Narkhede, Mayur

PURPOSE In large B-cell lymphoma (LBCL), use of high-dose methotrexate (HD-MTX) to prevent CNS relapse (so-called CNS prophylaxis) remains controversial. International guidelines continue to recommend HD-MTX in patients deemed ultra high risk (UHR) because of a lack of robust data specific to these subgroups. This study was designed to examine the impact of HD-MTX specifically in UHR patients. METHODS Data from two previous retrospective analyses were combined to produce a cohort of UHR patients (≥1 of the following criteria: CNS international prognostic index score 5-6; testicular, renal/adrenal, or breast involvement; ≥3 extranodal sites), treated with or without HD-MTX. The primary outcome was CNS relapse rate (isolated or concurrent with systemic relapse) measured from diagnosis with additional landmark analysis of all responding patients with no progression event at 6 months. RESULTS Analyses were performed on 1,923 patients meeting UHR criteria. No significant difference in 3-year CNS relapse rate was observed between no HD-MTX (n = 1,051) versus HD-MTX patients (n = 872), including in multivariable analyses adjusting for baseline characteristics (3-year rate, 9.3% v 8.1%; adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 1.13 [95% CI, 0.82 to 1.57]). Analyses restricted to isolated CNS relapse also confirmed no difference (5.9% v 5.7%; adjusted HR, 1.03 [95% CI, 0.69 to 1.53]). In the landmark analysis (no HD-MTX n = 782, HD-MTX n = 773), no difference in 3-year CNS relapse was observed (6.7% v 6.6%, adjusted HR, 0.95 [95% CI, 0.62 to 1.44]). CONCLUSION To our knowledge, this is the largest international comparative data set of patients with LBCL with UHR features showing no significant reduction in CNS relapse with HD-MTX in all UHR or in any individual subgroup. Despite inherent limitations of retrospective analyses, the data strongly support previous studies in suggesting HD-MTX prophylaxis has no meaningful benefit for most patients.

Abstract Secondary central nervous system (CNS) large B-cell lymphoma (SCNSL) occurs in the de novo setting, as a CNS-isolated relapse, or synchronous (concomitant CNS and systemic) relapse. SCNSL is a devastating event without therapeutic consensus. Thus, we aimed to evaluate treatment outcomes in an international cohort. Progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and cumulative incidence of relapse (CIR, estimated using competing-risk models) were reported. Prognostic factors were identified in a 6-month landmark multivariate analysis. Outcomes after thiotepa autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) and chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy (CAR-T) delivered at relapse were compared after propensity score matching (PSM). A total of 1139 patients were included in the analysis (de novo: 537; relapsed SCNSL: 602). Two-year PFS estimates were 40.4%, 43.9%, and 16.2% for de novo SCNSL, CNS-isolated relapse, and synchronous relapse, respectively. Patients with CNS-isolated relapse demonstrated low rates of systemic recurrence (24-month CIR, 6%). Thiotepa-ASCT correlated with longer survival in de novo SCNSL (PFS: hazard ratio [HR], 0.57; P = .005; and OS: HR, 0.62; P = .023) and CNS-isolated relapses (PFS: HR, 0.55; P = .002; and OS: HR, 0.39; P< .0001). ASCT (thiotepa or no thiotepa) also associated with improved survival in synchronous relapses (PFS: HR, 0.57; P = .023; and OS: HR, 0.48; P = .019). Higher survival with thiotepa-ASCT than CAR-T was observed after PSM (PFS: HR, 0.45; P = .005 and OS: HR, 0.41; P = .014). These data support thiotepa-ASCT in eligible patients, particularly de novo disease and CNS-isolated relapses. CNS-isolated relapse was infrequently associated with systemic recurrence, supporting treatment regimens adopted from primary CNS lymphoma.

