Thomas, Stephanie

Abstract BACKGROUND Children exposed to poverty during frontline therapy for B-lymphoblastic leukemia (B-ALL) experience inferior overall survival (OS), higher relapse rates, and earlier relapse than their peers. Real-world data describing treatment patterns and survival after relapse of B-ALL are lacking and, as a result, the impact of poverty following relapse remains poorly understood. This study evaluated the association of poverty exposure, proxied by insurance status, with post-relapse survival and explored potential explanatory mechanisms, including disease biology and therapy utilization. METHODS Data from Retrospective Study of Contemporary Approaches to First Relapse in B-ALL (ReCALL-1), a multicenter retrospective cohort study of patients < 30 years old with first relapse of B-ALL from 2018-2022, were used. The primary exposure was poverty, proxied by insurance status at relapse, categorized as any private insurance (poverty unexposed), public-only insurance (poverty exposed), no insurance, or unknown; the latter two were not included in comparative analyses due to low numbers. The primary outcome was OS. Secondary outcomes included measurable residual disease (MRD)-negative second complete remission (CR2), relapse after CR2, non-relapse mortality (NRM), with relapse treated as a competing risk, and receipt of cellular and immunotherapies. RESULTS Among 462 patients from 31 U.S. institutions, 41% had private insurance, 47% public-only insurance, 2% no insurance, and 10% unknown. Compared to privately insured patients, those with public insurance were more likely to be Hispanic (56% vs 19%, p<0.001) and have non-English preferred language (30% vs 6%, p<0.001). Non-Hispanic Black patients comprised 9% of those with public insurance and 5% of those with private insurance. Disease characteristics that differed by insurance status at relapse included: Ph-like cytogenetics, more common in publicly insured (23% vs 11%, p=0.002), and infant ALL, more common in privately insured patients (10% vs 5%, p=0.06). Publicly insured patients were more likely to have experienced major organ toxicity during frontline therapy (32% vs 18%, p=0.002) and very early relapse (<18m from diagnosis: 43% vs 32%, p=0.07). Other demographic and disease characteristics, including relapse site and cytomolecular features, were similar by insurance status. With a median follow-up of 51 months from relapse, 4-year OS differed by insurance (log-rank p=0.02): 72% for private vs 56% for public insurance. After adjusting for race/ethnicity and language, public insurance increased the hazard of death by 65% (aHR 1.65 95% CI 1.13-2.42, p=0.004). The association remained, but was attenuated, when unbalanced disease characteristics (time to relapse, infant ALL, Ph-like cytogenetics, prior organ dysfunction) were included (aHR 1.47, 95% CI 1.00-2.16, p=0.05). Rates of MRD-negative CR2 were similar (85% public vs 87% private). However, point estimates suggested publicly insured patients had more relapse after CR2 (44% vs 37%, p=0.42) and higher 4-year NRM (16% vs 10%, Gray's test p=0.12), though neither were significant. Treatment choices for first relapse did not differ by insurance status. Utilization of intensive reinduction (91% vs 95% for public vs private, p=0.18) and clinical trial enrollment (22% for both) were similar. Receipt of cellular therapies did not significantly differ by public vs private insurance: Chimeric Antigen Receptor-T cells (CAR-T: 38% vs 34%, p=0.41), hematopoietic cell transplant (HCT: 42% vs 47%, p=0.32). Use of blinatumomab trended higher in those with private insurance (36% vs 45%, p=0.07), and inotuzumab was similar (11% for both, p=0.87). Median time from relapse to CAR-T or HCT was comparable (to CAR-T 102 vs 100 days, to HCT 117 vs 114 days). CONCLUSION This is the first study to demonstrate differential survival by insurance type, a proxy for poverty exposure, after first relapse of B-ALL. In this large multicenter, real-world cohort, patients with public insurance had worse OS after relapse than those with private insurance. The survival disparity existed independent of other SDOH factors. Adjustment for known high-risk disease features only partially accounted for the observed differences in OS. In contrast, rates of MRD-negative CR2 and receipt of CAR-T and HCT were comparable across insurance types. These findings highlight the urgent need to identify effective interventions that will ensure equitable outcomes after relapse.

