Stefan, M

Introduction In October 2021, brexucabtagene autoleucel (brexu-cel) received U.S. FDA approval as the first CAR T-cell therapy for adults with relapsed/refractory (r/r) B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia (B-ALL) based on the 55-patient ZUMA-3 Phase II study. We subsequently established ROCCA and now report on the largest cohort of patients treated with commercial brexu-cel for r/r B-ALL to date. Methods Adults (18+) with r/r B-ALL infused with commercial brexu-cel across 25 U.S. institutions were included. ASTCT consensus criteria were used to score CRS and ICANS. Methodologies for assessing MRD (minimal threshold of 10 -4) included flow cytometry, NGS, or qPCR depending on institution practice. Duration of remission (DOR) was calculated from time of complete response (CR); progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were calculated from day of brexu-cel infusion and were not censored for hematopoietic cell transplant (HCT) or maintenance. All living patients were censored at the time of last follow-up prior to data lock, which occurred on June 30, 2023. Results Among 152 infused, the median age was 46 (range, 18-81), 57% were male, and 34% were Hispanic. Most (67%) had Ph- ALL, were heavily pre-treated (median 4 prior lines), and entered apheresis with high disease burden (57%). At time of apheresis, 23% of patients only had MRD+ disease and 15% were in complete molecular remission. While 82% developed CRS, the majority was grade 1-2, with 9% of the overall cohort experiencing grade 3-4 CRS. In contrast, 55% developed ICANS, with 32% of the entire cohort experiencing grade 3-4 ICANS. Eight patients (5%) died of toxicity/infection prior to D+28 response assessment. Among 133 patients with response assessment, 120 (90%) achieved morphologic CR, of whom 82% were MRD-, 15% were MRD+, and 3% MRD unknown. The median follow-up for survivors was 8.4 months; 45 patients have relapsed and 42 patients died. Median DOR was not reached. Median PFS and OS were 8.6 months and 15.6 months, respectively. Estimated PFS and OS of the entire cohort at 6-months were 61% (95% CI, 52-68) and 81% (95% CI, 73-87) and at 12-months were 47% (95% CI, 37-56) and 63% (95% CI, 53-72), respectively. We found no association between pre-CAR disease burden and post-CAR PFS/OS. However, patients with MRD- response to CAR had superior PFS relative to patients with MRD+ CR (median 14 months vs. 5 months, P=0.002). Forty-four patients received post-CAR consolidation/maintenance therapy while in CR: 25 allogeneic HCT, 15 TKI, 2 POMP, and 3 other/unknown. To examine the effect of consolidation/maintenance following brexu-cel, we performed a landmark analysis of PFS limited to patients alive and in CR at 2-months post-CAR infusion (N=113) and suggests superior PFS in patients receiving either HCT or other forms maintenance, relative to those receiving no further therapy following brexu-cel ( P=0.055). We then investigated post-CAR MRD-response in combination with receipt of post-CAR consolidation/maintenance and found that even among patients achieving MRD-negative response, post-CAR consolidation/maintenance led to superior PFS (Figure 1). Conclusions Among 152 adults treated with commercial brexu-cel for r/r B-ALL across 25 U.S. institutions, we found very high response rates (CR/CRi: 90%; 82% MRD-) consistent with the Zuma-3 data. While rates of severe CRS are low, grade 3-4 ICANS was observed in 32% of patients and warrants further investigation We demonstrate the prognostic impact of achieving an MRD-negative CR and an emerging role for consolidation/maintenance therapies to enhance the durability of response following brexu-cel in adults r/r B-ALL.

