Yi, Shuhua

7078 Background: Lisaftoclax is a novel, oral, highly selective, potent BCL-2 inhibitor in development. In an ibrutinib-resistant patient-derived WM xenograft/preclinical model, lisaftoclax + ibrutinib has a strong synergistic effect. This report provides updated efficacy and safety data of lisaftoclax-based therapies (including combinations with ibrutinib) in pts with WM. Methods: In this global, open-label, phase 1b/2 multicenter study, pts with WM were enrolled in 3 arms: Arm A (lisaftoclax) included BTKi-resistant/intolerant pts; Arm B (lisaftoclax + ibrutinib), treatment-naïve pts; and Arm C (lisaftoclax + rituximab), BTKi-naïve relapsed/refractory pts. Lisaftoclax was escalated from 400 to 1,200 mg using a modified toxicity probability interval design. A 3-day ramp-up was used for pts at high risk of tumor lysis syndrome (TLS). Objectives were efficacy, safety, and pharmacokinetics (PK) assessments (responses assessed per IWWM criteria). Results: As of January 25, 2024, 46 pts were enrolled and treated at doses of up to 1,000 (Arm A), 1,200 (Arm B), and 800 mg (Arm C; Table). The median (range) treatment duration was 11 (1-28; Arm A), 23.5 (1-34; B), and 11.5 (5-33; C) months. Objective response rates (PR, VGFR, CR) were: 41.7% (Arm A), 90.9% (B), and 37.5% (C). In Arm A, pts with wild-type CXCR4 (n = 7) had better overall response to lisaftoclax than the CXCR4mut group (n = 3). No significant difference was observed between pts with/without CXCR4mut in Arms B and C. In Arm B, 1 DLT (grade 3 clinical TLS due to preexisting renal impairment) was reported at 1,200 mg; 1 grade 3 laboratory TLS, primarily attributed to dehydration and concomitant symptomatic therapies, occurred at 1,000 mg; abnormal electrolytes resolved after 1 day of drug interruption, without recurrence. Grade ≥ 3 lisaftoclax-related AEs included neutropenia (15.2%), thrombocytopenia (4.3%), decreased leukocytes (4.3%), TLS (4.3%), anemia (2.2%), weight loss (2.2%), and septic shock (2.2%). Ventricular arrhythmia was not observed. One pt required dose reduction because of neutropenia. The MTD was not reached. Lisaftoclax + ibrutinib showed a PK exposure comparable to lisaftoclax or ibrutinib alone, indicating no potential drug-drug interactions. Conclusions: Lisaftoclax alone and combined with ibrutinib or rituximab was well tolerated and demonstrated measurable effects in pts with naïve or BTKi-treatment-failed WM. (CT.gov: NCT04260217; Internal ID: APG2575WU101) *Co-first authors: ML and SA. Clinical trial information: NCT04260217 . [Table: see text]

Background The class of CD20×CD3 bispecific antibodies (BsAbs) has emerged as an important anti-lymphoma modality for patients (pts) with R/R B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma. Odronextamab, a novel, off-the-shelf, CD20×CD3 BsAb, has previously demonstrated compelling efficacy in both R/R diffuse large B-cell lymphoma and R/R FL. In pts with R/R FL, odronextamab monotherapy achieved 75% complete response (CR) rates and encouraging durability of responses, and showed generally manageable safety, in the Phase 2 ELM-2 study (NCT03888105; Kim TM, et al. ASH. 2022). Here, we report the results of a second, pre-specified interim analysis of ELM-2. Methods Intravenous odronextamab was administered weekly in 21-day cycles during Cycles (C) 1-4. Optimization of the step-up regimen to further mitigate cytokine release syndrome (CRS) was reported previously (Kim TM, et al. ASH. 2022). Odronextamab was administered with steroid prophylaxis and step-up doses of 0.7/4/20 mg during C1, followed by 80 mg on Days 1, 8, and 15 of C2-4. After C4, odronextamab maintenance treatment continued at 160 mg every 2 weeks until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Pts who achieved a durable CR for ≥9 months transitioned to dosing every 4 weeks. A pre-specified interim analysis was performed when 80 pts had completed ≥12 months follow-up. The primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR), assessed by independent central review (ICR) according to the Lugano classification. Key secondary endpoints included CR rate, duration of response (DoR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and changes in scores of patient-reported outcomes. Minimal residual disease (MRD) was included as an exploratory endpoint. Results At data cut off (Jan 31, 2023), the global study was fully enrolled and included 140 safety-evaluable pts with FL; 128 pts were efficacy-evaluable and 85 pts had ≥12 months follow-up. The median duration of study follow-up for efficacy was 26.6 months. In the safety-evaluable FL population, median age was 60.5 years (range 22-84), 53% were male, and pts had received a median of 3 (range 2-13) prior lines of therapy. 