Oliai, Caspian

Introduction: In October 2021, the FDA approved brexu-cel for the treatment of adults ≥ 18 years old with R/R B-ALL. Following this approval, a consortium of cancer centers was formed across the US to investigate outcomes following commercial brexu-cel use for adults with R/R B-ALL. One area of interest is the toxicity profile of brexu-cel when given in the real-world context, including the respective incidences and severity of cytokine release syndrome (CRS) and immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity (ICANS). Methods: Eligible pts included adults ≥ 18 years old who received commercial brexu-cel starting in October 2021 onward at a participating center in the US (N = 25). Retrospective patient data were collected across participating institutions, with the most recent data lock occurring on June 30, 2023. Criteria from the ASTCT were used to grade CRS and ICANS severity. Statistical methods included the use of medians and simple ratios for descriptive outcomes; univariate logistic regression models were used to assess the association of various factors with the probability of CRS and ICANS, and Cox regression was used to examine the association of each with the hazards of mortality and failure for event-free survival (EFS; earliest of progression, relapse, or death). Results: Key demographics and toxicities are described in Tables 1 and 2 (respectively). Of the 152 pts infused with brexu-cel, 82% (N = 125) developed CRS and 56% (N = 85) developed ICANS. CRS and ICANS did NOT develop in 12% (N = 19). Twenty percent of all pts (N = 31) required ICU-level care for management of CAR-related toxicities, with a median LOS in ICU of 4 days (range 1-79). In univariate models, grade 3+ ICANS was most likely to occur in pts with active disease (≥ 5% marrow blasts and/or EMD) at the time of apheresis (OR 2.63, 1.28-5.38, p = 0.008); a numerical increase for grade 3+ CRS (OR 2.35, 0.69-8, p = 0.17) was seen in pts with active disease at apheresis. Therapies received for these CAR-related toxicities included steroids, tocilizumab (toci), and anakinra (Table 2). Among pts who received steroids (N = 94), 37% (N = 34) achieved a sufficient response to the first steroid trial and did not require subsequent therapies; otherwise, toxicities improved with the first steroid course but later worsened in 16% (N = 15); the first trial of steroids was not effective but improved when further steroids were given in 31% (N = 29); there were no responses to any doses of steroids in 10% (N = 9). In pts receiving toci (N = 103), 31% (N = 32) achieved a sufficient response to the first dose and did not require any further therapy; toxicities improved with the first dose but later worsened in 31% (N = 32); the first dose was ineffective but improvement was seen with subsequent doses in 21% (N = 22); 9% (N = 9) did not respond at all to toci. The rate of death within day +28 was 6% (N = 9), and the respective causes were typically multifactorial: CRS was implicated in 3 cases, ICANS in 3, infection in 5, disease relapse/progression in 2, and HLH in 1 case. In total, uncontrolled ICANS was implicated in the death of 6 pts (between day +9 to day +106). HLH was reported in 6 pts: in most cases, this was a biochemical diagnosis, and it either overlapped with concurrent CRS or infection or occurred following CRS/ICANS. The most common infections between day 0 and day +28 included bacteremia in 8% of pts (N = 12), fungal infections in 4% (N = 6), pneumonia in 3% (N = 5), and CMV infections in 3% (N = 4). The fungal infections included 4 instances of invasive sinopulmonary infections (2 due to aspergillus; 2 due to mucormycosis) and 2 cases of candidemia. With both CRS and ICANS treated as a time-varying covariate, the development of grade 3+ CRS was associated with a higher hazard of death (HR 2.38, 1.00-5.66, p = 0.05); grade 3+ ICANS was not associated with a demonstrably higher risk of death (HR 1.11, 0.60-2.05, p = 0.74). The HR of EFS failure for Grade 3+ CRS was 1.81 (0.87-3.79, p = 0.12) and for grade 3+ ICANS HR = 0.93 (0.56-1.53, p = 0.77). Conclusions: In this real-world study of toxicities from brexu-cel use for adults with R/R B-ALL, we observed CRS and ICANS in the majority of pts, and no new safety signals were observed. Rates of severe CRS and ICANS were more common with active disease. Interestingly, though CRS-related mortality was rare, grade 3+ CRS was associated with a higher risk of death. Efforts to identify mechanisms and mitigable risk factors for these toxicities are warranted.

