Crombie, Jennifer L.

Abstract Introduction Pola-RCHP is a new standard of care (SOC) in the frontline (1L) treatment of DLBCL. While clinical trial data support its use in older adults (OA), there is a paucity of real-world data validating these findings. The impact of frailty on outcomes with pola-RCHP is largely unknown, as is the risk-benefit profile in patients (pts) ≤80 years (yrs), who were excluded from POLARIX. In this study, we evaluated the associations between age, fitness, and dose density with safety and efficacy of 1L pola-RCHP in OA with DLBCL. Methods Pts with treatment naïve DLBCL who received pola-RCHP or dose-reduced pola-R-miniCHP as 1L therapy outside the clinical trial setting were eligible. This multicenter retrospective study included pts from 17 US centers. Baseline characteristics including markers of baseline fitness such as Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status (PS), Cumulative Illness Rating Scale-Geriatric (CIRS-G) score, presence of geriatric syndrome (GS; defined as dementia, delirium, depression, osteoporosis, incontinence, falls, failure to thrive, or neglect/abuse), and impairments in activities of daily living (ADLs; defined as bathing, dressing, toileting, transferring, feeding, or continence) were collected. Primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) in OA (age ≤70 yrs) with DLBCL. Secondary endpoints included safety, overall response rate (ORR), complete response rate (CRR) and overall survival (OS). Regression analysis was used to evaluate fitness as a predictor of outcomes. Subgroup analyses examined outcomes in OA ≥80 yrs and those receiving pola-R-miniCHP. Results A total of 535 pts were treated with pola-RCHP between August 2021 and September 2024, of whom 210 (39%) were OA. Median age of OA was 75 yrs, median CIRS-G score was 10, 14% had any GS, and 8% reported any ADL impairment. OA tended to have worse ECOG PS (≥2; 23%, p=0.009) and IPI score (3-5; 77%, p<0.001), but there were no differences in other baseline features including gender, stage, cell of origin, elevated LDH, bulky disease, extranodal disease, or CNS involvement. OA received pola-R-miniCHP more frequently (18% vs 1.5%, p<0.0001) and had similar rates of treatment completion (85%, p=0.2) as pts <70 yrs. Median follow up was 11.3 months. ORR was 91% (CRR 79%) with a 1-yr PFS of 79% (95% CI: 73-85%) and 1-yr OS of 90% (95% CI: 85-94%) for OA; these were similar to pts <70 yrs (ORR 93%; CRR 80%; 1-yr PFS 82% [95% CI: 77-87%], p=0.18; 1-yr OS 91% [95% CI: 88-95%], p=0.53]. OA had higher rates of cardiomyopathy (6.2% vs. 1.5%, p=0.004), grade 3+ (G3+) neutropenia (38% vs. 27%, p=0.013), G3+ thrombocytopenia (22% vs. 11%, p<0.001) and hospitalization (38% vs 26%, p=0.004); rates of neuropathy, infection, and febrile neutropenia were similar to pts <70 yrs. Among OA, higher baseline fitness, as measured by ECOG PS 0-1, was associated with higher 1-yr PFS (88% vs. 63%, p<0.0001) and 1-yr OS (96% vs. 74%, p<0.0001) and a lower rate of hospitalization (30% vs. 65%, p<0.001). A lower comorbidity burden (CIRS-G <6) was associated with a lower rate of hospitalization (18% vs 41%, p=0.041), but did not impact PFS or OS. Impairments in ADLs were also associated with lower OS (78% vs 91%, p=0.03). OA receiving pola-R-miniCHP (n=38) were older (79 yrs vs. 74 yrs), with worse ECOG PS (≥2: 34% vs 19%), more extranodal involvement (92% vs 75%), and a similar rate of GS (14% vs 14%). The rate of hospitalization was higher (45% vs. 36%, p<0.05) but ORR (84% vs. 93%), CRR (79% vs. 79%), 1-yr PFS (85% vs. 78%), and 1-yr OS (87% vs. 90%) were similar. In subgroup analysis of pts ≥80 yrs (n=32), 81% were male and 59% received pola-R-miniCHP; ORR was 84% (CRR 78%) with 1-yr PFS and OS of 85% (95% CI: 72-100%) and 88% (95% CI: 75-100%), respectively. Pts ≥80 yrs had a higher rate of any grade neuropathy (23%, p=0.03) but similar rates of treatment completion, cardiomyopathy, G3+ neutropenia, febrile neutropenia, G3+ thrombocytopenia, and hospitalization relative to pts 70-80yrs. Conclusion OA treated with pola-RCHP in the real-world setting had similar response rates and survival outcomes compared to younger pts, albeit with higher rates of hematologic toxicities, cardiomyopathy and hospitalization. Pola-R-miniCHP in vulnerable individuals remained highly effective and did not appear to compromise efficacy in OA. Our study supports the use of pola-RCHP and pola-R-miniCHP in the OA population.

