Geyer, Susan

Abstract Varlilumab is a monoclonal antibody with agonistic activity on CD27. The efficacy of single-agent PD-1 inhibitors on aggressive B-cell non-Hodkin lymphoma is limited. Preclinical and phase 1 data suggest that Varlilumab is safe and may have synergistic activity with PD-1 inhibitors. In the DIAL study, we explored whether dual immunomodulatory therapy with Varlilumab and Nivolumab in patients with relapsed/refractory aggressive B-NHL was safe and effective. We conducted a randomized phase II clinical trial on adult patients with relapsed/refractory aggressive B-NHL. Patients were randomized to receive Nivolumab monotherapy in the control group and Varlilumab combined with Nivolumab in the experimental group. Crossover to the experimental group was allowed upon progression in the control group. The primary endpoint was the overall response rate based on the Lymphoma Response to Immunomodulatory Therapy Criteria (LYRIC). 54 patients underwent randomization, and 51 received assigned intervention and were included in the intention-to-treat analysis. Objective response was observed in 6 out of 51 patients (ORR 12%). There were 4 responders (ORR 16%) in the Nivolumab group and 2 responders (ORR 7.6%) in the Nivolumab and Varlilumab combination group (p = 0.3). None of the 7 patients that crossed over to the experimental group responded to the addition of Varlilumab. The ORR of patients who were previously exposed to CAR-T cell therapy was 13% (5 out of 39) compared to 8.3% (1 out of 12) in the unexposed patients (p > 0.99). The rate of treatment emergent adverse events was similar between groups, and there was no fatal TEAE in the study. The addition of Varlilumab to Nivolumb did not improve outcomes in patients with aggressive B-NHL. Even though this trial was not designed to evaluate immunotherapy as a rescue therapy after CAR-T failure, most patients (76%) had previously received CAR-T therapy, and their outcomes were equally poor.

Abstract Purpose Bevacizumab is an effective treatment for radiation necrosis; dose dependent radiographic and edema response data are lacking. Methods Multicenter, retrospective cohort study of adult patients with primary central nervous system tumors or brain metastases who received bevacizumab for radiation necrosis between June 2021 and July 2024. Patients were grouped by bevacizumab dose (7.5 mg/kg vs 10 mg/kg administered every three weeks). Primary outcome was edema response, assessed by a blinded neuro-oncologist. Secondary outcomes included contrast enhancing disease response, clinical response, adverse events, treatment discontinuation, and re-dosing for recurrent radiation necrosis. Analyses were performed with and without adjustment for tumor type. Results 104 patients were included (7.5 mg/kg, n = 53; 10 mg/kg, n = 51). Edema response differed between dosing groups in unadjusted analyses (p = 0.032), favoring the 7.5 mg/kg cohort; however, this association was attenuated after adjustment for tumor type. Contrast enhancing disease response did not differ between groups in either unadjusted or adjusted analyses (p = 0.43). Clinical response was higher in the 7.5 mg/kg group (65.2% vs 37.8%, p = 0.013). Tumor type differed significantly between cohorts (p < 0.001), with more primary CNS tumors in the 10 mg/kg group. Rates of adverse events, treatment discontinuation, and re-dosing were similar. Conclusions While lower-dose bevacizumab was associated with greater edema reduction in unadjusted analyses, this effect was attenuated after accounting for tumor type. Importantly, 7.5 mg/kg dosing appeared sufficient for achieving edema control and contrast enhancing disease response. These findings support an individualized approach to bevacizumab dosing in radiation necrosis and highlight the need for prospective, tumor-stratified studies.