1 month. Among all 40 treated patients, 90% had an objective response (80% CR rate). At data cutoff, 73% of response-evaluable patients had ongoing responses. Medians for DOR, EFS, and PFS were not reached; 12-month estimates were 81%, 73%, and 75%, respectively. The estimated OS at 12 months was 91%. All 40 treated patients had AEs of any grade; 85% of patients had Grade ≥3 AEs, most commonly cytopenias (68%). Grade ≥3 cytokine release syndrome (CRS) and neurologic events (NEs) occurred in 3 patients (8%) and 9 patients (23%), respectively. Median times to onset of CRS and NEs were 4 days (range, 1-10) and 9 days (range, 2-44), with median durations of 6 days and 7 days, respectively. All CRS and most NEs (28/29) of any grade resolved by data cutoff (1 ongoing Grade 1 tremor); 39/40 CRS events resolved by 14 days post-infusion and 19/29 NEs resolved by 21 days post-infusion. Tocilizumab was administered to 63% and 3% of patients for management of CRS or NEs, respectively; corticosteroids were administered to 35% and 33% of patients for CRS and NE management. One Grade 5 event of COVID-19 occurred (Day 350). Median peak CAR T-cell level in all treated patients was 36 cells/µL (range, 7-560), and median expansion by AUC 0-28 was 495 cells/µL × days (range, 74-4288). CAR T-cell levels peaked at a median of 8 days post-infusion (range, 8-37). Higher frequency of CCR7+CD45RA+ T cells in axi-cel product, previously associated with greater expansion of CAR T cells (Locke et al. Blood Adv. 2020), was observed in ZUMA-12, compared with the ZUMA-1 study in R/R LBCL (Neelapu et al. New Engl J Med. 2017). Conclusion: In the primary analysis of ZUMA-12, axi-cel demonstrated a high rate of rapid and complete responses in patients with high-risk LBCL, a population with high unmet need. With 15.9 months of median follow-up, responses were durable as medians for DOR, EFS, and PFS were not yet reached and over 70% of patients remained in response at data cutoff. No new safety signals were reported with axi-cel in an earlier line. Overall, axi-cel may benefit patients exposed to fewer prior therapies, and further trials in first-line high-risk LBCL are warranted to assess axi-cel in this setting. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Neelapu: Kite, a Gilead Company, Merck, Bristol Myers Squibb, Novartis, Celgene, Pfizer, Allogene, Kuur, Incyte, Precision BioSciences, Legend, Adicet Bio, Calibr, and Unum Therapeutics: Other: personal fees; Kite, a Gilead Company, Bristol Myers Squibb, Merck, Poseida, Cellectis, Celgene, Karus Therapeutics, Unum Therapeutics (Cogent Biosciences), Allogene, Precision BioSciences, Acerta and Adicet Bio: Research Funding; Takeda Pharmaceuticals and related to cell therapy: Patents & Royalties; Kite, a Gilead Company, Merck, Bristol Myers Squibb, Novartis, Celgene, Pfizer, Allogene Therapeutics, Cell Medica/Kuur, Incyte, Precision Biosciences, Legend Biotech, Adicet Bio, Calibr, Unum Therapeutics and Bluebird Bio: Honoraria. Dickinson: Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Honoraria; Celgene: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria; MSD: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel, accommodation, expenses, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Gilead Sciences: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Munoz: Kite, a Gilead Company, Kyowa, Bayer, Pharmacyclics/Janssen, Seagen, Acrotech/Aurobindo, Beigene, Verastem, AstraZeneca, Celgene/BMS, Genentech/Roche.: Speakers Bureau; Bayer, Gilead/Kite Pharma, Celgene, Merck, Portola, Incyte, Genentech, Pharmacyclics, Seattle Genetics, Janssen, and Millennium: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics/Abbvie, Bayer, Kite, a Gilead Company, Pfizer, Janssen, Juno/Celgene, Bristol Myers Squibb, Kyowa Kirin, Alexion, Fosun Kite, Innovent, Seagen, BeiGene, Debiopharm, Epizyme, Karyopharm, ADC Therapeutics, Servier, and Genmab: Consultancy, Other: advisory role; Alexion, AstraZeneca Rare Disease: Other: Study investigator; Targeted Oncology, OncView, Kyowa Kirin, Physicians' Education Resource, and Seagen: Honoraria. Thieblemont: Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses ; Gilead Sciences: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses ; Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Kyte: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses ; Bristol Myers Squibb/Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses ; Takeda: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses , Research Funding; Incyte: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses ; Cellectis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses ; Hospira: Research Funding; Bayer: Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses . Oluwole: Pfizer: Consultancy; Curio Science: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Kite, a Gilead Company: Consultancy, Research Funding. Herrera: Takeda: Consultancy; Genentech: Consultancy, Research Funding; Merck: Consultancy, Research Funding; Seagen: Consultancy, Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Research Funding; Kite, a Gilead Company: Research Funding; Gilead Sciences: Research Funding; Tubulis: Consultancy; ADC Therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding; Karyopharm: Consultancy. Ujjani: Loxo: Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Epizyme: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Consultancy; TG Therapeutics: Honoraria; Gilead: Honoraria; ACDT: Honoraria; Kite, a Gilead Company: Honoraria; Adaptive Biotechnologies: Research Funding; Atara Bio: Consultancy; AbbVie: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Research Funding. Lin: Sorrento: Consultancy; Legend: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Bluebird Bio: Consultancy, Research Funding; Gamida Cell: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Juno: Consultancy; Vineti: Consultancy; Takeda: Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Kite, a Gilead Company: Consultancy, Research Funding. Riedell: Bayer: Honoraria; Karyopharm Therapeutics: Consultancy, Honoraria; Morphosys: Research Funding; Celgene/Bristol-Myers Squibb Company: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Verastem Oncology: Honoraria; Kite, a Gilead Company: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy; BeiGene: Consultancy; Calibr: Research Funding; Xencor: Research Funding; Tessa Therapeutics: Research Funding. Kekre: Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria. Lui: Gilead Sciences: Other: stock or other ownership; Kite, a Gilead Company: Current Employment, Other: travel support. Milletti: Kite, a Gilead company: Current Employment; Gilead Sciences: Other: stock or other ownership . Dong: Kite, a Gilead Company: Current Employment; Gilead Sciences: Other: stock or other ownership ; GliaCure/Tufts: Consultancy, Other: advisory role, Patents & Royalties. Xu: Kite, A Gilead Company: Current Employment; Gilead Sciences: Other: stock or other ownership . Chavez: MorphoSys, Bayer, Karyopharm, Kite, a Gilead Company, Novartis, Janssen, AbbVie, TeneoBio, and Pfizer: Consultancy; ADC Therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Merk: Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Research Funding; MorphoSys, AstraZeneca, BeiGene, Genentech, Kite, a Gilead Company, and Epizyme: Speakers Bureau; BMS: Speakers Bureau.

Abstract There is a lack of large comparative study on the outcomes of reduced intensity conditioning (RIC) in acute myeloid leukemia (AML) transplantation using fludarabine/busulfan (FB) and fludarabine/melphalan (FM) regimens. Adult AML patients from Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research who received first RIC allo-transplant between 2001 and 2015 were studied. Patients were excluded if they received cord blood or identical twin transplant, total body irradiation in conditioning, or graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) prophylaxis with in vitro T-cell depletion. Primary outcome was overall survival (OS), secondary end points were leukemia-free survival (LFS), nonrelapse mortality (NRM), relapse, and GVHD. Multivariate survival model was used with adjustment for patient, leukemia, and transplant-related factors. A total of 622 patients received FM and 791 received FB RIC. Compared with FB, the FM group had fewer transplant in complete remission (CR), fewer matched sibling donors, and less usage of anti-thymocyte globulin or alemtuzumab. More patients in the FM group received marrow grafts and had transplantation before 2005. OS was significantly lower within the first 3 months posttransplant in the FM group (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.82, P < .001), but was marginally superior beyond 3 months (HR = 0.87, P = .05). LFS was better with FM compared with FB (HR = 0.89, P = .05). NRM was significantly increased in the FM group during the first 3 months of posttransplant (HR = 3.85, P < .001). Long-term relapse was lower with FM (HR = 0.65, P < .001). Analysis restricted to patients with CR showed comparable results. In conclusion, compared with FB, the FM RIC showed a marginally superior long-term OS and LFS and a lower relapse rate. A lower OS early posttransplant within 3 months was largely the result of a higher early NRM.