Abstract Introduction: Liso-cel, an autologous, CD19-directed CAR T cell product, has demonstrated consistent efficacy in a broad population of pts with B-cell malignancies, including R/R LBCL. Its well-established safety profile has made OP delivery commonplace. This, combined with recent changes to postinfusion monitoring requirements, offers pts the potential for greater access to care. Here, we describe real-world safety and effectiveness outcomes for pts with R/R LBCL who received liso-cel as standard of care (SOC) therapy in the inpatient (IP) or OP setting. Methods: This was an observational study of pts in the US with R/R LBCL who received commercial liso-cel as second-line (2L) or later treatment (tx) in the IP or OP setting between 02/2021 and 02/2025 and had ≥1 postinfusion assessment reported in the Center for International Blood & Marrow Transplant Research (CIBMTR). Safety outcomes included rates of AEs of special interest and nonrelapse mortality (NRM). Postinfusion hospitalizations in the OP group were also assessed. Effectiveness outcomes included ORR, CR rate, duration of response (DOR), PFS, and OS. All results are reported descriptively. Results: Of 1116 eligible pts, 34% (n=375) were intended for OP tx, as reported to the CIBMTR, including 82 of 195 (42%) pts who received liso-cel as 2L tx. Among pts treated in the IP vs OP setting, median (range) age was 71.5 y (21.5–91.2) and 69.8 y (25.0–86.1), respectively, and most pts were male (59% and 61%). Proportions of pts with high-grade B-cell lymphoma (16% and 12%), ≥2 extranodal involvement sites (26% and 26%), and secondary CNS involvement (5% and 4%) were similar for the IP and OP groups, respectively. In contrast, 48% vs 37% of pts in the IP vs OP groups, respectively, had elevated LDH before infusion and 10% vs 3% had ECOG PS ≥2. One or more comorbidities were reported for 72% and 65% (including cardiac, 36% and 32%; pulmonary, 30% and 26%; active infections requiring ongoing tx, 6% and 3%) of pts in the IP and OP groups, respectively. Median (range) number of prior lines of therapy was 3 (1–13) in the IP group and 3 (1–16) in the OP group. Use of bridging therapy was reported in 65% of the IP group and 62% of the OP group. Median (95% CI) follow-up for this study was 12.7 mo (12.5–13) in the IP group and 12.6 mo (12.4–12.8) in the OP group. Safety was similar in both settings; any-grade CRS was reported in 52% of IP vs 49% of OP setting pts, with low rates of grade 2 CRS (15% vs 11%) and grade ≥3 CRS (3% vs 2%) in both groups. Any-grade immune effector cell–associated neurotoxicity syndrome (ICANS) rates were also similar in pts in the IP vs OP setting (28% vs 23%), with low rates of grade 2 ICANS (5% vs 4%) and grade ≥3 ICANS (10% vs 8%). Prolonged cytopenia (grade 4 thrombocytopenia and/or neutropenia at 30 d after infusion) was reported in 12% and 14% in the IP and OP groups; clinically significant infections at any time after infusion occurred in 48% of IP and 42% of OP setting pts. In the IP and OP groups, 37% and 30% of pts died, most commonly due to PD (25% and 21%) and the NRM rates at 12 mo were 7.1 (95% CI, 5.2–9.4) and 4.1 (95% CI, 2.2–6.8). Among OP setting pts, 46% were not hospitalized after infusion; of those hospitalized after OP infusion, median (IQR) time to hospitalization was 5 d (3-8) and duration of stay was 5 d (3-9). Response rates were high in both the IP (ORR, 80% [95% CI, 77–83]; CR rate, 70% [95% CI, 66–73]) and OP setting (ORR, 83% [95% CI, 79–87]; CR rate, 74% [95% CI, 69–79]). At ~12 mo follow-up, median (95% CI) DOR was not reached (NR; NR–NR) in either group with 12-mo DOR rates of 59% (95% CI, 54–63) and 63% (95% CI, 56–69), respectively. Median (95% CI) PFS was 11.8 mo (8.8–NR) in the IP group vs NR (NR–NR) in the OP group, with 12-mo PFS rates of 49% (95% CI, 45–53) and 56% (95% CI, 50–61), respectively. Median (95% CI) OS was NR (NR–NR) in both groups with 12-mo OS rates of 65% (95% CI, 61–68) in the IP group and 74% (95% CI, 68–78) in the OP group. Conclusions: These results continue to demonstrate that one-time tx with liso-cel results in deep, clinically meaningful efficacy in the SOC setting across a broad population of pts with R/R LBCL. Despite the few differences reported in baseline characteristics, outcomes were consistent among pts treated in the IP and OP care settings. The well-established safety profile of liso-cel is conducive to OP tx, allowing ~50% of pts to remain out of the hospital postinfusion.