73% of pts were refractory to their last therapy, 41% were double refractory, and 74% were refractory to an anti-CD20 antibody. 50% of pts had progression of disease within 2 years (POD24) and 29% had a prior autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplant. ORR and CR rate by ICR were 80% (102/128) and 72% (92/128), respectively, and were consistent across pts with high-risk features. Responses were durable, with both median DoR and duration of CR of 21.7 months; the probability of maintaining CR for 24 months was 48%. Median PFS was 20.7 months (95% CI: 16.7-26.5) and median OS was not reached; the probability of survival at 3 years was 63%. Patient-reported overall quality of life (QoL) scores were maintained during the course of treatment. MRD status at 12 weeks was highly predictive of PFS. Safety was generally consistent with previous reports, and no new treatment-related Grade (Gr) 5 events were recorded since the first interim analysis. The most common treatment-emergent AEs (>30% all grades) were CRS (55%), anemia (34%), neutropenia (34%), and pyrexia (33%). With the optimized 0.7/4/20 mg step-up regimen (n=72), 98% of CRS events were Gr 1/2, and only one pt had Gr 3 CRS. All CRS events resolved with supportive measures; 13 pts received tocilizumab for CRS management with the optimized regimen. Only one low-grade ICANS event was reported with the optimized regimen. Gr ≥3 infections occurred in 50 (36%) pts (Gr 5, n=14 [10%]); COVID-19 infections were reported in 46 (35%) pts (Gr 5, n=8 [6%]). Conclusions The results of this pre-specified analysis of the Phase 2 ELM-2 study continue to demonstrate deep and durable responses with odronextamab in heavily pretreated, refractory pts with R/R FL. 90% of responders were complete responders, with a 48% probability of maintaining CR for 2 years. High CR rates appear to translate to favorable, long-term survival outcomes in the setting of incurable disease. The incidence of AEs was consistent with earlier reports, with no new treatment-related Gr 5 events. Importantly, continued treatment with odronextamab had no detrimental effects on overall QoL. These data underscore the promise of odronextamab as a potentially effective agent for the management of R/R FL. Updated data will be presented.

Background: Goals of patient-centered care for management of relapsed or refractory follicular lymphoma (R/R FL) are to improve clinical outcomes while maintaining or improving health-related quality of life (HRQoL). In ELM-2 (NCT03888105), a Phase 2, open-label, multicohort, multicenter study, odronextamab monotherapy demonstrated high and durable complete response rates and generally manageable safety in patients with R/R FL. We report here, for the first time, patient-reported outcome (PRO) results from ELM-2 in patients with R/R FL. Methods: Patients with R/R FL Grade 1-3a received odronextamab IV at 80 mg weekly in 21-day cycles in Cycles (C) 1-4. Optimization of the step-up regimen to mitigate cytokine release syndrome (CRS) was reported previously. Odronextamab was administered with steroid prophylaxis and step-up doses of 0.7/4/20 mg in C1, then 80 mg on Days 1, 8, and 15 of C2-4. After C4, odronextamab maintenance continued at 160 mg every 2 weeks until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Patients with durable complete response (≥9 months) switched to dosing every 4 weeks. Patients completed EORTC QLQ-C30, FACT-Lym, and EQ-5D-3L questionnaires at Weeks 1 (baseline), 2, 3, 4, and 10, then every 8 weeks for the