Abstract The benefit of rituximab maintenance after first-line (1L) bendamustine-rituximab (BR) in patients with mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) remains uncertain, with inconsistent results from the phase 2 MAINTAIN trial and several retrospective studies. We conducted a large retrospective study at 27 US and Canadian academic centers to examine the benefit of rituximab maintenance after BR. A total of 911 patients received 1L BR between 2010 and 2020, and 703 had an objective response and no evidence of disease progression at the 3-month post-BR landmark. Among those, 394 (56%) received rituximab maintenance and 309 (44%) did not, with largely similar baseline patient and disease characteristics. In the landmark analysis, rituximab maintenance was associated with improved event-free survival (EFS; median, 49.9 vs 29.7 months; P< .001) as well as overall survival (OS; median, 109.5 vs 74.2 months; P< .001). The EFS and OS benefits were observed across most of the subgroups. EFS and OS differences were statistically significant in those who achieved a complete response to 1L BR (n = 590; median EFS, 62.7 vs 31.1 months [P< .001]; median OS, 136.1 vs 75.3 months [P< .001]), but the analysis among those who achieved a partial response to 1L BR was limited by the small sample size. These results provide additional evidence for the survival benefit of rituximab maintenance after BR in MCL and support its use in clinical trial design and routine practice.

Abstract Introduction: Among Non-Hodgkin lymphomas (NHL), DLBCL is the most prevalent subtype (~30% of diagnoses). First-line (1L) chemoimmunotherapy cures many patients (pts), but 30-40% will relapse. Prognostic and predictive biomarkers are needed to identify pts refractory to 1L therapy or at high risk of relapse, enabling timely intervention and improved outcomes. This study evaluated tumor-informed WGS-based longitudinal ctDNA monitoring in a real-world DLBCL cohort. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed ctDNA data from 49 pts with DLBCL. Plasma samples were collected before, during, and at the end of 1L therapy (EOT, defined as ± 21 days from the last infusion (preferred when available) or ± 14 days from post-treatment PET imaging) and during surveillance/subsequent treatments. A WGS-based tumor-informed assay (Signatera™ Genome, Natera, Inc.) was used for ctDNA detection and quantification. The association of ctDNA dynamics with event-free survival (EFS) was evaluated using Cox regression analysis, restricted to pts completing at least 5 cycles of 1L therapy. Results: The median age of the cohort was 62 years (range: 56-74), and median follow-up was 22 months (range: 14-30). Pre-treatment ctDNA-positivity rate was 100% (31/31). A total of 19 pts achieved ctDNA clearance during 1L therapy (early clearance within 3 cycles, n=5; late clearance between cycle 4 and EOT, n=14). Pts with no clearance or ctDNA-positivity at EOT (n=7) had significantly inferior EFS compared to those achieving ctDNA clearance (HR 8.04, 95%CI: 1.87-34.62, p=0051). On further stratifying the clearance group and comparing with no clearances, pts with early clearance had superior outcomes (HR 13.22, 95%CI: 1.48-1741.94, p=0.0166), relative to late clearances (HR 5.65, 95%CI 1.46–25.16, p=0.0129). Notably, all 5 pts with early ctDNA clearance remained serially negative and relapse-free. Of the 49 pts, 9 proceeded to chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy (CAR-T). Among 6 of these pts with available ctDNA results pre and post therapy, all 3 who stayed ctDNA-positive after CAR-T relapsed (1.3, 2, and 4.5 months post-infusion); 1 pt with pre- and post-CAR-T ctDNA-negativity and 2 pts with ctDNA clearance post-CAR-T remained relapse-free for 9.6, 15.9, and 22.4 months, respectively. Taken together, the PPV and NPV for a single ctDNA time point post CAR-T infusion were 100% for predicting long-term clinical outcomes. Conclusions: Our data support longitudinal ctDNA monitoring as a valuable prognostic and predictive biomarker in DLBCL. ctDNA clearance, particularly early clearance within the first 3 cycles of 1L therapy, is associated with improved pt outcomes. Longitudinal ctDNA monitoring and dynamics can enable identification of high-risk pts who do not clear ctDNA and may benefit from earlier referral for CAR-T. Furthermore, ctDNA monitoring pre- and post-CAR-T infusion is predictive of treatment response and can identify pts at high risk of relapse.