Abstract INTRODUCTION Outcomes for 1st relapse of pediatric B-lymphoblastic leukemia (B-ALL), especially high/intermediate-risk (HR/IR) relapse, remain unacceptably poor. Limited enrollment of this population on cooperative group clinical trials has impeded our ability to study potentially effective regimens. In the current era, patients can access innovative immunotherapies commercially. However, there is no mechanism to capture outcomes for these off-study patients and no comparative effectiveness data to guide treatment selection. METHODS We conducted a multicenter, retrospective study of patients <30 years who initiated 1st relapse therapy at a participating center from 2018-2022 (ReCALL-1 Study). Objectives were to define real-world survival outcomes, compare response rates of reinduction strategies, describe the post-reinduction treatment landscape, and, for patients with HR/IR relapse, assess the comparative effectiveness (CE) of blinatumomab to hematopoietic cell transplant (blina/HCT) v CD19 CAR T cells (CART). For the CE analysis, we emulated an open-label, randomized study of blina/HCT v CART who achieved an M1/M2 marrow at the end of an intensive reinduction (EoRI). Patients were classified by their intended treatment at EoRI. Cox regression models were used to adjust for unbalanced patient and disease features by arms. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS) from EoRI. RESULTS The full cohort included 479 patients from 33 centers (31 US, 2 international). Median time to relapse was 31 months (m); 77% had bone marrow (BM) involvement and 31% central nervous sytem involvement. With a median follow-up of 49m from relapse, 4 year (y) OS, event-free survival (EFS), and non-relapse mortality (NRM) were 64%, 43%, and 13%, respectively. Among patients with very early BM (<18m, n=79), early BM (18-35m, n=76), late BM (≥36m, n=162), and isolated CNS (n=85) relapses, 4y OS/EFS were 29%/20%, 57%/35%, 78%/49%, and 84%/61%, respectively. Only 19% received reinduction therapy on a clinical trial. Among patients with BM disease, R3 reinduction (n=179) and VXLD (n=61) had identical MRD-negative (<0.01%) CR rates of 38% (p=1.00) and equivalent treatment failure (TF; M3 or extramedullary disease) rates: R3, 8% v VXLD 7%, p=0.79. Blina (n=33) and inotuzumab-based (n=21) reinductions achieved MRD-negative CR rates of 39% and 52%, respectively, but higher TF rates of 39% and 24%. Reinduction mortality was 2%: R3, n=5; VXLD, n=3; 3-drug reinduction, n=1. Overall, as part of 1st relapse therapy, 36% received CART (78% commercial product), 44% HCT, 40% blina, and 11% inotuzumab. The emulated trial included 159 patients, 95 on blina/HCT and 64 on CART. Study arms were well matched by demographics, cytogenetics, and relapse sites, but CART patients were more likely to have relapsed <18m from diagnosis (34% v 24%) and have EoRI M2 marrows (31% v 11%), and less likely to have private insurance (36% v 51%). Unadjusted OS was comparable between arms (log rank p=0.18): CART, 60% at 4y; blina/HCT, 71%, as was NRM (10% v 13% at 4y). EFS was lower for CART (p=0.049): 4y EFS 35% v 49% for blina/HCT. After adjustment for unbalanced covariates, the hazard of death was equivalent for CART as compared to blina/HCT (aHR 1.1, 95% CI 0.6-2.1, p=0.67) and EFS became more comparable (aHR 1.3, 95% CI 0.8-2.1, p=0.22). 91% of blina/HCT and 97% of CART received their intended cell therapy; time from EoRI to cell therapy was shorter for CART (67 v 86 days, p<.001). In the CART arm, 34% underwent consolidative HCT; 1/3 were preplanned and 2/3 due to loss of B cell aplasia or NGS-MRD positivity. Of those with a 2nd relapse, CART patients were more likely to be CD19 negative (47% v 10%, p=0.003). CONCLUSION In this multicenter, real-world cohort of children treated for 1st relapse in the immunotherapy era, suboptimal outcomes for early BM relapse persisted, with particularly dismal 4y OS of 29% for relapses <18m after diagnosis. In contrast, survival for late BM and isolated CNS relapses compared favorably to historic data. Only 1 in 5 patients initiated relapse therapy on a clinical trial and although 1st relapse is not an approved indication for commercial CART in pediatrics, 36% received CART. In an emulated trial of post-reinduction blina/HCT v CART, adjusted EFS and OS were comparable, suggesting that CART may be a viable alternative to HCT for select patients. Post hoc analyses will identify whether specific subgroups may benefit more from one strategy.