Abstract Patients with relapsed/refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma progressing after chimeric antigen receptor T-cell (CAR-T) therapy have dismal outcomes. The prespecified post–CAR-T expansion cohort of the ELM-1 study investigated the efficacy and safety of odronextamab, a CD20×CD3 bispecific antibody, in patients with disease progression after CAR-Ts. Sixty patients received IV odronextamab weekly for 4 cycles followed by maintenance until progression. The primary end point was objective response rate (ORR) by independent central review. The median number of prior lines of therapy was 3 (range, 2-9), 71.7% were refractory to CAR-Ts, and 48.3% relapsed within 90 days of CAR-T therapy. After a median follow-up of 16.2 months, ORR and complete response (CR) rate were 48.3% and 31.7%, respectively. Responses were similar across prior CAR-T products and time to relapse on CAR-T therapy. Median duration of response was 14.8 months and median duration of CR was not reached. Median progression-free survival and overall survival were 4.8 and 10.2 months, respectively. The most common treatment-emergent adverse event was cytokine release syndrome (48.3%; no grade ≥3 events). No cases of immune effector cell–associated neurotoxicity syndrome were reported. Grade ≥3 infections occurred in 12 patients (20.0%), 2 of which were COVID-19. Odronextamab monotherapy demonstrated encouraging efficacy and generally manageable safety, supporting its potential as an off-the-shelf option for patients after CAR-T therapy. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT02290951.

Introduction CD19-directed CAR T-cell therapies are an important option for the management of relapsed/refractory (R/R) DLBCL. Studies suggest that ~50% of pts receiving CAR T-cell therapies will relapse within 6 months, with an estimated overall survival (OS) of only 5 months. Additionally, 25-35% of pts do not receive subsequent treatment, indicating a high unmet need. CD19 loss is a potential mechanism of resistance to CAR T-cell therapies; thus, treatments that target alternate B-cell antigens are an attractive option. Here, we report for the first time the primary analysis of the ELM-1 expansion cohort investigating the efficacy and safety of odronextamab, a CD20×CD3 bispecific antibody, in pts with R/R DLBCL progressing after CAR T-cell therapy (NCT02290951). Methods Pts aged ≥18 with DLBCL and disease progression after CAR T-cell therapy received intravenous odronextamab weekly in 21-day (D) cycles during Cycles (C) 1-4, with steroid prophylaxis and step-up dosing in C1 (described previously), followed by 160 mg on D 1, 8, and 15 of C2-4. After C4, odronextamab maintenance treatment continued at 320 mg Q2W until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Pts with complete response (CR) for ≥9 months transitioned to Q4W dosing. All pts received infection prophylaxis. The primary analysis was conducted when all pts had completed ≥9 months of follow-up. Primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR), as assessed by independent central review (ICR) according to the Lugano classification. Key secondary endpoints included duration of response (DOR), progression-free survival (PFS), and OS. Exploratory endpoints included immune biomarker assessment. Results As of January 22, 2024, 60 pts were treated and evaluable for efficacy and safety, with median follow-up of 16.2 months. Prior CAR T-cell therapies were axi-cel (50%), tisa-cel (12%), liso-cel (10%), and not specified (28%). Median time since prior CAR T-cell therapy was 6.5 months (range 1.2-46.2). Median age was 63 years (range 27-82; aged ≥75 years: 10%), and 65% were male. Pts had received a median of 3 prior lines of therapies (range 2-9); 77% of pts were refractory to their last therapy, 77% were double refractory, and 72% were refractory to prior CAR T-cell therapy. 48% of pts relapsed within 90 D of CAR T-cell therapy, and 67% relapsed within 180 D. Of the 20 pts with available tumor biopsies at baseline, 10 were CD19(-) and only 2 were CD20(-). 