Lukowski, Joseph

Abstract Introduction: Lisocabtagene maraleucel (liso-cel) was approved in the United States for the treatment of CLL in 3/2024 for patients who have received two prior lines of therapy including a covalent BTK inhibitor and a BCL-2 inhibitor. Data regarding outcomes of liso-cel is limited to reports from the registrational TRANSCEND-CLL 004 clinical trial which had strict inclusion and exclusion criteria. This work investigates the real-world efficacy and safety of liso-cel for patients with CLL and its efficacy in specific sub-populations. Methods: This is a multi-institutional retrospective study (Collaborative Assessment of Real-World Evidence of Lisocabtagene Maraleucel in Patients with Relapsed/Refractory CLL/SLL [CARE CAR-T CLL]) of patients with CLL who received commercial liso-cel in the United States. Patients with Richter transformation were excluded. Response was defined by iwCLL criteria. Patients who did not undergo a marrow biopsy but met other criteria for a complete response (CR) were categorized as unconfirmed CR (CRu). CRS and ICANS were graded per ASTCT criteria. Results: A total of 30 patients were identified with a median age of 67 years (range 44 – 80). Twenty of thirty patients (67%) had either del17p and/or mutated TP53, and 8/30 (27%) had complex karyotype (≥ 3 abnormalities) at time of liso-cel infusion. Patients received a median of 6 prior lines of therapy (range 1 - 12), and 24 (80%) were previously treated with chemotherapy. All patients had previous exposure to a covalent BTK inhibitor and a BCL-2 inhibitor. Twenty-seven (90%) of patients had prior exposure to pirtobrutinib. Twenty-nine patients (96.7%) received bridging treatment that was stopped after leukapheresis with 1 patient in CR and 25 patients in PR at time of liso-cel. Eighteen patients (60%) were treated with pirtobrutinib as the last line of treatment prior to liso-cel. Median length of time on pirtobrutinib prior to liso-cel infusion was 4 months (interquartile range [IQR], 2 – 8 months). Twelve (66.7%) patients stopped pirtobrutinib between leukapheresis and lymphodepletion, and 6 continued after liso-cel. Best CR/CRu rate was 60.0% (CR, n = 17/30; CRu, n = 1/30), and best overall response rate (ORR) was 83.3% (25/30) with median time to best response of 30 days (IQR, 28 – 30 days). Of the 18 patients who received pirtobrutinib as their last line of therapy, 13 (72%) achieved a CR/CRu. Meanwhile, of the 12 patients who did not receive pirtobrutinib as their last line of therapy, only 5 (28%) achieved a CR. Measurable residual disease testing (MRD) by flow cytometry was done in 14/30 patients, and 9 patients (64%) had achieved undetectable MRD (uMRD). MRD by next generation sequencing (NGS) was done in 17 patients, and 7 (41%) patients had uMRD. Twenty-seven of 30 patients (90%) were alive at time of data collection. Median follow-up was 3.3 months (IQR, 1.2 – 8.9 months). Twenty-six patients (87%) experienced any grade cytokine release syndrome (CRS), and 3 patients experienced grade 3 CRS (10%). Twelve patients (40%) experienced any grade immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome (ICANS), and 4 patients (13%) experienced grade 3 ICANS. There were no grade 4 or 5 CRS or ICANS. One patient experienced grade 3 immune effector cell-associated hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis-like syndrome (IEC-HS). At day 30, patients had a median absolute neutrophil count of 1.7K/μL (IQR, 0.8 – 3.6K/μL), hemoglobin of 11.7 g/dL (IQR, 8.6 – 13.1 g/dL), and platelet count of 72K/μL (IQR, 29 – 119K/μL). Conclusion: Real-world analysis of liso-cel for patients with relapsed/refractory CLL showed CR and ORR of 60.0% and 83.3%, respectively. Despite having a heavily pre-treated and chemotherapy-exposed population and with over half the patients having high-risk features, these response rates are higher than what was described in the TRANSCEND-CLL 004 clinical trial. These results are limited by the short follow-up period and the variability in response assessment typical of a retrospective study. As we increase our sample size, we will also be interested if the use of the non-covalent BTK inhibitor pirtobrutinib prior to liso-cel is associated with a higher CR rate, mimicking the findings of the sub-cohort analysis of TRANSCEND-CLL 004 where the concurrent use of ibrutinib led to higher CR rates. Further updates and patients from additional collaborators will be presented at the meeting.