remainder of the first year and every 12 weeks in the second year. Results here focus on six key PRO scales: EORTC QLQ-C30 Global Health Status/Quality of Life (GHS/QOL), physical functioning (PF), role functioning (RF), and fatigue; FACT-Lym lymphoma subscale (LymS); and EQ-5D-3L visual analog score (VAS). Longitudinal analyses using mixed models for repeated measures (MMRM) were conducted through Week 50 (the last visit with ≥10 patients with PRO data). Changes from baseline were considered statistically significant if the 95% confidence interval did not contain zero. No adjustment for multiplicity was performed, hence all statistical significance is nominal. Published ranges for minimum important difference (MID) to define clinically meaningful changes are: EORTC QLQ-C30 scales, 10 points; FACT-Lym LymS, 2.9-5.4 points; and EQ-5D-3L VAS, 7-12 points. For responder and time to definitive deterioration (TTDD) analyses, the upper end of these published MID ranges was used to define deterioration or improvement. Results: At the ELM-2 interim data cutoff on 31-Jan-2023, 140 patients with R/R FL Grade 1-3a had received at least 1 dose of odronextamab. Median age was 60.5 years (range: 22-84), with 38.6% ≥65 years, 52.9% male, 57.1% White, 32.1% Asian, 52.2% ECOG=0, and 47.1% ECOG=1. Median duration of follow-up was 26.6 months (range: 6.2-37.5). PRO completion rates for EORTC-QLQ-C30, FACT-Lym, and EQ-5D-3L were high at baseline and remained high for all assessments through Week 50. At baseline, moderate levels of general health (GHS/QoL) and high levels of functioning (PF and RF) were observed that were higher (better) than reference values for general cancer or non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma (NHL). Fatigue scores at baseline were lower (less symptoms) than reference values for general cancer or NHL. EORTC QLQ-C30 GHS/QOL, PF, RF, and fatigue scores were maintained from baseline through Week 50 (Table). For EQ-5D-3L VAS, the overall estimated mean changes from baseline improved statistically significantly but did not reach MID thresholds (Table). For FACT-Lym LymS, overall estimated mean change from baseline statistically significantly improved, and scores improved statistically significantly from Weeks 10 to 42 (except Week 34), with clinically meaningful improvements at Weeks 26 and 42 (Figure). The proportion of patients reporting meaningful improvement or stability across the six scales was higher than the proportion reporting meaningful worsening through Week 50 (Table). The median TTDD for EORTC-QLQ-C30 GHS/QoL was 22.41 (95% CI: 14.59 to not yet reached) months, corresponding to the median PFS. Median TTDD was not reached for EORTC QLQ-C30 PF, FACT-Lym LymS, and EQ-5D-3L VAS scales. Conclusions: For patients with R/R FL, patient-reported HRQoL results were favorable during odronextamab treatment until disease progression, with no detriments on patient-reported symptoms, functioning, and overall quality of life. These results complement encouraging clinical efficacy, durability of responses, and tolerability observed in this highly refractory patient population and support the future role of odronextamab in the management of patients with R/R FL.

7569 Background: B-cell lymphoma 2 inhibitors (BCL-2i) are well tolerated and effective in treating B-cell lymphoproliferative disorders such as CLL. Investigational agent lisaftoclax is a novel, oral, highly selective and potent BCL-2i. Preclinical data show a strong synergistic effect of lisaftoclax plus ibrutinib in an ibrutinib-insensitive PDXWM1 model. Methods: This global, open-label, multicenter study evaluates the safety and efficacy of lisaftoclax alone and combined with ibrutinib or rituximab in pts with WM. Pts were enrolled in 3 arms: Arm A (lisaftoclax), BTKi-resistant/intolerant pts; Arm B (lisaftoclax plus ibrutinib), treatment-naïve pts; and Arm C (lisaftoclax plus rituximab), BTKi-naïve relapsed/refractory pts. Lisaftoclax was escalated from 400 to 1,200 mg using a modified toxicity probability interval design. A 3-day ramp-up was used for pts at high TLS risk. Primary objectives were pharmacokinetics (PK), safety, and efficacy assessments; responses were assessed per IWWM criteria. Results: As of January 25, 2023, 46 pts were enrolled (Arm A [n = 14]; up to 1,000 mg; Arm B [n = 24]; up to 1,200 mg; Arm C [n = 8]; up to 800 mg). Baseline characteristics are shown in the table. Median (range) treatment duration was 6 (1-18; Arm A), 14 (1-27; B), and 8 (2-26; C) months. Overall response rates (ORRs) were: Arm A, 25% (median time to response [MTTR], 4.3 months); Arm B, 90.9% (MTTR, 1.9); Arm C, 37.5% (MTTR, 4.4). No significant difference was observed between pts with and without CXCR4-mut. At 1,200 mg, 1 DLT (grade 3 clinical TLS), due to pre-existing renal impairment, was reported. At 1,000 mg, 1 grade 3 laboratory TLS occurred in Arm B because of dehydration and active symptomatic therapies; abnormal electrolytes resolved after 1 day of drug interruption, without recurrence. Grade ≥ 3 lisaftoclax-related AEs included neutropenia (13%), leukocytopenia (4.3%), anemia (2.2%), weight loss (2.2%), and septic shock (2.2%). Ventricular arrhythmias were not observed. Only 1 pt required dose reduction (due to neutropenia). MTD has not been reached. A total of 14 pts discontinued study treatment because of disease progression (n = 5) and AE (n = 1). Lisaftoclax plus ibrutinib showed a PK exposure comparable to ibrutinib alone, indicating no potential DDI. Conclusions: Lisaftoclax alone or combined with ibrutinib/rituximab demonstrated measurable effects in pts with naïve or BTKi-treatment-failed WM. Internal study identifier: APG2575WU101. *SA and ML are co-first authors. Clinical trial information: NCT04260217 . [Table: see text]

Summary Even in the era of highly active combination antiretroviral therapy (cART), patients with HIV have a disproportionate risk of developing aggressive lymphomas that are frequently Epstein‐Barr virus (EBV)‐related. Here, we investigate HIV‐associated diffuse large B‐cell lymphoma (HIV‐DLBCL) and compare EBV‐positive and EBV‐negative cases. HIV‐DLBCL were identified from two academic medical centres and characterised by immunohistochemistry, EBV status, fluorescence in situ hybridisation, cell of origin determination by gene expression profiling, and targeted deep sequencing using a custom mutation panel of 334 genes. We also applied the Lymphgen tool to determine the genetic subtype of each case. Thirty HIV‐DLBCL were identified, with a median patient age of 46 years and male predominance (5:1). Thirteen cases (48%) were EBV‐positive and 14 (52%) EBV‐negative. Nine of the 16 tested cases (56%) had MYC rearrangement, three (19%) had BCL6 (two of which were double hit MYC / BCL6 ) and none had BCL2 rearrangements. Using the Lymphgen tool, half of the cases (15) were classified as other. All HIV‐DLBCL showed mutational abnormalities, the most frequent being TP53 (37%), MYC (30%), STAT3 (27%), HIST1H1E (23%), EP300 (20%), TET2 (20%), SOCS1 (17%) and SGK1 (17%). EBV‐negative cases were mostly of germinal centre B‐cell (GCB) origin (62%), showed more frequent mutations per case (a median of 13·5/case) and significant enrichment of TP53 (57% vs. 15%; P = 0·046), SGK1 (36% vs. 0%; P = 0·04), EP300 (43% vs. 0%; P = 0·02) and histone‐modifying gene (e.g. HIST1H1E , HIST1H1D , 79% vs. 31%; P = 0·02) mutations. EBV‐positive cases were mostly of non‐GCB origin (70%), with fewer mutations per case (median 8/case; P = 0·007), and these tumours were enriched for STAT3 mutations ( P = 0·10). EBV‐positive cases had a higher frequency of MYC mutations but the difference was not significant (36% vs. 15%; P = 0·38). EBV‐association was more frequent in HIV‐DLBCLs, arising in patients with lower CD4 counts at diagnosis (median 46·5 vs. 101, P = 0·018). In the era of cART, approximately half of HIV‐DLBCL are EBV‐related. HIV‐DLBCL are enriched for MYC rearrangements, MYC mutations and generally lack BCL2 rearrangements, regardless of EBV status. Among HIV‐DLBCL, tumours that are EBV‐negative and EBV‐positive appear to have important differences, the latter arising in context of lower CD4 count, showing frequent non‐GCB origin, lower mutation burden and recurrent STAT3 mutations.