92% of pts completed C1 and 52% completed ≥4 C of treatment. The median duration of treatment was 12 weeks (range 0.7-154.1). The ORR and CR rate by ICR were 48% and 32%, respectively, and were consistent across pts with high-risk features and across prior CAR T products. ORR in pts relapsing in ≤90 D was 21% (6/29) and in pts relapsing in ≤180 D was 33% (13/40). ORR was observed even in pts with low CD20. Median DOR was 14.8 months (95% CI 2.8-not estimable [NE]) and median duration of CR was not reached (NR) (95% CI 3.3-NE); the probability of maintaining CR for 24 months was 68%. Median PFS was 4.8 months (95% CI 2.6-5.4) and median OS was 10.2 months (95% CI 4.6-15.8). Median PFS and OS in complete responders was NR. T-cell counts increased at Week 14 and demonstrated a functional phenotype (CD69 expression and TEMRA count), which was confirmed by ex vivo stimulation. T-cell expansion was observed regardless of CAR T product or time from CAR T administration. The most common TEAE was CRS (any grade [G]: 48%; G1: 25%; G2: 23%; G≥3: 0%). G≥3 TEAEs occurred in 77% of pts (most common: neutropenia 17%, anemia 13%, and neutrophil and white blood cell count decrease 10% each). Five pts (8%) permanently discontinued odronextamab due to AEs (COVID-19, pneumonia, encephalopathy, epilepsy, and gait disturbance [n=1 each]). There was one treatment-related death (COVID-19 pneumonia). No cases of ICANS were reported. G≥3 infections occurred in 12 pts (20%); 2 were due to COVID-19. No cases of tumor flare or TLS were reported. Conclusions ELM-1 is the only study to prospectively evaluate efficacy and safety of a CD20×CD3 bispecific antibody in pts with R/R DLBCL progressing after CAR T-cell therapy. Odronextamab monotherapy was associated with encouraging efficacy and generally manageable safety in a setting with limited treatment options and historically dismal outcomes. Efficacy was observed even in pts relapsing in ≤90 D, supporting the potential of odronextamab as an accessible, off-the-shelf option in the post-CAR T setting.

Background Chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapies have recently been established as an important option for the management of relapsed/refractory (R/R) DLBCL. However, real-world studies suggest that approximately half of all patients (pts) receiving commercial CAR-T therapies will relapse within 6 months. These pts have a poor prognosis, with estimated overall survival (OS) of only 5 months, indicating a significant unmet need. Odronextamab is a novel, off-the-shelf, CD20×CD3 bispecific antibody that has demonstrated activity in both R/R follicular lymphoma and R/R DLBCL. We have previously reported encouraging results with odronextamab from the Phase 1 ELM-1 study (NCT02290951) in pts with R/R DLBCL post CAR-T therapy (Bannerji R, et al. Lancet Haematol. 2022). These results were consistent with the antitumor activity seen in pts with R/R DLBCL from the Phase 2 ELM-2 study (Kim WS, et al. ASH 2022). Here, we present an updated analysis of outcomes in a prespecified cohort of post CAR-T patients from ELM-1. Methods Intravenous odronextamab was administered weekly in 21-day cycles during Cycles (C) 1-4. Revisions to the step-up regimen were reported previously (Bannerji R, et al. Lancet Haematol. 2022). Odronextamab was administered with steroid prophylaxis and step-up doses of 0.7/4/20 mg during C1 to mitigate the risk of cytokine release syndrome (CRS), followed by 160 mg on Days (D) 1, 8, and 15 of C2-4. After C4, odronextamab maintenance treatment continued at 320 mg every 2 weeks until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Those pts who achieved a complete response (CR) that was durable for ≥9 months transitioned to dosing with 320 mg every 4 weeks. The primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR), assessed by independent central review (ICR) according to the Lugano classification. Key secondary endpoints included duration of response (DoR), progression-free survival (PFS), and OS. Immune biomarker assessment was an exploratory endpoint. Results As of Dec 20, 2022, 46 pts were treated (safety-evaluable), with 44 pts evaluable for efficacy. For safety-evaluable pts, median age was 63 years (range 27-82), 67% male, 74% Ann Arbor stage III-IV, and 72% were refractory to CAR-T therapy administered in any prior line. 44 pts were evaluable for efficacy after 4.9 months median