Grover, Punita

Abstract Introduction: Brexucabtagene autoleucel (Brexu-cel) is a CD19-targeted chimeric antigen receptor (CAR-)T cell therapy approved for treatment of relapsed/refractory (r/r) B-ALL. Brexu-cel's approval was founded on data from the ZUMA-3 trial, in which 78 patients (pts) were treated at the pivotal dose of 1x10e6 CAR-T cells/kg, resulting in a complete remission (CR) rate of 73%. Three-year follow-up from ZUMA-3 demonstrated median relapse-free and overall survival (RFS/OS) of 11.6 and 25.6 months (mos) for all treated pts. Amongst responders, the median OS was 60.4 mos for those who did not receive a subsequent allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplant (HCT) (n=43), but only 36.3 months for those who did (n=14). This has led some to conclude that HCT may not be beneficial following brexu-cel therapy for r/r B-ALL; however, it must be noted that 29 (37%) of the pts treated on ZUMA-3 received brexu-cel for post-HCT relapse. T cells collected from individuals who relapse in the post-HCT setting are largely of donor origin, making the CAR-T product comparable to a genetically modified donor lymphocyte infusion (DLI). The immunology at play in this scenario may be different from that in which CAR-T cells are of truly autologous origin. Methods: The Real-World Outcomes Collaborative for CAR-T in ALL (ROCCA) consortium database includes pt characteristics and outcomes of brexu-cel therapy given as standard-of-care across 41 US institutions. We identified pts who achieved an MRD negative (neg) CR by either flow cytometry (minimum sensitivity 10e-4) or NGS following brexu-cel for r/r Ph neg B-ALL and categorized them into three groups with regard to use of HCT: Never HCT, Pre-CAR HCT, or Post-CAR HCT. Pts who received second HCT following brexu-cel for post-HCT relapse (n=9) were excluded. Pt/disease characteristics, RFS, and OS were assessed for each group, landmarked at 73 days after brexu-cel infusion (the median time to consolidative allogeneic HCT). Results: In the ROCCA database we identified 165 pts who achieved MRD neg CR following brexu-cel, amongst whom 69 never underwent HCT, 49 were transplanted pre-CAR (ie, brexu-cel served as a genetically modified DLI), and 47 underwent post-CAR consolidative HCT while in CR. The median follow-up is 373 days. The median age was higher in the Never HCT group (49, range 19-83) in comparison with the Pre-CAR HCT (40, 24-72) and Post-CAR HCT (34, 18-70) groups. Thirty-five percent were >60yo in the Never HCT group vs 20% in the Pre-CAR HCT and 9% in the Post-CAR HCT groups. Ph-like disease was present in 38%, 29%, and 43% of the Never HCT, Pre-CAR HCT, and Post-CAR HCT groups, respectively (p=0.35). No significant differences were observed in pre-apheresis bone marrow blasts, presence of CNS disease at apheresis, prior blinatumomab or inotuzumab treatment, or use of bridging therapy across the groups, though there was a higher prevalence of non-CNS extramedullary disease in the Pre- and Post-CAR HCT groups (32, 39%) vs the Never HCT group (13%) (p=0.004). A minority of pts in all groups were deemed to be in MRD neg CR prior to apheresis (6-20%). Median RFS was 260 days in the Never HCT group and not reached in the Pre- and Post-CAR HCT groups (p=0.002), with respective 1-yr RFS of 38%, 64%, and 67%. Median OS was not reached in any group and was similar for all at 1-yr at 68-79% (p=0.13). Characteristics of those in the Never HCT group who were least likely to relapse included age >60 (OR 0.22, CI 0.07-0.73 vs age 18-39, p=0.024) and those with non-Ph-like B-ALL (OR 0.33, CI 0.12-0.94, vs Ph-like, p=0.037) in univariate analyses. Conclusions: Real-world data regarding outcomes following brexu-cel therapy allow evaluation of the role for consolidative allogeneic HCT, which remains one of the most important unresolved questions in the use of CAR-T therapy for r/r B-ALL. This analysis demonstrates that a first consolidative HCT after achieving MRD neg CR with brexu-cel is associated with a significant decrease in relapse. Additionally, use of brexu-cel for post-HCT relapse is also associated with a significantly lower risk of relapse compared with those who never received an allogeneic HCT. With the current duration of followup, OS is not significantly different across the three groups. These data suggest there is a benefit for relapse-free survival in pts receiving an allogeneic HCT at some point in the course of treatment for r/r Ph neg B-ALL.