Background Brexucabtagene autoleucel (brexu-cel) is an autologous anti-CD19 chimeric antigen receptor (CAR-T) cell therapy that recently received U.S. FDA approval as the first CAR-T cell therapy for adults with relapsed/refractory (r/r) B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia (B-ALL). Social determinants of health (SDoH) are shown to significantly influence outcomes in B-ALL. However, how SDoH relate to and affect outcomes in patients with B-ALL receiving CAR-T therapy has not been well established. We studied the impact of SDoH on outcomes of adults with B-ALL receiving brexu-cel as part of the Real-world Outcomes Collaborative of CAR-T in Adult ALL (ROCCA). Methods This retrospective multicenter analysis spanning 25 U.S centers included adults (≥18 years) with r/r B-ALL treated with commercial brexu-cel between 2021-2023. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were calculated from the day of brexu-cel infusion and were not censored for hematopoietic cell transplant (HCT) or maintenance. Univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazards models were used to evaluate the association of age, sex, pre-apheresis disease burden, and SDoH (referral source, insurance, distance from home to CAR-T site, marital status, and the social deprivation index) with progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). The social deprivation index (SDI), a composite measure (including income, education, employment, housing, household characteristics, and transportation) used to quantify socio-economic variation in health outcomes, with higher SDI indicating greater social disadvantage, was estimated at the zip code level. (Butler et al., 2013) Results Of the 152 patients who received brexu-cel (Table 1), 57% were male. 51% identified as non-Hispanic White, with the remainder identifying as Hispanic (34%), Asian/Pacific Islander (7%), Black (6%), American Indian/Alaskan Native (1%), or mixed race (1%). A majority (46%) were referred for brexu-cel from private/community-based practices and 62% lived within 50 miles of the CAR-T center (36% lived >50 miles and 2% were unknown). Health insurance coverage included primarily public (49%) and private (42%); no patients were uninsured. High SDI (76-100% percentile) was present in 26%, while 14% had a low SDI (0-25 th percentile). In unadjusted analyses, there was no difference in PFS or OS between patients with high versus low SDI; closer distance to the CAR-T site (<50 miles versus >50 miles)) was associated with worse OS (HR 1.96; 95% CI 1.00, 3.84; p=0.05). Multivariate analysis (Table 2) revealed that male sex was associated with inferior PFS (HR 1.98; 95% CI 1.02, 3.85; p=0.04) and OS (HR 2.52; 95% CI 1.09, 5.84; p=0.03). There was no difference in PFS (HR 0.95, 95% CI 0.48-1.88, p=0.88) or OS (HR 0.80; 95% CI 0.33,1.92; p=0.62) when comparing Hispanic and non-Hispanic White patients. Additionally, there was no difference in PFS or OS based on any SDoH, including insurance type, marital status, referral source, caregiver type, and distance to transplant center. Conclusions In patients receiving brexu-cel, survival outcomes appear independent of SDoH. Contrary to previous reports suggesting inferior outcomes for Hispanic patients with B-ALL after receiving traditional systemic therapies, we observed comparable outcomes to non-Hispanic patients treated with brexu-cel. Distance from the CAR-T site and referrals from the community did not affect outcomes. Additionally, those with higher SDI had similar outcomes to those with a lower SDI, although this analysis was limited by sample size and the selection bias that exists in being referred for brexu-cel in the first place. The relatively lower logistical burden of CAR-T compared to allogeneic stem cell transplant or non-fixed duration systemic therapies may have mitigated the impact of SDoH on outcomes. These real-world data suggest that continuing to improve access to and treatment with brexu-cel may improve overall outcomes for disadvantaged populations with r/r B-ALL.

