Reicks, Tanner W.

Abstract Introduction There is currently no standard-of-care for patients (pts) who cannot tolerate full dose anthracycline regimens in frontline large B-cell lymphoma (LBCL). R-miniCHOP is a commonly used regimen that provides curative intent treatment with manageable toxicity. Despite this, lymphoma and treatment-related mortality are the leading causes of death in these pts. Additionally, many pts may not be eligible to receive R-miniCHOP due to comorbidity or frailty. There are limited clinical trial and real-world data focused on this population. Methods Pts with LBCL age 18 years (yrs) and older were identified from the Lymphoma Epidemiology of Outcomes (LEO) cohort, a prospective study of newly diagnosed pts with non-Hodgkin lymphoma enrolled from 2015-2020 at 8 academic medical centers in the US. Pts with LBCL were included in this analysis if they had received R-miniCHOP or a regimen that did not include an anthracycline (nonAC). NonAC regimens included R-CVP, BR, rituximab, radiation and lenalidomide and rituximab. Pts completed the Vulnerable Elders Survey (VES-13) and were considered vulnerable if they had a score >3. Event-free survival (EFS) was defined as the time from start of treatment until progression/relapse, retreatment, or death due to any cause; EFS at 24 months (EFS24) was a secondary endpoint. Overall survival (OS) was defined as the time from start of treatment until death due to any cause. EFS and OS for R-miniCHOP and non-IC groups, as well as vulnerable and not vulnerable by VES-13 were estimated using Cox models. Results A total of 190 pts received R-miniCHOP (N=139) or nonAC (N=51). R-miniCHOP-treated pts were older (median 82 vs 72 yrs) and more commonly female (55% vs 35%). The majority in both groups (86% vs 78%) received their treatment at a LEO center and did not receive therapy on a clinical trial (89% vs 100%). Most pts receiving R-miniCHOP had high-intermediate (32%) or high (30%) international prognostic index (IPI) score, while both high-intermediate (22%) and high (20%) IPI were lower in the nonAC-treated pts. Cell of origin was determined by immunohistochemistry as available clinically, with GCB 42% vs 31%, non-GCB 32% vs 29%, and not done/unknown 26% vs 39% in R-miniCHOP vs nonAC pts. Double-hit status by FISH was known in 115 pts and was positive in 13% of R-miniCHOP pts and 10% of nonAC pts. The diagnosis-to-treatment interval (DTI) was ≤14 days in 30% of R-miniCHOP pts and 24% of nonAC pts. Of pts who had a VES-13 score (N=119), vulnerable status trended higher in the R-miniCHOP (66%) vs the non-IC group (50%; p=0.15). With a median follow-up of 50.5 months, the median EFS was 37.1 months and median OS was 50.0 months. R-miniCHOP, compared with non-IC, was associated with improved EFS (unadjusted HR=0.54, 95% CI 0.36-0.81; p=0.003) and OS (unadjusted HR=0.58, 95% CI 0.38-0.88; p=0.011). When adjusted for age, IPI, LBCL subtype (diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, not otherwise specified vs other), DTI and VES-13, R-miniCHOP was strongly associated with improved EFS (HR=0.26, 95% CI 0.14-0.50; p<0.001) and OS (adjusted HR=0.29, 95% CI 0.15-0.57; p<0.001). EFS24 rate was 56% in all pts and was superior in pts treated with R-miniCHOP vs non-IC (62.7% vs 34.1%; p=0.001). In the R-miniCHOP group, vulnerable status (adjusted for IPI) was associated with inferior OS (HR=2.22, 95% CI 1.09-4.50; p=0.028) and trended towards inferior EFS (HR=1.76, 95% CI 0.93-3.32; p=0.083). In a competing-risk cumulative-incidence analysis, lymphoma was the leading cause of death for pts receiving R-miniCHOP at 2 (0.16, 95% CI 0.11-0.24) and 5 (0.20, 95% CI 0.14-0.28) yrs, as well as for those receiving non-IC at 2 (0.35, 95% CI 0.24-0.53) and 5 (0.38, 95% CI 0.26-0.56) yrs. Treatment-related mortality was similar in both groups. In the R-miniCHOP group, the 2-yr (0.20 vs 0.03) and 5-yr (0.20 vs 0.11) lymphoma-related mortality was higher in pts who were vulnerable vs not by VES-13, while there were no differences for mortality due to therapy or other causes by vulnerable status. Conclusions These data support R-miniCHOP as a curative regimen in older and frail pts with the majority achieving EFS24. R-miniCHOP compared to non-IC use is strongly associated with improved EFS and OS when adjusted for disease and patient related variables. Within the R-miniCHOP group, vulnerable status is associated with inferior OS. Additional research efforts are needed to optimize outcomes for this group of pts.