Abstract Epcoritamab and glofitamab are CD20-directed bispecific antibodies (BsAbs) approved in the United States for relapsed or refractory (R/R) diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL). Limited data exist for patients treated outside of trials. Patients with R/R DLBCL receiving commercial epcoritamab or glofitamab between 1 January 2023 and 15 October 2024 were collected from 21 United States institutions. Among 245 patients, 156 received epcoritamab and 89 received glofitamab, 113 were refractory to front-line therapy, 40 had MYC and BCL2 and/or BCL6 rearrangements, 147 received prior chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy, and 174 patients would have been ineligible for registrational trials. The overall response rate (ORR) for epcoritamab and glofitamab was 51% (23% complete response, [CR]) and 53% (30% CR), respectively. Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 2.6 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 2.0-3.8 months), and median overall survival (OS) was 7.8 months (95% CI, 6.2-11.0 months). The 6-month PFS was 36% (95% CI, 30-44) and the 6-month OS was 60% (95% CI, 54-67). Both trial ineligibility and undetectable CD20 pre-BsAbs portended shorter PFS and OS. Of 17 individuals with paired biopsies, 15 (88.2%) lost CD20 expression after BsAbs with a median time to progression of 3.7 months. This analysis including patients with R/R DLBCL shows the ORR to CD3/CD20 BsAbs was comparable to pivotal trials, although PFS and OS were lower. Baseline undetectable levels of CD20 were associated with poor outcomes. These results demonstrate the activity of BsAbs in R/R DLBCL, and underscore the importance of target antigen expression.

Introduction: Scant data exist on prognostic factors, survival and treatment (Tx)-related outcomes in SCNSL. We conducted a multicenter international analysis to identify prognostic factors and outcomes in SCNSL at diagnosis (de novo), or after frontline Tx (1L) either with (concomitant) or without (isolated) systemic (syst) relapse. Methods: This study collected data from patients (pts) treated between 2001-2023 at 35 centers. Overall (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were calculated from SCNSL diagnosis to first event (death for OS, relapse/death for PFS) or last follow-up. Uni- (UVA) and multivariable (MVA) Cox analyses were performed to assess prognostic factors; Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate survival. Results: 1173 (US: 863, UK: 273, Canada: 37) pts with SCNSL were included. Baseline characteristics were median age: 62 years (interquartile range 52.5-69), male sex: 58.7%, elevated LDH: 71.1%, stage III/IV: 88.6%, HIV: 3%, transformed LBCL (tLBCL): 13.8%, non-germinal center B-cell like (non-GCB) subtype: 52.3%, double expressor (DE): 40%, MYC rearrangement (MYC-R): 28.3%, MYC/BCL2 double hit: 16.6%, MYC/BCL2/BCL6 triple hit (TH): 6.1%. Among 522 pts with de novo SCNSL, 84.2% had involvement of a single CNS compartment (44.7% brain parenchyma; 40.4% leptomeningeal [lepto]). 1L regimens included 36.2% R-CHOP with high-dose methotrexate (HD-MTX), 12.5% MARIETTA-type, and 9.8% R-CODOX-M/IVAC; 54.6% received intrathecal chemotherapy. Consolidation Thiotepa-based autologous stem cell transplant (TT-ASCT) occurred in 15.3%. The majority of pts who underwent TT-ASCT had previously achieved CR or PR in syst (92.5%) and CNS (72.5%) compartments. At median follow-up 25.7 months (mos), subsequent relapse was observed in 27.5% TT-ASCT recipients: 36.3% had isolated CNS, 27.4% syst, and 36.3% concomitant. 588 pts presented with SCNS after 1L (66.2% isolated, 33.8% concomitant). Brain parenchyma involvement was observed in 56.8%, lepto in 22.6%. Tx included 31.6% HD-MTX combination (eg, R-MPV, MTR); 18.4% HD-MTX +/- rituximab; 16.2% MARIETTA-type; and 9.4% platinum-based regimen. Consolidation TT-ASCT occurred in 22.4% (n=132), and 13.8% (n=81) received CAR-T cell therapy (excluding subsequent relapses in de novo group). Syst (65.1%) & CNS (69.1%) responses (CR/PR) were higher before TT-ASCT compared to CAR-T cell (49.5% & 54.5%, respectively). After TT-ASCT, 52 pts (39.3%) relapsed, mainly in the CNS (n=30, 57.7%), with only 4 (7.7%) concomitant. After CAR-T, 48 pts (59.3%) relapsed: 15 (31.2%) isolated in CNS and 15 (31.2%) concomitant. 