Introduction: Brexucabtagene autoleucel (brexu-cel) is an autologous anti-CD19 chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy approved for adults with relapsed or refractory (r/r) B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia (B-ALL). Blinatumomab is a CD19-directed bispecific T-cell engager that is also approved for r/r B-ALL, and often used as early salvage therapy. Data in the pediatric/AYA population suggest that patients who did not respond to blinatumomab may have inferior outcomes to CD19-directed CAR-T products compared to those who have achieved a response to blinatumomab or were blinatumomab-naïve (Myers et al. J Clin Oncol 2022). In this study, we evaluate the response to blinatumomab and subsequent response to brexu-cel in adults with r/r B-ALL. Methods: Retrospective data were collected from 25 centers across the U.S. as part of the real-world outcomes collaborative study of CAR-T in B-ALL (ROCCA). Consecutive patients treated with brexu-cel from 2021 to 2023 were categorized by blinatumomab exposure status. Those exposed were separated into “blinatumomab responders” (B-R), defined as patients achieving a CR/CRi in response to any number of cycles of blinatumomab, and “non-responders” (B-NR). Each cohort was compared for outcomes of interest. The primary outcome was CR/CRi rate at day 28 following brexu-cel administration. Secondary outcomes were duration of response (DOR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). Survival outcomes were calculated from day of brexu-cel infusion and were not censored for allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation or maintenance therapy. All living patients were censored at data cutoff on June 30, 2023. Survival comparisons were made by log rank test. Results: Among 152 patients who received brexu-cel, the median follow-up time was 8.4 months. Eighty-eight (57%) of 152 r/r B-ALL brexu-cel recipients had received blinatumomab prior to apheresis. The median number of pre-apheresis blinatumomab cycles was 2 (range 1-12). The baseline characteristics of B-R, B-NR, and blinatumomab-naïve (B-NV) patients were similar, including pre-apheresis disease burden and receipt of maintenance therapy following brexu-cel infusion (Table 1). Seventy percent (N= 62) of the blinatumomab-exposed patients were B-R, while 30% (N=26) were B-NR. Rates of CR/CRi at day 28 following brexu-cel infusion were similar between B-R, B-NR, and B-NV patients (79% vs 84% vs 78%, respectively). Most of these remissions were negative for measurable residual disease (MRD), with similar MRD negativity rates in the three groups (table 2). 1-year DOR and PFS were significantly higher in the B-NV group compared to B-R or B-NR (77% vs 49% vs 50%, p<.0001; 60% vs 37% vs 30%, p<.0001). B-NV and B-R had better 1-year survival compared to B-NR (71% vs 65% vs 32%, p<.0001). There were more CD19-negative relapses following brexu-cel in B-NR (29%) and B-R (18%) compared to B-NV patients (8%), although this was not statistically significant. Conclusions: Brexu-cel induced deep responses in a majority of adults with r/r B-ALL, irrespective of prior exposure or response to blinatumomab. Similar to data published by the pediatric CAR-T cell groups, our data draw speculation that adult patients who did not respond to blinatumomab experience shorter overall survival following brexu-cel compared to those who responded to or did not receive blinatumomab. This should be confirmed in a larger, prospective clinical trial. Because this analysis could not account for patients who achieved durable remission after blinatumomab, these differences may not reflect superiority of sequencing brexu-cel before blinatumomab. The higher number of CD19-negative relapses in the blinatumomab-exposed cohort add to the interest in pursuing strategies to address antigen escape following CAR-T cell therapy directed against a previously targeted antigen.