ABSTRACT Rituximab, gemcitabine, and oxaliplatin (R‐GemOx) is a commonly used chemoimmunotherapy regimen for relapsed or refractory (R/R) diffuse large B‐cell lymphoma (DLBCL), but there are limited real‐world data. In a multicenter retrospective study from a cohort of eight US academic centers (LEO CReWE), we evaluated 183 patients with R/R DLBCL and high‐grade B cell lymphoma treated with R‐GemOx, including subgroups treated without intent for consolidation with autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) or chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cell therapy ( n = 100), those utilizing R‐GemOx as a bridge to ASCT or CAR T ( n = 83), and those aged 70 and older ( n = 71). Overall response rates (ORRs) for all patients treated with R‐GemOx were 45% with a complete response (CR) rate of 29%. The median event‐free survival (EFS) was 2.3 months, and the median overall survival (OS) was 13.5 months. Patients receiving R‐GemOx without intent for ASCT or CAR T had ORR and CR rates of 33% and 18%, respectively, with median EFS and OS of 2.0 and 9.5 months, respectively. Patients receiving R‐GemOx as a bridge to ASCT or CAR T had ORR and CR rates of 57% and 36%, respectively, with median EFS and OS of 3.5 and 17.4 months, respectively. Patients receiving R‐GemOx aged 70 and older had ORR and CR rates of 53% and 33%, respectively, with median EFS and OS of 2.2 and 13.9 months, respectively. These data provide a benchmark for R‐GemOx in the rapidly evolving landscape of R/R DLBCL therapies.

Background: Rituximab, gemcitabine, and oxaliplatin (R-GemOx) is a commonly utilized chemoimmunotherapy regimen for relapsed or refractory (R/R) diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), especially for patients ineligible for autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) or chimeric antigen receptor T cell therapy (CAR T). R-GemOx is used as a comparator arm in several active phase III clinical trials for R/R DLBCL, including the POLARGO (polatuzumab vedotion and R-GemOx), STARGLO (glofitamab and GemOx), SUNMO (mosunetuzumab and polatuzumab vedotin), LOTIS-5 (loncastuximab tesirine and rituximab), and EPCORE DLBCL-1 (epcoritamab) studies. However, real-world data are limited to understand the patterns of use and outcomes of R-GemOx in the US. Methods: We developed a retrospective multicenter US cohort (known as LEO CReWE) of patients with R/R DLBCL and other aggressive B-cell lymphomas at the eight US academic centers participating in the LEO Cohort Study (NCT02736357). Patients first diagnosed with DLBCL (including transformed and high-grade B-cell lymphoma) from 2007 - 2022 who received second line (2L) or later therapy for R/R DLBCL with R-GemOx were included. Baseline characteristics, treatment, and follow-up data were abstracted by chart review. Index line of therapy was defined as the first receipt of R-GemOx therapy in the 2L or later setting. Intent for CAR T and/or ASCT was evaluated at each line of therapy based on medical records at the time of treatment initiation. Subgroup analyses were pre-planned in groups of special interest, including those treated with R-GemOx without intent for ASCT or CAR T, those treated as a bridge to CAR T, and those aged 70 and older. Results: 183 patients with R/R DLBCL treated with R-GemOx were included. At time of initiation of R-GemOx, median age was 68 years (range 21-88), with 71 patients (39%) aged 70+ and 18 (10%) aged 80+. Many patients had high risk features including 13% with high grade B-cell lymphoma and 56% with IPI 3 or greater. 21% had an ECOG performance status of 2 or greater. Patients received a median of 2 lines of therapy prior to the index line of R-GemOx (range 1-7). 52% of patients did not achieve a complete response (CR) to first-line therapy, and 20% relapsed <12 months from an initial CR. In all patients receiving R-GemOx, the overall response rate (ORR) was 45% (29% CR). At a median follow-up of 39 months, median EFS was 2.3 months (95% CI: 1.8-3.2), with 12-month EFS of 21% and a 24-month EFS of 15%. Median OS was 13.5 months (95% CI: 9.6-18.1), with a 12-month OS of 52% and a 24-month OS of 38%. In patients treated without intent for ASCT or CAR T, ORR was 33% (18% CR). Median EFS was 2.0 months (95% CI: 1.6-2.5) with 12- and 24-month EFS of 14% and 9%, respectively. Median OS was 9.5 months (95% CI: 6.6-16.1) with 12- and 24-month OS of 45% and 29%, respectively. In patients receiving R-GemOx as bridging to ASCT or CAR T, ORR was 57% (35% CR). 