Orlando, Evelyn

Abstract Introduction: CTCLs are rare, heterogeneous non-Hodgkin lymphomas (NHL) with significant regional variability in treatment patterns. Prospective studies characterizing CTCL management, particularly in racially and ethnically diverse populations, remains limited. The LEO-MER multi-center prospective cohort study (NCT02736357) is designed to address the persistent disparities in outcomes research by enrolling historically underrepresented groups of patients diagnosed with lymphoma across the United States (US). Here, we present a real-world analysis of CTCL patients that reflects US academic practice, evaluating treatment patterns, as well as prognostic factors influencing survival outcomes. Methods: Patients aged ≥18 years with newly diagnosed CTCL were prospectively enrolled in either the University of Iowa/Mayo Clinic MER cohort (2002-2015) or the expanded LEO cohort (2015-2020), which included 8 US academic centers. Standardized protocols were used to abstract clinical, pathologic, treatment, and outcome data from medical records. ANOVA/Kruskal-Wallis and Fisher's/chi-square tests were used to compare patient distribution across demographic and clinical characteristics based on data distribution and sample size. Overall survival (OS) was calculated from diagnosis to death or last follow-up. Survival analyses employed Kaplan-Meier estimation supplemented by Cox proportional hazards modeling. Results: The LEO-MER cohort enrolled 223 CTCL patients (91 MER and 132 LEO). Subtypes included mycosis fungoides (MF, n=155, 69.5%), Sézary syndrome (SS, n=22, 9.9%), primary cutaneous anaplastic large-cell lymphoma (n=17, 7.6%), subcutaneous panniculitis-like T-cell lymphoma (n=11, 4.9%), cutaneous CD4+ small/medium T-cell lymphoproliferative-disorder (n=9, 4%), and other rarer CTCL subtypes (n=9, 4%). Among the MF/SS cohort, median age was 64 years (Range: 18-89 years), 58.2% (n=103) were male and race/ethnicity distribution included White (n=123, 69.5%), Black (n=29; 16.4%) and others/unknown (n=25; 14.1%). Stage distribution included 62.7% with early-stage (ES) MF (IA-IIA, n=111), 37.2% with advanced-stage (AS) MF (IIB-IVB, n=66). To complete diagnostic workup, T-cell receptor (TCR) testing was performed in 52.6% of skin biopsies (n=92) and 62.5% of blood samples (n=110), with clonal detection rates of 75% (69/92) in skin and 51.8% (57/110) in blood. Paired TCR matching between skin and blood samples was performed in 31.6% (n=56) of cases, demonstrating 53.6% (30/56) concordance. Blood flow cytometry data were reported in 80.1% (89/111) and 84.4% (56/66) of ES and AS MF cases, with T-cell population being detected in 7.2% (8/111) and 62.1% (41/66) of ES and AS cases. Nodal biopsies were obtained in 23.4% (n=41) of patients and clonality assessment was reported in 18.6% (33/177) of these cases. The MF/SS cohort's lifetime treatment exposure data (n=160) revealed topical skin-directed therapies alone (n=49, 31.8%) as the most common approach followed by lifetime exposure to topical skin-directed and systemic therapies (n=45, 29.2%) followed by multimodal exposure of topical skin-directed, radiation and systemic treatments (n=30, 19.5%). Only 5.6% of patients were enrolled in a clinical trial. First-line (1L) systemic regimens were predominantly a) immunomodulatory agents (n=47, 29.3%); including oral retinoid (n=20), extracorporeal photopheresis (n=18), interferon (n=9) followed by b) chemotherapy (n=30, 18.7%) and c) targeted therapies (n=17, 10.6%) including Brentuximab Vedotin (n=6), Romidepsin (n=5), Mogamulizumab (n=3), Vorinostat (n=2) and Pralatrexate (n=1). Multivariable analysis predicting 1L systemic treatment initiation demonstrated a significant association with presence of N2/N3 stage (N2/N3 vs N0/N1: Odds Ratio (OR): 5.45) and elevated LDH (OR: 5.30). At median follow-up of 91.1 months (mon), median OS was 122.3 mon (95% confidence interval 67.2-159.2 mon). In subset analyses, Black race (p=0.001) and SS (p=0.0001) were associated with worse OS outcomes. Conclusion: We present initial data from our prospective LEO-MER cohort, a large US-based multicenter consortia. Our findings demonstrate variability in both diagnostic staging and treatment approaches for MF/SS patients. The cohort demonstrated worse outcomes with high-risk disease and Black race/ethnicity. These findings warrant further study on the impact of underlying social determinant factors, given the variability noted in this population.