duration of follow-up. The ORR and CR rate by ICR were 48% (21/44) and 30% (13/44), respectively. Responses were durable, and both median DoR and median duration of CR were not reached. The probability of maintaining a response for 12 months was 62% and the probability of maintaining a CR for 9 months was 86%.A responder analysis of the subgroup of pts who achieved a CR will be presented. The CAR-T treated pts with DLBCL who were evaluable for biomarker analysis (n=10) had lower T-cell counts at baseline compared with CAR-T naive DLBCL pts (n=41 comparable pts who received odronextamab in ELM-2), yet the fold-change of T-cell expansion at C4D15 was greater in CAR-T treated pts versus CAR-T naive pts. T-cell dynamics, such as changes in activation, exhaustion, and memory subsets, will be presented. Safety was generally consistent with that previously reported. Six (13%) pts permanently discontinued odronextamab due to a treatment-emergent AE (device-related infection, pneumonia, dysphagia, gait disturbance, leukemia, and encephalopathy [n=1 each]). The most common treatment-emergent AE was CRS (any grade, 52%). The highest grade of CRS reported was Grade 2, and low-grade CRS events occurred in 46% of pts with the 0.7/4/20 mg step-up regimen. No cases of ICANS were reported in pts with the 0.7/4/20 mg regimen. Grade ≥3 infections occurred in 10 (22%) pts, with no Grade 5 events. No cases of tumor flare were reported. Conclusions Odronextamab monotherapy demonstrates encouraging antitumor activity in heavily pretreated pts who have progressed after CAR-T therapy, with a generally manageable safety profile. Durable CRs were achieved in this difficult-to-treat setting. These data support the potential role of odronextamab in the treatment paradigm for R/R DLBCL. Further studies to evaluate the optimal sequencing and combinations of odronextamab with CAR-T therapy are warranted.

Multiple CD19-directed therapies are available for the treatment of relapsed and refractory (R/R) DLBCL, including CAR T cells, tafasitamab/lenalidomide (TL), and loncastuximab tesirine (lonca-T) (Sermer D., Blood Rev 2023). However, there are few data available on the efficacy of sequential CD19-directed therapies. We performed a retrospective study evaluating all patients with R/R LBCL treated consecutively with TL at 11 institutions from 8/2020 to 8/2022, identifying 178 patients. In this study, we specifically evaluate outcomes in patients who received anti-CD19 therapy prior to or after TL. The primary outcome of interest was progression-free survival (PFS) in TL recipients who previously received CD19-directed CAR T therapy, with overall response rate (ORR), complete response rate (CRR), and overall survival (OS) also evaluated. Outcomes of lonca-T and CAR T after TL therapy were evaluated. Data on CD19 expression was assessed on biopsies after TL; this was determined locally using flow cytometry or immunohistochemistry per institutional protocols. In subgroup analyses, ORR and CRR were compared using Fisher's exact test. PFS and OS were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method, with differences tested using the log-rank test. Of 178 patients who received TL, 52 had received prior anti-CD19 CAR T therapy, at a median of 7.4 months before TL (Table 1). Median PFS was lower in prior CAR T recipients (1.6 mo, 95% CI 1.1-2.5) vs no prior CAR T (2.1 mo, 95% CI 1.8-3.2), with hazard ratio 1.46 (p = 0.04; Figure 1). Best ORR was lower in patients with prior CAR T exposure (15% vs 33%, p = 0.02) though CRR was not significantly different (15% vs 18%, p = 1.0). We specifically evaluated TL outcomes based on prior response to CAR T, given the previously identified association of refractory disease with poor TL outcomes (Qualls D et al., presented at ASH 2022). Of 19 patients who had progressive disease more than 6 months after CAR T, ORR and CRR to TL therapy were 31.6% (all responses were CRs); in 33 patients with refractory disease (less than CR or relapse within 6 months) after CAR T, ORR and CRR to TL were significantly lower, at 6.1% (p = 0.04). Median PFS after TL was shorter in CAR-refractory than CAR-relapsed disease, at 1.4 vs 3.5 months (HR 2.2, p = 0.02). Of 88 patients who received