35% received CAR T and 14% received ASCT, while the remainder did not receive the intended therapy as part of this line. Median EFS was 3.6 months (95% CI: 1.8-5.2) with 12- and 24-month EFS of 28% and 25%, respectively. Median OS was 17.4 months (95% CI: 13.4-NR); 12- and 24-month OS were 61% and 50%, respectively. In patients aged 70+, ORR was 53% (33% CR). Median EFS was 2.3 months (95% CI: 1.6-5.2), with 12- and 24-month EFS of 20% and 18%, respectively. Median OS was 13.9 months (95% CI: 8.6-30.2); 12- and 24-month OS were 57% and 39%, respectively. Conclusion: This study represents the largest reported cohort of patients treated with R-GemOx in US academic centers to date. The ORR of 45% and CR rate of 29% CR, as well as median EFS and OS of 2.3 and 13.5 months, respectively, are consistent with findings from previous phase II studies; these results highlight that responses to R-GemOx are not durable and the vast majority of patients require additional therapy. This study demonstrates real-world evidence of the efficacy of R-GemOx in a large cohort of patients with R/R DLBCL from the US over a long period, including both transplant-eligible and -ineligible patients, and patients treated in the CAR T era. These data aid in providing a benchmark for active clinical trials in the rapidly evolving landscape of R/R DLBCL therapies and allow potential comparison to a real-world cohort of patients with a broad range of clinical characteristics.

Abstract Patients with large B-cell lymphoma (LBCL) that fail to achieve a complete response (CR) or who relapse early after anthracycline-containing immunochemotherapy (IC) have a poor prognosis and are commonly considered to have “primary refractory disease.” However, different definitions of primary refractory disease are used in the literature and clinical practice. In this study, we examined variation in the time to relapse used to define refractory status and association with survival outcomes in patients with primary refractory LBCL in a single-center prospective cohort with validation in an independent multicenter cohort. Patients with newly diagnosed LBCL were enrolled in the Molecular Epidemiological Resource cohort (MER; N = 949) or the Lymphoma Epidemiology of Outcomes cohort (LEO; N = 2755) from September 2002 to May 2021. Primary refractory LBCL was defined as no response (stable disease [SD]) or progressive disease (PD) during, or by the end of, frontline (1L) IC (primary PD; PPD); partial response at end of treatment (EOT PR); or relapse within 3 to 12 months after achieving CR at EOT to 1L IC (early relapse). In the MER cohort, patients with PPD had inferior overall survival (OS; 2-year OS rate: 15% MER, 31% LEO) when compared with other subgroups considered in defining primary refractory disease, EOT PR (2-year OS rate: 38% MER, 50% LEO) and early relapse (2-year OS rate: 44% MER, 58% LEO). Among patients receiving 1L IC with curative intent, we identified that patients with PPD are the key subgroup with poor outcomes. We propose a definition of primary refractory LBCL as SD or PD during, or by the end of, 1L treatment.

AbstractTo address the current and long‐term unmet health needs of the growing population of non‐Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) patients, we established the Lymphoma Epidemiology of Outcomes (LEO) cohort study (NCT02736357; https://leocohort.org/). A total of 7735 newly diagnosed patients aged 18 years and older with NHL were prospectively enrolled from 7/1/2015 to 5/31/2020 at 8 academic centers in the United States. The median age at diagnosis was 62 years (range, 18–99). Participants came from 49 US states and included 538 Black/African‐Americans (AA), 822 Hispanics (regardless of race), 3386 women, 716 age <40 years, and 1513 rural residents. At study baseline, we abstracted clinical, pathology, and treatment data; banked serum/plasma (N = 5883, 76.0%) and germline DNA (N = 5465, 70.7%); constructed tissue microarrays for four major NHL subtypes (N = 1189); and collected quality of life (N = 5281, 68.3%) and epidemiologic risk factor (N = 4489, 58.0%) data. Through August 2022, there were 1492 deaths. Compared to population‐based SEER data (2015–2019), LEO participants had a similar distribution of gender, AA race, Hispanic ethnicity, and NHL subtype, while LEO was underrepresented for patients who were Asian and aged 80 years and above. Observed overall survival rates for LEO at 1 and 2 years were similar to population‐based SEER rates for indolent B‐cell (follicular and marginal zone) and T‐cell lymphomas, but were 10%–15% higher than SEER rates for aggressive B‐cell subtypes (diffuse large B‐cell and mantle cell). The LEO cohort is a robust and comprehensive national resource to address the role of clinical, tumor, host genetic, epidemiologic, and other biologic factors in NHL prognosis and survivorship.