12-month cumulative incidence of relapse (with death as competing risk) was 21.1% after TT-ASCT and 55.8% after CAR-T. In 63 pts (5.4%), the first CNS event occurred >2 lines of Tx. With median follow-up of the entire cohort of 24.6 mos, median PFS and OS were 11 and 21 mos, respectively. mPFS and mOS were significantly better in pts with de novo SCNSL (13.4 & 47.4 mos) compared to SCNSL after 1L (10.4 & 14.2 mos) and >2 lines of Tx (6.5 & 9.7 mos); P<0.0001. Factors associated with significantly shorter OS in UVA across all presentations were age >60, male sex, GCB subtype, MYC-R, tLBCL, DE, TH, elevated LDH, ECOG PS ≥2, SCNSL after 1L (vs. de novo), and failure to achieve syst/CNS response to 1L. Of these, age >60, male sex, MYC-R, ECOG PS ≥2, and failure to achieve response to 1L remained significant in MVA. In de novo cases, age >60, DE, ECOG PS≥2, and failure to achieve syst/CNS response to 1L were associated with poorer OS; for pts with SCNSL after 1L, age >60, GCB subtype, and ECOG PS ≥2 were significant. Pts treated with HD-MTX-based regimens after 1L experienced longer OS than those treated with platinum regimens or high-dose cytarabine. In de novo cases, TT-ASCT was significantly associated with longer OS (HR=0.58; P=0.025) in MVA after adjusting for significant factors, 1L type, and response. For SCNSL at relapse, TT-ASCT (HR=0.34; P<.0001) and isolated SCNSL presentation (vs. concomitant HR=0.70, P=0.007) were associated with longer OS, adjusting for significant factors, type of second-line Tx, & site of CNS relapse. Conclusions: This study represents the largest analysis of SCNSL inclusive of all modes of presentation. Concomitant SCNSL at relapse was associated with poor outcomes, while TT-ASCT consolidation was associated with improved OS in de novo & relapsed disease. Despite advances in LBCL SCNSL remains an unmet therapeutic need.

Introduction: Bispecific antibodies (BsAbs) epcoritamab (Epco) and glofitamab (Glofit) are approved in the US for the treatment of patients (pts) with relapsed or refractory (r/r) large B-cell lymphomas (LBCLs) based upon high response rates and manageable toxicity profiles reported in pivotal trials. However, data on outcomes for pts treated with BsAbs outside of clinical trials are limited. As such, we sought to investigate the safety and efficacy of Epco and Glofit for the treatment of pts with r/r LBCLs in real-world settings. Methods: We performed a retrospective study including 19 US centers evaluating pts with r/r LBCLs receiving commercially available Epco or Glofit between 2023 and 2024. Baseline characteristics and outcomes were extracted from medical records. Efficacy outcomes included overall response rate (ORR), complete and partial response (CR, PR) rates, progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS), analyzed using the Kaplan Meier method. Key safety outcomes included cytokine release syndrome (CRS) and immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome (ICANS). Results: As of May 31, 2024, a total of 209 pts with r/r LBCLs were treated with Epco (n=139) or Glofit (n=70). Median age at BsAb start was 67 years (interquartile range [IQR] 58-76). Most were male (62.2%), and the most common histology was diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (n=155 [74.2%]). Of pts with molecular testing (n=168), 34 (20.2%) had double/triple hit lymphoma. Most (78.9%) had Ann Arbor stage III-IV disease and 91% had an ECOG performance status of ≤1. Median number of lines of treatment before BsAb was 3 (range 1-12). Of pts with known response assessment following front-line therapy, 54 (32.1%) had primary refractory disease, defined as failure to achieve PR or CR to front-line therapy. Most pts (n=126 [60.3%]) received prior chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy and 21 (10.0%) received prior autologous hematopoietic progenitor cell transplant. CD20 expression was assessed in 106 biopsies (50.7%) prior to BsAb and was positive in 90 (84.9%). A total of 172 pts were response-evaluable. The best ORR was 50.6%, with CR in 41 (23.8%), PR in 46 (26.7%), stable disease in 10 (5.8%), and progressive disease in 75 (43.6%). The ORR and CR rates were 49% and 23% for Epco, and 53% and 25% for Glofit, respectively. With a median follow-up of 5 months, the median PFS was 2.7 months (95% CI 2.0, 3.9) and median OS was 7.2 months (95% CI 6.1, not reached [NR]). The estimated PFS and OS at six months were 35% (95% CI 29%-43%) and 59% (95% CI 52%-67%), respectively. For pts who relapsed after CAR T-cell therapy, the median PFS and OS were 2.5 (95% CI 1.8, 4.7) and 7.8 (95% CI 6.2, NR) months, respectively. Pts without detectable CD20 expression via immunohistochemistry or flow cytometry prior to BsAb therapy had significantly inferior outcomes (PFS 1.1 vs 3.4 months, P < 0.001 and OS 1.3 vs 13 months, P < 0.001) compared to pts with detectable CD20. CRS of any grade occurred in 82 pts (39.2%), corresponding to 51.1% and 28.6% of pts treated with Epco and Glofit, respectively. Grade ≥3 CRS occurred in 9 (4.3%), all of whom received Epco. CRS was treated with tocilizumab in 43 pts (53.1%). ICANS occurred in 24 (11.5%) pts; any grade ICANS occurred in 13.7% and 7.1% of pts treated with Epco and Glofit, respectively. Grade ≥3 ICANS occurred in 6 pts (2.9%), 5 of which received Epco (3.6%). Of