ImportanceSystematic data on the association between anticancer therapies and thromboembolic events (TEEs) in patients with COVID-19 are lacking.ObjectiveTo assess the association between anticancer therapy exposure within 3 months prior to COVID-19 and TEEs following COVID-19 diagnosis in patients with cancer.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsThis registry-based retrospective cohort study included patients who were hospitalized and had active cancer and laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. Data were accrued from March 2020 to December 2021 and analyzed from December 2021 to October 2022.ExposureTreatments of interest (TOIs) (endocrine therapy, vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitors/tyrosine kinase inhibitors [VEGFis/TKIs], immunomodulators [IMiDs], immune checkpoint inhibitors [ICIs], chemotherapy) vs reference (no systemic therapy) in 3 months prior to COVID-19.Main Outcomes and MeasuresMain outcomes were (1) venous thromboembolism (VTE) and (2) arterial thromboembolism (ATE). Secondary outcome was severity of COVID-19 (rates of intensive care unit admission, mechanical ventilation, 30-day all-cause mortality following TEEs in TOI vs reference group) at 30-day follow-up.ResultsOf 4988 hospitalized patients with cancer (median [IQR] age, 69 [59-78] years; 2608 [52%] male), 1869 had received 1 or more TOIs. Incidence of VTE was higher in all TOI groups: endocrine therapy, 7%; VEGFis/TKIs, 10%; IMiDs, 8%; ICIs, 12%; and chemotherapy, 10%, compared with patients not receiving systemic therapies (6%). In multivariable log-binomial regression analyses, relative risk of VTE (adjusted risk ratio [aRR], 1.33; 95% CI, 1.04-1.69) but not ATE (aRR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.56-1.16) was significantly higher in those exposed to all TOIs pooled together vs those with no exposure. Among individual drugs, ICIs were significantly associated with VTE (aRR, 1.45; 95% CI, 1.01-2.07). Also noted were significant associations between VTE and active and progressing cancer (aRR, 1.43; 95% CI, 1.01-2.03), history of VTE (aRR, 3.10; 95% CI, 2.38-4.04), and high-risk site of cancer (aRR, 1.42; 95% CI, 1.14-1.75). Black patients had a higher risk of TEEs (aRR, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.03-1.50) than White patients. Patients with TEEs had high intensive care unit admission (46%) and mechanical ventilation (31%) rates. Relative risk of death in patients with TEEs was higher in those exposed to TOIs vs not (aRR, 1.12; 95% CI, 0.91-1.38) and was significantly associated with poor performance status (aRR, 1.77; 95% CI, 1.30-2.40) and active/progressing cancer (aRR, 1.55; 95% CI, 1.13-2.13).Conclusions and RelevanceIn this cohort study, relative risk of developing VTE was high among patients receiving TOIs and varied by the type of therapy, underlying risk factors, and demographics, such as race and ethnicity. These findings highlight the need for close monitoring and perhaps personalized thromboprophylaxis to prevent morbidity and mortality associated with COVID-19–related thromboembolism in patients with cancer.

ImportanceCytokine storm due to COVID-19 can cause high morbidity and mortality and may be more common in patients with cancer treated with immunotherapy (IO) due to immune system activation.ObjectiveTo determine the association of baseline immunosuppression and/or IO-based therapies with COVID-19 severity and cytokine storm in patients with cancer.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsThis registry-based retrospective cohort study included 12 046 patients reported to the COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium (CCC19) registry from March 2020 to May 2022. The CCC19 registry is a centralized international multi-institutional registry of patients with COVID-19 with a current or past diagnosis of cancer. Records analyzed included patients with active or previous cancer who had a laboratory-confirmed infection with SARS-CoV-2 by polymerase chain reaction and/or serologic findings.ExposuresImmunosuppression due to therapy; systemic anticancer therapy (IO or non-IO).Main Outcomes and MeasuresThe primary outcome was a 5-level ordinal scale of COVID-19 severity: no complications; hospitalized without requiring oxygen; hospitalized and required oxygen; intensive care unit admission and/or mechanical ventilation; death. The secondary outcome was the occurrence of cytokine storm.ResultsThe median age of the entire cohort was 65 years (interquartile range [IQR], 54-74) years and 6359 patients were female (52.8%) and 6598 (54.8%) were non-Hispanic White. A total of 599 (5.0%) patients received IO, whereas 4327 (35.9%) received non-IO systemic anticancer therapies, and 7120 (59.1%) did not receive any antineoplastic regimen within 3 months prior to COVID-19 diagnosis. Although no difference in COVID-19 severity and cytokine storm was found in the IO group compared with the untreated group in the total cohort (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.80; 95% CI, 0.56-1.13, and aOR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.41-1.93, respectively), patients with baseline immunosuppression treated with IO (vs untreated) had worse COVID-19 severity and cytokine storm (aOR, 3.33; 95% CI, 1.38-8.01, and aOR, 4.41; 95% CI, 1.71-11.38, respectively). Patients with immunosuppression receiving non-IO therapies (vs untreated) also had worse COVID-19 severity (aOR, 1.79; 95% CI, 1.36-2.35) and cytokine storm (aOR, 2.32; 95% CI, 1.42-3.79).Conclusions and RelevanceThis cohort study found that in patients with cancer and COVID-19, administration of systemic anticancer therapies, especially IO, in the context of baseline immunosuppression was associated with severe clinical outcomes and the development of cytokine storm.Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04354701