Abstract Introduction: Primary central nervous system T-cell lymphoma (PCNSTL) is a rare form of PCNSL, comprising 2–8% of cases. Prognostic factors remain undefined, and no standard treatment protocol currently exists. Prior studies have been limited by small sample sizes, incomplete molecular profiling, and poor representation of novel treatment modalities. In this study, we aimed to identify clinicopathologic factors associated with patient (pt) outcomes and delineate the spectrum of treatment regimens used to inform future clinical practice. Methods A multicenter retrospective study was conducted across 15 North American academic institutions. Pts aged ≥18 years with biopsy-confirmed PCNSTL between 2009 and 2025 with no evidence of systemic disease were included. Cases with CNS relapse of systemic T-cell lymphoma were excluded. Baseline characteristics were analyzed using independent t-tests, Fisher's exact tests, or Pearson's chi-square tests. Primary endpoints were overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS), evaluated by Kaplan–Meier, log-rank tests, and Cox regression. Results: Forty-two pts met inclusion criteria. Median age was 57 (range 19–77), 69% were male, and 79% were white. Most (69%) had ECOG 0–1. No patients had HIV, hepatitis B or C, or a history of solid organ transplant. LDH was elevated at diagnosis in 38%, and 24% had B-symptoms. Mean absolute lymphocyte count at diagnosis was 1.82/µL. The most common histologic subtypes were PTCL-NOS (76%), followed by ALK-negative ALCL (12%) and γδ T-cell lymphoma (5%). All patients had parenchymal brain lesions with 57% having multifocal disease. Additionally, CSF involvement was seen in 21%, vitreoretinal involvement in 3%, and deep brain involvement in 34%. Next-generation sequencing was performed in seven pts (17%), with disease-associated variants identified in three cases. Among these, two pts had mutations in TP53, and one had a mutation in DNMT3A. Cytogenetics were obtained in 7 pts with only one exhibiting a complex karyotype. Only one pt was EBV positive by EBER-ISH. Overall, 79% received HD-MTX-based therapy. First-line treatments were mainly HD-MTX alone (38%), HD-MTX + temozolomide (17%), or vincristine + procarbazine (12%). No patients were treated on clinical trials. Median treatment duration was 78 days and median number of treatment cycles was 4 (range 1–9 cycles). One patient received radiation alone; 5% received radiation with systemic therapy. A steroid pre-phase was used in 60%, with 44% exhibiting a clinical response. Overall response rate to first-line treatment was 63% (13 CR, 12 PR). Imaging alone was used in determining response in all patients. Repeated biopsy was not performed. Twelve patients (29%) underwent consolidative autologous transplant, most commonly with thiotepa/carmustine (TT/BCNU, 69%) or BEAM conditioning (25%). Median duration of follow-up was 10.4 months. Sixty-two percent of pts progressed during the study period, with 7% experiencing extra-CNS relapse. Median PFS was 8.2 months. Improved PFS was associated with >3 cycles of therapy (p=0.03) and transplant with TT/BCNU (p=0.0004). At last follow-up, 43% were in remission and 52% were deceased, mostly due to disease progression (77%). Median OS was 17.6 months. One- and two-year OS rates were 58% and 42%, respectively. OS was associated with Nottingham/Barcelona score <2 (p=0.02), >3 treatment cycles (p=0.0008), response to first-line therapy (p=0.0007), and TT/BCNU-based transplant (p=0.0001). IELSG, Taipei, and MSKCC risk scores were not significantly associated with survival, though IELSG approached significance (p=0.09). Discussion: This study is among the largest cohorts of PCNSTL pts compiled to date. PCNSTL remains rare and heterogenous. Treatment across centers largely mirrors management of B-cell PCNSL with high utilization of HD-MTX regimens and TT/BCNU conditioning autologous transplant. Survival outcomes within our cohort are consistent with those previously reported within the literature. Receipt of >3 cycles of therapy, TT/BCNU conditioning and Nottingham/Barcelona scores were associated with longer survival within our cohort. Limitations of our study include its retrospective design and heterogeneity within pt disease characteristics, treatments utilized and disease assessment intervals. Further exploration into pathophysiology and optimal management of this unique entity is needed.