those experiencing ICANS, 66.0% were treated with corticosteroids. Two pts had deaths attributed to ICANS and one to CRS. A total of 122 (58.4%) pts discontinued therapy after a median of 3 cycles (range 0-48), 91 (74.6%) due to disease progression and 31 (25.4%) due to adverse events (15 due to infection, 3 due to ICANS, 2 due to CRS, and 11 for other reasons). Conclusions: In this heavily pretreated group with adverse disease features and high rate of CAR T exposure, the response rates, PFS, and OS following BsAb therapy were lower compared to pivotal trials. Poor outcomes were observed for those without detectable CD20. Rates of ICANS and grade ≥3 CRS were higher than reported in pivotal trials, as was the rate of discontinuation of therapy due to adverse events. Future efforts to improve outcomes may include intensified dose escalation protocols to more rapidly achieve disease control, combination therapies, and characterization of clinicopathologic factors that predict response to BsAb to identify subgroups of pts who can derive maximal benefit from these agents.

Introduction: Nearly 50-60% of the patients withDiffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) can be cured by front line chemoimmunotherapy. Current risk stratification modalities include cell-of-origin (germinal center (GCB) or non-GCB (activated B-cell [ABC])) subtyping, use of the revised International Prognostic Index (R-IPI), Ki-67 proliferation index assessment, and cytogenetic aberration detection. However, a novel approach for molecular residual disease (MRD) detection and treatment monitoring is needed to improve patient outcomes. Methods: A personalized and tumor-informed multiplex PCR assay (Signatera™ bespoke mPCR NGS assay) was used for the detection and quantification of ctDNA in a prospective clinical cohort of patients with DLBCL. Serial ctDNA testing was performed at various time points collected at the treating physician's discretion, including pretreatment (baseline), during first-line therapy, during and post-salvage therapy, at the end of treatment, and during surveillance, up to the last clinical follow-up. ctDNA clearance was defined as change in ctDNA status (positive to negative) from the pre-treatment time point to the subsequent time point. Event-free survival (EFS) was defined as the time elapsed since the initial ctDNA clearance or PET imaging, for those without ctDNA clearance, during which the patient did not experience progression, death or treatment with salvage therapy. EFS was censored at the last date of followup if the patient was alive and without an event. Overall survival (OS) was defined as the elapsed time after primary treatment until death from any cause. Univariate and multivariable models were analyzed using Cox proportional models. Results: In this retrospective evaluation of commercial ctDNA testing in patients with stage I-IV DLBCL, a total of 50 patients (I:3, II:12, III: 4, and IV: 29;median age: 59 years) were analyzed. Patients were followed up for a median of 12.68 months (inter quartile range: 7.9-17.7 months). Of the 50 patients, 41 had pre-treatment (baseline) time points available and ctDNA was detected in 95% (39/41) of patients. Since the majority of the patients had stage IV disease, median ctDNA detection levels were observed to be high (overall median: 534 MTM/ml, range: 0-5957 MTM/ml; I median: 9.6 MTM/mL [range: 0.2-2822 MTM/mL], II median: 53 MTM/mL [range: 0.8-862 MTM/mL], III median: 368 [range: 2-940 MTM/mL], IV median: 1011 MTM/mL [range: 74-5958 MTM/mL]). Clearance of ctDNA at any point during first-line therapy was associated with improved outcomes (EFS, HR: 8.3, 95% CI: 2.56-27.0, p<0.0001 and OS, HR: 15.2, 95% CI: 1.53-149, p=0.0021), compared to patients who remained ctDNA-positive. Furthermore, 48% (13/27) of patients were found to clear their ctDNA upon the completion of the first cycle of treatment. On comparing baseline ctDNA levels with other clinicopathological risk factors, high ctDNA levels were observed to be strongly correlated with higher R-IPI scores (0-2 vs. 3-5; p=0.0008) and higher stage (I-II vs. III-IV; p=0.0007). Additionally, multivariate analysis determined that ctDNA clearance significantly outperformed all other clinicopathologic risk factors associated with EFS (HR: 48.8, 95% CI:1.2-2005, p=0.04). Finally, ctDNA clearance predicted complete response (CR)/no evidence of disease (NED) on average 95 days (range: 0-14.7 months) ahead of PET imaging or biopsy. Conclusions: In this study utilizing a real-world cohort of patients with stage I-IV DLBCL, ctDNA clearance during first-line therapy was prognostic for EFS and OS and preceded clinical response. ctDNA testing in patients with DLBCL may enable personalized surveillance, intervention, and/or trial options, ultimately improving patient outcomes.