Introduction: Brexucabtagene autoleucel (brexu-cel) is an autologous anti-CD19 chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cell therapy approved for adults with relapsed/refractory B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia (R/R B-ALL). Bridging therapy, defined as anti-leukemia therapy given between apheresis and lymphodepleting chemotherapy, was permitted on the pivotal ZUMA-3 trial. The optimal bridging therapy is unknown in this setting. Here we report patient and disease characteristics in those receiving bridging therapies prior to brexu-cel and the impact of bridging on clinical outcomes in a large multicenter cohort. Methods and Results: ROCCA includes 25 US institutions contributing retrospective data from 152 B-ALL patients treated with standard of care brexu-cel between 2021-2023. Ninety-nine patients (65%) received bridging therapy, while 53 patients (35%) received no bridging therapy. Bridging therapy consisted of cytotoxic chemotherapy ( n=65, 66%), immunotherapy ( n=26, 26%; 23 inotuzumab, 3 blinatumomab), tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) ( n=20, 20%; 16 ponatinib), steroids only ( n=10, 10%), and intrathecal chemotherapy ( n=22, 22%). The median age of the cohort was 46 (IQR 32-61). Patients were heavily pre-treated with a median of 4 prior lines of therapy. The median days from apheresis to infusion was 33 (IQR 26-42). 119 patients had known pre-apheresis blast counts; the bridging group had higher pre-apheresis blast burden, with 21 of 76 patients (28%) having ≥ 50% blasts compared to only 5 of 43 patients (12%) in the no bridging group ( p=0.02). In addition, more patients who received bridging had pre-apheresis extramedullary disease (32% vs. 15%, p=0.02). All other baseline characteristics were similar between the two groups (Table 1). Fifty-four (54%) patients had response assessment after bridging therapy and prior to brexu-cel infusion. In patients who received inotuzumab for pre-apheresis active disease, defined as ≥ 5% blasts, 6 of 13 (46%) who had post-bridging assessment achieved a complete response (CR; 5 measurable residual disease (MRD)+, 1 MRD-), with a mean proportional reduction in blast burden of 46% from baseline. In contrast, after chemotherapy bridging, only 2 of 16 patients (13%) with pre-apheresis active disease had a CR. Patients receiving chemotherapy bridging had a mean proportional increase in blast burden of 4.4%. In recipients of TKI bridging, 2 of 4 patients (50%) with pre-apheresis active disease had a CR. Compared to no bridging, patients in the bridging group had similar rates of grade 3 or 4 CRS (9% bridging vs. 8% no bridging, p=0.73) and grade 3 or 4 ICANS (34% vs. 26%, p=0.32). In univariate analysis, there was no statistically significant difference in day 28 response with 63 patients (72%) achieving MRD- complete response in the bridging group as compared to 36 patients (78%) in the no bridging group ( p=0.60). Non-relapse mortality was similar between the two groups (17% bridging vs. 9% no bridging, p=0.20). Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were superior in the no bridging group: 1-year OS 74.7% vs 56.8% (log-rank p=0.04), and 1-year PFS 57.3% vs 41.7% (log-rank p=0.04). In a multivariate analysis stratified by bridging and pre-apheresis disease burden, patients with pre-apheresis blasts ≥ 5% and bridging had worse survival than ≥ 5% blasts and no bridging: 1-year OS 45.3% vs. 87.5% and 1-year PFS 27.7% vs. 64.3% (Figure 1). However, patients with < 5% blasts had similar survival regardless of bridging. Conclusions: In our real-world analysis, adults with R/R B-ALL receiving bridging therapy had a higher disease burden at baseline. Despite greater baseline disease, there were no significant differences in toxicity and day 28 response in those receiving bridging therapy vs. not. While survival was inferior in patients with pre-apheresis active disease who received bridging, this may be confounded by the degree of tumor burden. In patients with < 5% blasts pre-apheresis, bridging did not impact survival. Furthermore, inotuzumab bridging demonstrated the most significant disease debulking. However, the comparisons in this study are limited by the variability in practice for post-bridging disease reassessment and the small proportion of patients with active disease who did not receive bridging. A more uniform approach to peri-CAR disease assessment would enable more robust study of optimal bridging strategies.

AbstractCheckpoint inhibitor (CPI) therapy with anti–PD-1 antibodies has been associated with mixed outcomes in small cohorts of patients with relapsed aggressive B-cell lymphomas after CAR-T failure. To define CPI therapy efficacy more definitively in this population, we retrospectively evaluated clinical outcomes in a large cohort of 96 patients with aggressive B-cell lymphomas receiving CPI therapy after CAR-T failure across 15 US academic centers. Most patients (53%) had diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, were treated with axicabtagene ciloleucel (53%), relapsed early (≤180 days) after CAR-T (83%), and received pembrolizumab (49%) or nivolumab (43%). CPI therapy was associated with an overall response rate of 19% and a complete response rate of 10%. Median duration of response was 221 days. Median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were 54 and 159 days, respectively. Outcomes to CPI therapy were significantly improved in patients with primary mediastinal B-cell lymphoma. PFS (128 vs 51 days) and OS (387 vs 131 days) were significantly longer in patients with late (>180 days) vs early (≤180 days) relapse after CAR-T. Grade ≥3 adverse events occurred in 19% of patients treated with CPI. Most patients (83%) died, commonly because of progressive disease. Only 5% had durable responses to CPI therapy. In the largest cohort of patients with aggressive B-cell lymphoma treated with CPI therapy after CAR-T relapse, our results reveal poor outcomes, particularly among those relapsing early after CAR-T. In conclusion, CPI therapy is not an effective salvage strategy for most patients after CAR-T, where alternative approaches are needed to improve post–CAR-T outcomes.