Background: Pts with high-risk LBCL have poor outcomes with R-CHOP chemoimmunotherapy (Sathyanarayanan, et al. ASH 2016. #106), and ≈50% of pts will not achieve long-term disease remission (Coiffier, et al. ASH Ed Program. 2016), highlighting unmet need for new therapies. Axi-cel, an autologous anti-CD19 chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cell therapy, was approved for treatment of adults with R/R LBCL after ≥ 2 lines of systemic therapies based on the pivotal study, ZUMA-1 (Neelapu SS, et al. NEJM. 2017). ZUMA-12 is a Phase 2, multicenter, open-label, single-arm study of axi-cel as part of first-line therapy in pts with high-risk LBCL. Here, we present interim efficacy, safety, and pharmacokinetics (PK) results from ZUMA-12. Methods: Eligible adults (≥ 18 y) met 2 criteria for high-risk LBCL: i) double- or triple-hit lymphoma by fluorescent in situ hybridization per investigator or LBCL with IPI score ≥ 3; and ii) positive interim PET per Lugano Classification (Cheson, et al. J Clin Oncol. 2014; Deauville score [DS] 4 or 5) after 2 cycles of an anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody and anthracycline containing regimen, which served as a dynamic risk assessment. Pts with PMBCL were not eligible. Pts underwent leukapheresis (≥ 2 wks after prior systemic therapy) and optional non-chemotherapy bridging at investigator discretion, followed by conditioning chemotherapy (cyclophosphamide 500 mg/m2/d and fludarabine 30 mg/m2/d for 3 d) and a single axi-cel infusion (target dose, 2 × 106 CAR T cells/kg). The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed complete response (CR) rate per Lugano. Key secondary endpoints included objective response rate (ORR), frequency of adverse events (AEs), and levels of CAR T cells and cytokines in blood and serum. Results: As of July 15, 2020, 31 pts have been enrolled and treated, and as of January 24, 2020, in a planned interim analysis, 15 pts were treated with axi-cel with ≥ 3 mos of follow-up. Median age was 60 y (range, 39 - 86), 67% of pts were male, 73% had ECOG of 1, 40%/60% had DS4/5; 60% had double- or triple-hit status per investigator, and 67% had IPI score ≥ 3. Baseline characteristics were largely comparable to ZUMA-1 Cohort 1 except for lower median tumor burden in ZUMA-12 (ZUMA-1: 3897 mm2 vs ZUMA-12: 1610 mm2). Of 12 response-evaluable pts (pts with centrally confirmed high-risk LBCL who received axi-cel), the investigator-assessed ORR was 92% (95% CI, 62% - 100%) with a CR rate of 75% (95% CI, 43% - 95%); 75% of pts had ongoing responses at data cutoff. Of 15 pts treated (safety analysis set), the investigator-assessed ORR was 93% (95% CI, 68% - 100%) with a CR rate of 80% (95% CI, 52% - 96%); 86% of pts had ongoing responses at data cutoff. Of 15 safety-evaluable pts, 80% experienced Grade ≥ 3 AEs. The most common Grade ≥ 3 AEs (≥ 25% of pts) were white blood cell count decreased (40%), anemia (27%), and encephalopathy (27%). Grade ≥ 3 cytokine release syndrome (CRS) and neurologic events (NEs) occurred in 20% and 27% of pts, respectively. All CRS and 10/11 NEs of any grade resolved (causally unrelated Grade 1 tremor was ongoing in 1 pt at data cutoff). Median time to onset of CRS was 4 d (range, 1 - 8), with median duration of 5 d (range, 2 - 12). Median time to onset of NEs was 9 d (range, 2 - 44), with median duration of 10 d (range, 1 - 40). Grade ≥ 3 infection was reported in 27% and Grade ≥ 3 neutrophil count decreased was reported in 20%. No Grade 5 AEs occurred. Despite similar assessment schedule and methodology, median peak CAR T cell levels were greater in ZUMA-12 vs ZUMA-1 Cohort 1 (131 cells/µL [range, 10 - 555] vs 32 cells/µL [range, 1 - 1514]). Median CAR T cell expansion (AUC0-28) was also greater in ZUMA-12 (1124 cells/µL × d [range, 147 - 4261]; ZUMA-1: 357 cells/µL × d [range, 5 - 11,507]). Median time to peak levels of CAR T cells in blood was 7 d after infusion. PK were similar in pts with double- or triple-hit lymphoma and IPI score ≥ 3. Updated safety, efficacy, and PK results will be reported, along with product characteristics and levels of key cytokines. Conclusion: ZUMA-12 is the first study evaluating CAR T cell therapy as first-line therapy in high-risk LBCL, which notably was defined by both histology and/or IPI and dynamic risk assessment with PET scan. Axi-cel demonstrated significant clinical benefit, with high ORR and CR rates and a manageable safety profile in pts for whom there is an unmet medical need. The study also provides new insights into the pharmacology of CAR T cell therapy for pts exposed to fewer prior therapies. Disclosures Neelapu: Pfizer: Other: personal fees; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Other: personal fees, Research Funding; Merck: Other: personal fees, Research Funding; Kite, a Gilead Company: Other: personal fees, Research Funding; N/A: Other; Adicet Bio: Other; Poseida: Research Funding; Unum Therapeutics: Other, Research Funding; Celgene: Other: personal fees, Research Funding; Novartis: Other: personal fees; Allogene Therapeutics: Other: personal fees, Research Funding; Takeda Pharmaceuticals: Patents & Royalties; Precision Biosciences: Other: personal fees, Research Funding; Cell Medica/Kuur: Other: personal fees; Incyte: Other: personal fees; Acerta: Research Funding; Karus Therapeutics: Research Funding; Cellectis: Research Funding; Legend Biotech: Other; Calibr: Other. Dickinson:Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Merck Sharp & Dohme: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Oluwole:Spectrum Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Bayer: Consultancy; Kite, a Gilead Company: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy. Herrera:Genentech, Inc./F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Merck: Consultancy, Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Other: Travel, Accomodations, Expenses, Research Funding; Immune Design: Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Research Funding; Gilead Sciences: Consultancy, Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Karyopharm: Consultancy. Thieblemont:Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES (paid by any for-profit health care company); Bayer: Honoraria; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES (paid by any for-profit health care company); Kite, a Gilead Company: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES (paid by any for-profit health care company); Cellectis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES (paid by any for-profit health care company), Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Honoraria; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: travel support; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES (paid by any for-profit health care company); Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES (paid by any for-profit health care company); Hospira: Research Funding; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES (paid by any for-profit health care company), Research Funding. Ujjani:AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Verastem Oncology: Consultancy, Honoraria; Gilead/Kite: Consultancy, Research Funding; Atara: Consultancy, Honoraria; Genentech: Consultancy, Honoraria; MorphoSys: Consultancy. Lin:Sorrento: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Vineti: Consultancy; Gamida Cells: Consultancy; Kite, a Gilead Company: Consultancy, Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Legend BioTech: Consultancy; Juno: Consultancy; Bluebird Bio: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding. Riedell:Celgene/Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Karyopharm Therapeutics: Consultancy; Bayer: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Kite/Gilead: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; MorphoSys: Research Funding. Kekre:Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria. de Vos:Bayer: Consultancy; Verastem: Consultancy. Yang:Kite, a Gilead Company: Current Employment. Milletti:Kite, a Gilead Company: Current Employment; Gilead Sciences: Other: stock or other ownership . Goyal:Kite, a Gilead Company: Current Employment. Kawashima:Kite, a Gilead Company: Current Employment; Gilead Sciences: Other: stock or other ownership . Chavez:Merck: Research Funding; Morphosys: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; AstraZeneca: Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Kite, a Gilead Company: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Genentech: Speakers Bureau; Epizyme: Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Consultancy; Bayer: Consultancy; BeiGene: Speakers Bureau; Karyopharm: Consultancy; AbbVie: Consultancy; Verastem: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy.

TPS7574 Background: Pts with LBCL who have persistent disease assessed by dynamic PET after rituximab-based induction therapy have an increased risk of death (Casasnovas, et al. Blood. 2017). Axi-cel is an autologous anti-CD19 chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cell therapy approved for the treatment of pts with relapsed/refractory LBCL with ≥ 2 prior systemic therapies. In ZUMA-1, the registrational study of axi-cel in pts with refractory LBCL, the objective response rate (ORR) was 91% (70% complete response [CR] rate) in pts with double-expressor or high-grade LBCL with ongoing responses in 48% after a median follow-up of 27.1 mos (Locke FL, et al. Lancet Oncol 2019). Furthermore, pts with fewer prior lines of therapy and lower tumor burden had higher rates of ongoing responses and manageable safety (Locke et al. ASCO 2018. 3039). ZUMA-12 will investigate the efficacy and safety of axi-cel as a first-line therapy in newly diagnosed pts with high-risk LBCL who have PET-positive disease after 2 cycles of induction therapy. Methods: This Phase 2 study has a planned enrollment of ≈40 pts aged ≥ 18 y with high-risk LBCL, defined by the presence of MYC and BCL2 and/or BCL6 translocations by FISH or an IPI score ≥ 3 any time before enrollment, and an ECOG performance status of 0 – 1. Before enrollment, pts must have a Deauville score of 4 – 5 (Barrington SF et al. J Clin Oncol. 2014) after 2 cycles of chemoimmunotherapy that includes an anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody and anthracycline. After leukapheresis, pts with bulky or rapidly progressing disease may receive optional non-chemotherapy bridging therapy. Following conditioning therapy with cyclophosphamide (500 mg/m2) and fludarabine (30 mg/m2) for 3 days, pts will receive a single infusion of axi-cel at a target dose of 2 × 106 CAR T cells/kg. The primary endpoint is investigator-assessed CR rate per the Lugano classification (Cheson et al. J Clin Oncol. 2014). Key secondary endpoints include ORR, duration of response, event-free survival, progression-free survival, overall response, safety, relapse with CNS disease and levels of blood CAR T cells and serum cytokines over time. Accrual is ongoing. Clinical trial information: NCT03761056.