Introduction: Diffuse Large B-cell Lymphoma (DLBCL) are aggressive B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphomas (NHL). One particular subtype, Primary Mediastinal B-cell Lymphoma (PMBCL), is often grouped with DLBCL, but it possesses distinct biological and clinical characteristics. While initial therapy successfully cures approximately two-thirds of patients (pts), those who do not respond or experience progression within the first two years have a poor prognosis despite novel cellular therapies and bispecifics and ultimately succumb to their disease. There is a pressing need for more effective therapeutic approaches in this patient population. Recent advances in the understanding of DLBCL pathogenesis have led to the targeting of various signaling pathways, including the PI3K-AKT-mTOR pathway. One such drug, copanlisib (C), a pan-PI3K inhibitor with potent PI3K-α/PI3K-δ inhibition, exhibited activity in both indolent and aggressive NHL. In preclinical studies using a DLBCL mouse model, treatment with C effectively reduced the immunosuppressive tumor-infiltrating T-regulatory cells (Tregs). Moreover, when combined with a surrogate anti-mouse programmed death -1 (PD-1) blocker, C demonstrated significant in vivo responses (75%) compared to the monotherapy groups (0%). These findings support the rationale for exploring the combination of nivolumab, a PD-1 blocker, and copanlisib (C-N) in DLBCL. Thus, a phase 2 prospective study has been developed, focusing on two relapsed/refractory (RR) cohorts (DLBCL and PMBCL), treated with the combination of C-N. A prespecified interim analysis was planned upon enrollment of 14 pts. Herein, we report outcomes of the 12 enrolled pts, as the study was halted prematurely due to a safety signal deemed possibly related to the combination. Study design: C 60 mg was given intravenously on days 1, 8, and 15 during cycles 1-8, and on days 1 and 15 in subsequent cycles. N 240 mg IV was given on days 1 and 15 during cycles 1-8, and 480 mg on day 1 on subsequent cycles. Each treatment cycle is 28 days. Therapy was given for up to 2 years, as long as there is no disease progression or unacceptable side effects. The primary objective of the study is to determine the ORR, which includes complete and partial responses (CR+PR). Secondary objectives include evaluating the safety of the combination, as well as assessing progression-free survival (PFS), duration of response (DOR), CR, and overall survival (OS). The study plan was to enroll a maximum of 106 pts, including a safety cohort of 6 pts. The study received funding from Bayer and conducted through NCI-CTEP (NCI Protocol #10193; NCT03484819). Results: Twelve pts who received at least one cycle of C-N were included in this analysis. Pt characteristics are illustrated in table 1. All enrolled pts had DLBCL histology. Only one patient received a prior autologous stem cell transplant. Interestingly 4/12 received prior chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy (CART). Of the 12 enrolled pts, seven were evaluated for response. The ORR was 25% (3/12) (95% CI: 5 - 57%), all CR. The median number of cycles received was 2.5 (range 1-24) with two pts receiving 23 and 24 cycles. Observed grade 3 and higher adverse events (AEs) were as follows: non-hematologic AEs in 10/12 (83.3%), while hematologic AEs were seen in 5/12 (41.7%) pts. A relatively higher incidence of cardiac events (4/12) were noted including one cardiac arrest after one cycle of therapy, and four atrial fibrillation events, all grade 3, but only two were deemed possibly attributed to therapy. The cardiac arrest was deemed unrelated to therapy. Conclusions: C-N combination had modest clinical activity in pts with R/R DLBCL with some prolonged responses. However, due to the relatively high number of cardiac events and the changing therapeutic landscape with recent approvals, a decision was made to halt the study. These findings likely reflect possibly older and sicker patient population. Biomarker studies for predictors of response are under consideration.