Abstract Background: Given a potential risk of extravasation with vesicants and irritants, central venous catheters (CVCs), such as port-a-cath or peripherally inserted central catheters (PICC), are commonly used for the administration of anthracycline-based chemotherapy. However, CVC placement can result in treatment delay, deep vein thrombosis (DVT), catheter malfunction, and added burdens (eg, financial, travel, etc), partly due to the need for regular flushing. Peripheral intravenous (PIV) access is often utilized in the academic setting with select frontline chemotherapy regimens. However, there is limited data reporting on the safety of PIV in this setting. This large, multicenter RWA evaluated the use and associated complications of PIV and CVC for administering CHOP- or ABVD-based chemotherapy in patients (pts) with lymphoma. Methods: We conducted a retrospective RWA across 8 U.S. centers among pts aged ≥18 years with non-Hodgkin lymphoma and Hodgkin lymphoma who were consecutively treated with ABVD or CHOP-based anthracycline chemotherapy via PIV or CVC access between 2010-2024. Choice of catheter placement was at the discretion of the pt's treating physician. Detailed baseline and safety data were collected. The primary outcome was extravasation; secondary outcomes included infiltration, DVT, cellulitis, erythema, and pain. Standard definitions of extravasation and other complications were used (Jackson-Rose J. CJON 2017). Rates of complications were compared via Fischer exact testing. Results: A total of 1,414 pts were included in the analysis: 790 in each arm (ie, PIV vs CVC). Of these, 624 were unique to each group, while 166 pts received chemotherapy via both modalities (PIV and CVC during the treatment course). Overall, 78.9% of pts completed all treatment as planned via PIV. Median age was 63 years (IQR 45–75) in the PIV group and 61 years (IQR 40–73) in the CVC group. Male sex comprised 57% vs 51%, ECOG 0–1 performance status was 83% vs 76%, and advanced-stage disease (stage III/IV) was present in 51% vs 62%, respectively. Lymphoma subtypes were comparable: DLBCL/high-grade/B-cell NOS (54.5% vs 56.1%), Hodgkin lymphoma (27.2% vs 27.5%), T-cell lymphoma (12.4% vs 6.6%), and indolent/mantle cell lymphoma (5.6% vs 6.7%). Among those receiving chemotherapy via CVC, 78.5% were treated through a port-a-cath and 21.5% via PICC. CHOP-based and ABVD-based regimens were administered to 68% and 32% of PIV pts, and 69.6% and 30.4% of CVC pts, respectively. A total of 4,084 (PIV) vs 3,859 (CVC) treatment cycles were delivered, corresponding to 4,347 (PIV) vs 4,884 (CVC) anthracycline infusion days. There was 1 documented case of extravasation in the CVC group and 2 suspected cases in the PIV group (p=0.9); for PIV, this translates to a per pt risk of 0.3% (or 0.05% of infusion days). The two PIV cases involved elderly women with DLBCL receiving CHOP. Both developed localized symptoms post-infusion and were treated conservatively (DMSO/warm compresses or dexrazoxane/ice), with full symptom resolution within 1 week and 1 day, respectively. No tissue or vascular injury occurred. Additionally, there were no significant differences between the PIV and CVC groups in the rates of induration/swelling (1.8% vs 2.0%, p=0.85), phlebitis/cellulitis (2.4% vs 2.4%, p=0.9), venous thromboembolism (VTE; 1.4% vs 2.0%, p=0.32), or erythema (3.8% vs 5.1%, p=0.27). Pain or tenderness at the infusion site (8.5% vs 2.9%, p=0.001) and infiltration (1.4 vs 0.13%, p=0.006) were more frequent in the PIV group. Chronic vascular complications related to prior VTE was slightly lower in the PIV group (0.13% vs 0.9%, p=0.06), but not significant. Additional details from a propensity score-matched analysis will be presented at the meeting. Conclusions: This is the largest known analysis to date evaluating the safety of PIV access for anthracycline-based chemotherapy in >1,500 lymphoma pts over a recent 15-year period, representing >9,000 total treatments with CHOP or ABVD. PIV access was found to be safe and associated with a low rate of serious complications. Moreover, extravasation was rare and there was not a significant difference observed between PIV and CVC use. While PIV use was associated with higher rates of local pain/tenderness and infiltration, the events were uncommon and self-limited. Despite the widespread default to CVC placement in many centers, these findings support the selective use of PIV in appropriate pts as elucidated here.