Bonin, Malte von

Background: In 2015 the first B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia (B-ALL) patient receiving CAR T-cell therapy in Europe was reported to the EBMT registry. Today, the EBMT registry counts with more than 9000 patients treated with CAR T-cell therapies across all indications. Here, on behalf of the GoCART coalition, we present the outcomes of the largest European cohort of B-ALL patients treated with autologous, second generation, CD19-targeted CAR T-cells to date. Methods: Adult and paediatric patients with B-ALL received treatment with CAR T-cell therapy using either academic or commercially available products in 40 centres across 17 different countries. Safety was retrospectively assessed as per ASCTC 2019 consensus grading and CTCAE, and efficacy as per NCCN guidelines. Relapse incidence was defined as haematological relapse or progression after CART with non-relapse mortality as competing event. Leukemia free survival (LFS) was defined as being alive without occurrence of relapse. Follow-up includes patients treated from 2016 to Dec 2023 until data cutoff in June 2024. Results: A total of 345 patients (173 adults and 172 pediatrics) received therapy from 2016 to 2023 with tisagenlecleucel (65.2%), varnimcabtagene autoleucel (25.8%), brexucabtagene autoleucel (5.5%), and others (3.5%). Median age at infusion was 18 yrs. (range, 1.1-78.2) and 41.7% were females. High-risk features were identified including cytogenetic/genomic high-risk as per ELN guidelines (33.8%), relapse after allo-HCT (57.7%), early relapse (<1 year) after prior allo-HCT (30.4%), ≥3 prior treatment lines (55.5%) including prior exposure (and refractoriness) to blinatumomab and inotuzumab in 27.3% (34%) and 28.8% (32.3%), respectively. Median time from diagnosis to CART infusion was 2.8 years (0.1-17.9). Median time from last relapse prior CART to infusion was 2 months (range, 0.9-38.4). Bridging therapy was administered in 86.4% (298) of patients based on high or low intensity chemotherapy (32.1% or 26.5%, respectively), inotuzumab-ozogamicin (13.4%), TKI (8.2%), involved-site therapy (intrathecal chemotherapy, radiotherapy, orchiectomy) (3.5%), and blinatumomab (2.6%), alone or in combination. Prior to infusion, 34.7% had more than 5% BM blast count, 16.3% had circulating blasts in PB, and 20.6% had extramedullary disease. Lymphodepletion was performed in all but one patient, based on fludarabine and cyclophosphamide regimens. The reverse Kaplan-Meier median follow-up was of 2.2 years. The incidence of any grade (and severe) CRS was 71.6% (14.5%), and for ICANS was 15.7% (7.6%). The cumulative incidence of MRD-negative CR at month +3 was 76.9% (71.9-81.1), followed by a 2-year overall survival of 64.6% (58.7-69.8), leukemia-free survival of 48% (42.1-53.7), and relapse incidence of 45.5% (39.6-51.2). Non-relapse mortality at 2 years was 6.5% (4-9.6), 2-year cumulative incidence of subsequent HSCT of 33.3% (28-38.7) and second CAR-T infusions of 12.4% (8.8-16.6). Allogeneic HSCT after CAR-T was performed in 113 cases including 67 (59.3%) HSCT-naïve patients, due to molecular or overt disease relapse (60.9%), and other non-relapse reasons including suboptimal CAR-T persistence/B-cell aplasia (19.1%), pre-CAR-T high-risk features (13.6%), second malignancies (1.8%), and others. Second CAR-T infusions were performed in 39 cases due to molecular or overt disease relapse (79.5%) or suboptimal CAR-T persistence/B-cell aplasia in the absence of relapse (20.5%). Conclusions: The results from this European study demonstrate that CD19-targeted CAR T-cell therapy is an effective treatment for patients with high-risk B-cell ALL, providing substantial leukemia-free survival and overall survival rates despite the high-risk nature of the patient population. The necessity for bridging therapies and subsequent consolidative approaches, such as HSCT and second CAR T infusions, underscores the complexity and tailored nature of managing R/R B-ALL. These findings support the continued use and further investigation of CAR T-cell therapy in diverse clinical settings, emphasizing the importance of post-infusion strategies to sustain long-term remission. This will provide deeper insights into the factors influencing outcomes and help refine treatment protocols to improve patient care.

7526 Background: The TRANSFORM primary analysis (PA; NCT03575351) confirmed the superior efficacy of liso-cel vs SOC as 2L therapy in patients (pts) with primary refr or early rel LBCL (Abramson et al. Blood 2022). Response to first-line (1L) therapy (refr vs rel), which was a study randomization stratification factor, may influence future treatment response. Here, we present results for refr and rel LBCL subgroups from the TRANSFORM PA. Methods: TRANSFORM is a randomized phase 3 study of liso-cel vs SOC (salvage chemotherapy [CT] followed by high-dose CT [HDCT]/autologous SCT [ASCT]) in adults ≤ 75 y with LBCL primary refr to or rel ≤ 12 mo after 1L therapy and eligible for HDCT/ASCT. The primary endpoint was event-free survival (EFS); key secondary endpoints were CR rate, PFS, and OS. In this predefined subgroup analysis, refr was SD, PD, PR, or CR with rel < 3 mo after 1L therapy; rel was CR with rel ≥ 3 mo and ≤ 12 mo after 1L therapy. Results: 92 pts were randomized to each arm. Most pts in the liso-cel and SOC arms had refr disease (73% and 76%, respectively; rel disease, 27% and 24%). Baseline characteristics in the refr and rel subgroups, respectively, were generally balanced: median LDH (U/L; liso-cel, 228.5 and 225; SOC, 259 and 259); median SPD (cm2; liso-cel, 11 and 12; SOC, 15.5 and 18); high-grade B-cell lymphoma (liso-cel, 27% and 16%; SOC, 27% and 9%); diffuse LBCL not otherwise specified (liso-cel, 58% and 56%; SOC, 49% and 73%). Consistent with the overall study population, EFS, CR rate, and PFS favored liso-cel vs SOC in both subgroups (Table). Safety was also consistent. Grade ≥ 3 cytokine release syndrome (CRS) and neurological events (NE) were low in refr (1% and 4%) and rel (0 and 4%) subgroups, respectively, with no grade 4/5 CRS or NEs. Conclusions: In TRANSFORM, liso-cel showed benefits in EFS, PFS, and CR rate vs SOC irrespective of prior response to 1L therapy. As refr LBCL is historically difficult to treat, outcomes for liso-cel in this subgroup are encouraging. Clinical trial information: NCT03575351 . [Table: see text]