The NCCN Guidelines for Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation (HCT) provide an evidence- and consensus-based approach for the use of autologous and allogeneic HCT in the management of malignant diseases in adult patients. HCT is a potentially curative treatment option for patients with certain types of malignancies; however, recurrent malignancy and transplant-related complications often limit the long-term survival of HCT recipients. The purpose of these guidelines is to provide guidance regarding aspects of HCT, including pretransplant recipient evaluation, hematopoietic cell mobilization, and treatment of graft-versus-host disease—a major complication of allogeneic HCT—to enable the patient and clinician to assess management options in the context of an individual patient’s condition. These NCCN Guidelines Insights provide a summary of the important recent updates to the NCCN Guidelines for HCT, including the incorporation of a newly developed section on the Principles of Conditioning for HCT.

TPS7051 Background: The prognosis for adults with relapsed or refractory BCP-ALL is poor. MRD+ is the strongest predictor of relapse. Blinatumomab, a CD3/CD19-directed BiTE® (bispecific T-cell engager) molecule, is an effective treatment for patients with MRD+.1 Blinatumomab is administered as a continuous intravenous infusion (cIV) 28 days per cycle. Severe adverse events (AEs) such as cytokine release syndrome (CRS) and neurologic toxicity (NT) may occur; thus, hospitalization is recommended for the first 3 days of cycle 1 and the first 2 days of cycle 2 for MRD+ patients. However, the incidence of severe AEs is low in MRD+ BCP-ALL patients (CRS: 2%, NT: 13%).1 We believe that with the use of effective digital monitoring devices, blinatumomab can be safely administered for the entire 28-day cIV cycle as an outpatient. Methods: Adult patients (n = 45) with BCP-ALL in complete remission and MRD+ (≥0.1% blasts) are being enrolled at 25 planned treatment sites, endpoint: grade ≥3 AE during monitoring (Amgen NCT04506086). Patient suitability for blinatumomab and outpatient monitoring is established. Patients will receive 2-4 cycles of blinatumomab. Cycles are initiated in the outpatient setting, digital monitoring devices activated and attached, and patients sent home. Once home, patients set up the home hub and real-time remote data transfer to the healthcare professional (HCP) begins. The devices are worn continuously, 24 hours a day for the first 3 days of cycle 1 and the first 2 days of cycle 2 only. Devices: Current Health’s Wearable Monitoring System (CHWMS) is an FDA-cleared platform for wireless and wearable health monitoring of patients at home. The CHWMS provides continuous oxygen saturation, respiratory rate, and heart rate; an axillary temperature sensor is worn and provides continuous temperature. Patients manually measure blood pressure every 3-6 hours around the clock. Patients have an integrated mobile device (tablet) to initiate contact with the HCP if needed. HCP/designee has a mobile device (smart phone) and receives vital signs as a constant live feed transmitted from the CHWMS device. The CHWMS platform generates a loud audible alert based on pre-specified vital sign alarming thresholds or if there is an interruption in data transfer. HCP may initiate direct audio and video contact with the patient, assess the patient’s condition, and make an appropriate intervention. HCP may also initiate patient contact in the absence of an alert. Patients are required to have a caregiver present during the entire period of outpatient monitoring. Patients have a full set of replacement devices as well as a 24/7 hotline for device support. Trial enrollment is underway. This study may generate feasibility data on the effectiveness of home monitoring during blinatumomab infusion in patients with MRD+ BCP-ALL. 1Gökbuget, Blood, 2018. Clinical trial information: NCT04506086.