Abstract Background Nodal peripheral T-cell lymphomas (nPTCLs) are a challenging group of non-Hodgkin lymphomas that frequently recur after or are refractory to first line (1L) treatment. Chemotherapy options in the relapsed or refractory (R/R) setting are limited. The incorporation of non-cytotoxic agents including antibody drug conjugates, immune checkpoint inhibitors, epigenetic modifiers, and phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase inhibitors offers new therapeutic potential and possibly better outcomes. We report on outcomes for patients (pts) with R/R nPTCL enrolled in the multi-center LEO-MER prospective cohort study (NCT02736357) who received second line (2L) therapy. Methods Six hundred and three adult pts with newly diagnosed nPTCL were prospectively enrolled in the University of Iowa/Mayo Clinic MER observational cohort (2002-2015) or the expanded LEO cohort (2015-2020). Secondary overall survival (sOS) was calculated from date of 2L treatment initiation to date of death or last follow-up. Secondary event-free survival (sEFS) was calculated from date of 2Ltreatment initiation to disease progression, initiation of 3rd line therapy, or death from any cause. sEFS and sOS were evaluated using Cox model and Kaplan-Meier estimator. Log-rank test was used to test the significance of difference between groups. Pts with concomitant B-cell lymphomas were excluded from this analysis. Results Thus far, 169 pts with nPTCL initiating 2L therapy were evaluated. Of these, 75 (44.4%) had PTCL-NOS, 63 (37.3%) had angioimmunoblastic T-cell lymphoma (AITL, inclusive of nodal T-follicular helper cell lymphoma), 20 (11.8%) had ALK-negative anaplastic large cell lymphoma (ALCL), and 11 (6.5%) had ALK-positive ALCL. At 2L treatment initiation, the median age was 64 with 86.1% of pts having advanced stage disease. Of the 108 pts with available international prognostic index (IPI) scoring, 46.3% had an IPI of ≥3. Thirty-four (20.1%) pts had received a consolidative autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) in the 1L. A total of 86 pts (50.1%) had primary refractory disease (partial response, stable or progressive disease as best response to 1L therapy), 45 (26.6%) experienced early relapsing disease within 6 months of 1L therapy, and 38 (22.5%) had relapsed disease >6 months from 1L therapy. After a median follow-up of 7.1 years (yrs), median sOS was 1.52 yrs, and sEFS was 3.2 months (mos). There was no difference in sOS or sEFS regardless of timing of relapse. In keeping with other studies, ALK-positive ALCL pts had the best 5-year OS (70.1%) compared to other subgroups (ALK-negative ALCL 45.0%, AITL 30.4%; PTCL-NOS 21.3%). Lymphoma was the leading cause of death following 2L therapy, with a 2-year cumulative incidence of 49.2%. Eighty pts (47.3%) received only cytotoxic chemotherapy as second line (2L) therapy; ICE (41 (51.3%)) and gemcitabine-containing regimens were most common (14 (17.5%)). Seventy-five pts (44.4%) were treated with non-cytotoxic agents given as monotherapy or in combination with chemotherapy. The most common non-cytotoxic therapies were brentuximab vedotin (33 (44.0%)), romidepsin (17 (22.7%)) and immune checkpoint inhibitors (9 (12.0%)). Fourteen pts (8.3%) underwent palliative interventions involving radiation, steroids, or cyclosporine alone. Intent to proceed to transplant in the 2L was known in 158 pts (101 (63.9%) not intended, 57 (36.1% intended)). Following 2L treatment, 18 (10.7%) pts proceeded to consolidative ASCT and 10 (5.9%) to allogeneic transplant. Only 21 (12.9%) were treated on a clinical trial. Pts who received a non-cytotoxic agent had superior outcomes compared to pts receiving only chemotherapy; the median sOS was 30.4 mos (95% confidence interval [CI] 15.3, 53.52 mos) vs 11.7 mos ((95% CI 7.95,19.58); p=0.04; HR 0.67) and the median sEFS was 4.83 mos (95% CI 3.38, 10.09) vs 2.33 mos ((95% CI 1.71,3.02); p=0.02; HR=0.65). Conclusions We report here one of the largest prospective cohorts in R/R nPTCL. The LEO-MER cohort, despite its association with academic centers, shows poor outcomes regardless of refractory or relapsed disease, frequent inability to proceed to intended consolidative transplant, and low clinical trial participation in 2L, which corroborates findings from other registries (Jain 2025, Stuver 2019). Outcomes improved for pts treated with non-cytotoxic agents. Updated data including additional pts and subgroup analyses will be reported at the meeting.