Abstract Introduction: Relapse is the primary cause of death after reduced intensity conditioning (RIC) hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT). Documented responses have been reported after combination chemotherapy, hypomethylating agents, donor lymphocyte infusions, and second transplants. For patients with early relapse after RIC HCT while still on immunosuppression (IS), IS taper alone may induce significant graft-versus-tumor (GVT) activity. We describe the clinical characteristics and subsequent course of 48 patients with disease recurrence that responsed to IS taper alone without any additional chemotherapy, radiation, or donor lymphocyte infusion. Methods: We reviewed medical records of all patients with frank histologic or radiographic evidence of relapse (n=477) and those with impending relapse defined by development of cytopenias with a fall in donor derived hematopoietic cell chimerism (n=87) within one year of allogeneic RIC HCT who were on IS at time of relapse between January 1, 2004 and December 31, 2013 at Dana Farber Cancer Institute/Brigham and Women's Hospital. Complete response after IS taper was defined as complete recovery of peripheral blood counts, bone marrow biopsy with absence of disease, negative radiologic imaging, or chimerism recovery to above 90 percent. Partial response was defined as improvement in disease burden in bone marrow or by imaging. Survival probabilities were calculated using the Kaplan Meier method. Results: Forty-eight patients (37 male, 11 female) who relapsed within one year of HCT responded to IS taper alone. Of these, 14 had impending relapse and 34 had frank relapse at time of IS taper. The median age of patients was 62 years at time of transplant. The most frequent indication for transplant was MDS (n=14) followed by AML (n=11), non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (n=8), CLL (n=6), Hodgkin's disease (n=4), CML (n=3) and multiple myeloma (n= 2). At time of transplant, 9 patients had standard risk disease and 39 had high risk disease. All patients except one underwent conditioning with busulfan (≤ 6.4 mg/kg) and fludarabine. Five patients had graft versus host disease (GVHD) prior to relapse. The median time to frank or impending relapse was 105 days (range 57-360) after HCT. The median interval between starting and completing IS taper was 30 days (range 0-251), but 13 patients could not come off IS completely due to GVHD. The median time to documented response after initiation of IS taper was 77 days (range 14-189). Thirty-five patients had a complete response and the remaining 13 patients had a partial response. Nine patients subsequently relapsed late after initial response to IS taper at a median time of 2.38 years (range 0.88-3.95). Forty-five of the 48 patients developed or had a flare of previous GVHD as a consequence of IS taper. Of these, 26 patients had grade II-IV acute GVHD and 19 had chronic GVHD. The median time to developing GVHD after starting IS taper was 39 days (range 7-261 days). Twenty-five patients died during follow-up (10 from GVHD, 6 from disease, 7 from infection, 1 from congestive heart failure and 1 unknown). The median follow-up time among survivors was 4 years (range 1.6, 9.4). The median overall survival (OS) time from IS taper was 4.78 years (95% CI 2.93-7.35, see figure). The 4 year overall survival was 56%. There was no difference in survival for those with frank or impending relapse. Conclusion: Immunosuppression taper alone in patients who relapse early after RIC HCT can produce durable remissions but is almost always associated with development of GVHD. Understanding the clinical, molecular and immunologic characteristics of underlying disease will allow us to better predict who will respond to this manipulation. When feasible, this strategy should be given sufficient time to allow for a GVT response to develop in order to possibly avoid the adverse effects of more aggressive therapies. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.