Introduction: Brexucabtagene autoleucel (brexu-cel) is an autologous anti-CD19 chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cell therapy approved for adults with relapsed/refractory B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia (R/R B-ALL). Bridging therapy, defined as anti-leukemia therapy given between apheresis and lymphodepleting chemotherapy, was permitted on the pivotal ZUMA-3 trial. The optimal bridging therapy is unknown in this setting. Here we report patient and disease characteristics in those receiving bridging therapies prior to brexu-cel and the impact of bridging on clinical outcomes in a large multicenter cohort. Methods and Results: ROCCA includes 25 US institutions contributing retrospective data from 152 B-ALL patients treated with standard of care brexu-cel between 2021-2023. Ninety-nine patients (65%) received bridging therapy, while 53 patients (35%) received no bridging therapy. Bridging therapy consisted of cytotoxic chemotherapy ( n=65, 66%), immunotherapy ( n=26, 26%; 23 inotuzumab, 3 blinatumomab), tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) ( n=20, 20%; 16 ponatinib), steroids only ( n=10, 10%), and intrathecal chemotherapy ( n=22, 22%). The median age of the cohort was 46 (IQR 32-61). Patients were heavily pre-treated with a median of 4 prior lines of therapy. The median days from apheresis to infusion was 33 (IQR 26-42). 119 patients had known pre-apheresis blast counts; the bridging group had higher pre-apheresis blast burden, with 21 of 76 patients (28%) having ≥ 50% blasts compared to only 5 of 43 patients (12%) in the no bridging group ( p=0.02). In addition, more patients who received bridging had pre-apheresis extramedullary disease (32% vs. 15%, p=0.02). All other baseline characteristics were similar between the two groups (Table 1). Fifty-four (54%) patients had response assessment after bridging therapy and prior to brexu-cel infusion. In patients who received inotuzumab for pre-apheresis active disease, defined as ≥ 5% blasts, 6 of 13 (46%) who had post-bridging assessment achieved a complete response (CR; 5 measurable residual disease (MRD)+, 1 MRD-), with a mean proportional reduction in blast burden of 46% from baseline. In contrast, after chemotherapy bridging, only 2 of 16 patients (13%) with pre-apheresis active disease had a CR. Patients receiving chemotherapy bridging had a mean proportional increase in blast burden of 4.4%. In recipients of TKI bridging, 2 of 4 patients (50%) with pre-apheresis active disease had a CR. Compared to no bridging, patients in the bridging group had similar rates of grade 3 or 4 CRS (9% bridging vs. 8% no bridging, p=0.73) and grade 3 or 4 ICANS (34% vs. 26%, p=0.32). In univariate analysis, there was no statistically significant difference in day 28 response with 63 patients (72%) achieving MRD- complete response in the bridging group as compared to 36 patients (78%) in the no bridging group ( p=0.60). Non-relapse mortality was similar between the two groups (17% bridging vs. 9% no bridging, p=0.20). Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were superior in the no bridging group: 1-year OS 74.7% vs 56.8% (log-rank p=0.04), and 1-year PFS 57.3% vs 41.7% (log-rank p=0.04). In a multivariate analysis stratified by bridging and pre-apheresis disease burden, patients with pre-apheresis blasts ≥ 5% and bridging had worse survival than ≥ 5% blasts and no bridging: 1-year OS 45.3% vs. 87.5% and 1-year PFS 27.7% vs. 64.3% (Figure 1). However, patients with < 5% blasts had similar survival regardless of bridging. Conclusions: In our real-world analysis, adults with R/R B-ALL receiving bridging therapy had a higher disease burden at baseline. Despite greater baseline disease, there were no significant differences in toxicity and day 28 response in those receiving bridging therapy vs. not. While survival was inferior in patients with pre-apheresis active disease who received bridging, this may be confounded by the degree of tumor burden. In patients with < 5% blasts pre-apheresis, bridging did not impact survival. Furthermore, inotuzumab bridging demonstrated the most significant disease debulking. However, the comparisons in this study are limited by the variability in practice for post-bridging disease reassessment and the small proportion of patients with active disease who did not receive bridging. A more uniform approach to peri-CAR disease assessment would enable more robust study of optimal bridging strategies.