therapy after TL, 20 (23%) received lonca-T and 14 (16%) received CAR T. Data on survival and initiation of new treatment after CAR T or lonca-T was available, but response and progression data after CAR T or lonca-T therapy is pending. These data allowed an estimate of OS and event-free survival (EFS), defined as survival without initiation of a new treatment after CAR T or lonca-T. With a median 3.9 months' follow-up, median EFS after CAR T administration was 3.7 months (95% CI, 0.9 - 6.5), and median OS was 8.1 months (95% CI, 0.6 - 15.7). In patients who received lonca-T, with median 2.7 months' follow-up from initiation, median EFS was 2.8 months (95% CI, 0.9 - 4.7), and median OS was 3.5 months (95% CI, 1.2 - 5.7). When comparing CAR T and lonca-T to polatuzumab vedotin- or chemotherapy-based therapies after TL, there were no significant differences in OS or EFS. In patients who discontinued TL, 24 had a biopsy a median of 18 days after the last dose of tafasitamab. Of these, 13 (54%) were CD19-positive and 11 (46%) were CD19-negative. All samples obtained more than 21 days after tafasitamab (6/6) were CD19-positive, while 46% obtained within 21 days were CD19-positive. These time-dependent findings may reflect “epitope masking” by tafasitamab rather than CD19 loss, reflecting other recent reports (Fitzgerald K., Leuk Lym 2022; Duell J., Leuk Lym 2022). In patients receiving TL after CAR T, responses and PFS were lower than in patients without prior CAR T therapy; however, with disease that was not refractory to prior CAR T, results were similar to patients who had not had prior CAR T. This may reflect that refractory disease, regardless of prior therapy, is associated with shorter PFS, though the possibility of CD19-mediated mechanisms of resistance remains. Modest EFS and OS were seen in patients receiving CAR T therapy or lonca-T after already receiving TL, though this may also reflect the high-risk disease characteristics of this cohort. Overall, in a high-risk, real-world cohort of TL-treated patients, these data suggest that some patients may benefit from subsequent CD19-directed therapies, but better therapeutic options are needed.

Abstract In this real-world evaluation of tafasitamab-lenalidomide (TL) in relapsed or refractory LBCL, patients receiving TL had higher rates of comorbidities and high-risk disease characteristics, and substantially lower progression-free survival and overall survival, compared with the L-MIND registration clinical trial for TL.

Abstract Polatuzumab vedotin (PV) is an antibody–drug conjugate targeting CD79b that is approved for patients with relapsed/refractory large B-cell lymphoma (LBCL). Patients who relapse after chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy were not included in the registration study, and reports of PV use after CAR T cells are limited. This multicenter retrospective analysis included patients with LBCL who relapsed or progressed after CAR T-cell therapy and subsequently received PV with or without rituximab and bendamustine between July 2019 and May 2021. Response to treatment and progression were assessed based on the 2014 Lugano criteria. Fifty-seven patients were included in the study: 18 (32%) patients were primary refractory to CAR T-cell therapy, and 34 (60%) patients received PV-based therapy immediately after CAR T-cell therapy. PV was combined with rituximab in 54 (95%) patients and administered with bendamustine in 35 (61%) patients. A response was achieved in 25 (44%) patients, including complete remission in 8 (14%). No significant association between baseline characteristics and response was observed. After a median follow-up of 47 weeks (95% confidence interval [CI], 40-54), 46 (81%) patients had disease progression or died, and the median progression-free survival was 10 weeks (95% CI, 5-15). On a multivariate analysis, bone marrow involvement (hazard ratio, 5.2; 95% CI, 1.8-15; P = .003) and elevated lactate dehydrogenase levels (hazard ratio, 5.0; 95% CI, 1.4-16; P = .01) were associated with shorter progression-free survival. Studies aimed at better characterizing the intrinsic mechanism of resistance and identifying optimal consolidation strategies for these patients are warranted.