Background: Recently, large B-cell lymphomas (LBCLs) have undergone major shifts in classification and treatment paradigm, particularly with the advent of CD19-targeted chimeric antigen receptor T cell therapy (CAR-T). Initially approved as third-line treatment in LBCL in 2017, as of early 2022 CAR-T is indicated for second-line therapy (2L) in patients with relapsed or refractory (R/R) disease within 12 months of frontline treatment or who are not candidates for autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT). Given this quickly changing landscape, we aimed to describe disease characteristics, patterns of care, and survival outcomes in patients with R/R LBCL receiving two or more lines of systemic therapy across modern treatment eras. Methods: We developed a database of patients with R/R LBCL from 8 U.S. academic centers in the Lymphoma Epidemiology of Outcomes (LEO) Cohort study (NCT02736357) and Consortium for Real World Evidence (CReWE). Unlike the SCHOLAR-1 dataset (M Crump et al, Blood 2017), our cohort included any patient receiving 2L, regardless of timing of progression/relapse. For this analysis, eligible patients were aged ≥18 years and received 2L between 2002-2022. Patients with histologic transformation, post-transplant lymphoproliferative disorder, primary CNS lymphoma, primary mediastinal B-cell lymphoma, Burkitt lymphoma, or plasmablastic lymphoma were excluded. Prognostic factors, therapy details (including intent for ASCT and/or CAR-T), and outcomes, including treatment response, event-free survival (EFS), and overall survival (OS), were abstracted for all lines of therapy. Treatment eras were defined as pre-CAR-T (2002-2010), CAR-T available via clinical trial (2011-2017), and post-FDA approval of CAR-T (2018-2022). Results: Of 1760 patients initiating 2L for R/R disease, 1523 were eligible for analysis. Median age at start of 2L was 62 (interquartile range [IQR] 53-70), and 65% were male; 11% were non-White, and 8% were Hispanic. High-grade subtypes comprised 16% of all cases. IPI was available for 1013 patients at time of 2L therapy, with 54% having IPI 3-5. Median time from diagnosis to 2L was 8.7 months (IQR 5.6-18.5), with 834 patients not having achieved complete response (CR) to 1L, 285 patients relapsing &lt;12 months after 1L, and 404 patients relapsing ≥12 months after 1L. The median number of total lines of therapy received was 4 (range 2-18), with 586 and 347 receiving ASCT and CAR-T, respectively, at any line of treatment. At a median follow-up of 48 months from the start of 2L, 926 patients (61%) had died. Progressive lymphoma was the primary cause of death in 75% of deceased patients, with 8% of reported deaths due to therapy. 2L was received at an academic medical center in 83% cases, and 209 patients (14%) received 2L on a clinical trial. ASCT and/or CAR-T was planned at 2L for 989 patients (65%), of whom 463 ultimately received ASCT, 88 received CAR-T, and 21 received allogeneic transplant at 2L. 494 patients were not considered for ASCT or CAR-T at 2L, and 40 were unknown for ASCT/CAR-T intent. Breakdown by treatment era (n = 1518 with available treatment start date) is shown in the Table. Median EFS from start of 2L was 4.2 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 3.8-4.8). Median OS from start of 2L was 18 months (95% CI: 17-22), and 2- and 5-year OS estimates were 46% (95% CI: 44-49%) and 35% (95% CI: 33-38%), respectively. EFS and OS improved significantly for patients initiating 2L between 2011-2017 compared to 2002-2010. However, EFS and OS in the 2018-2022 era remained similar to 2011-2017 (Figure). Conclusions: To our knowledge, this study is the first-ever large-scale attempt to describe patterns of care and outcomes in LBCL 2L in the modern era, inclusive of all treatment approaches. The rich and unique LEO CReWE dataset captures evolving practice approaches over time in terms of both intent for and receipt of cellular therapies. Likely reflecting the rapid development of many novel immune effector cell products and bispecific antibodies, we observed increased enrollment on 2L clinical trials in the 2018-2022 period, including a substantial proportion of patients receiving CAR-T in 2L. Importantly, survival increased in treatment eras during which CAR-T was available. Ongoing analyses of factors associated with improved survival will be presented at the meeting.