Izutsu, Koji

We report correlative circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) analyses from TRANSFORM (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03575351 ) evaluating lisocabtagene maraleucel (liso-cel) versus standard of care (salvage immunochemotherapy, high-dose chemotherapy, autologous stem cell transplantation [ASCT]) in second-line large B-cell lymphoma (LBCL). ctDNA association with efficacy was investigated at predefined time points (random assignment, day 43, day 64, and day 126 [3 months after liso-cel, approximately 2 months after ASCT]) for 136 patients using ultrasensitive PhasED-Seq. ctDNA clearance (measurable residual disease [MRD] neg ) predicted longer event-free survival (EFS) at all time points in both arms, with significantly more liso-cel–treated patients achieving MRD neg . Liso-cel demonstrated superior outcomes versus ASCT, including longer EFS, progression-free survival (PFS), and duration of response among patients in complete response (CR) and MRD neg . ctDNA re-emergence in patients with CR after ASCT confirmed its potential in predicting relapse. MRD neg remained significantly associated with EFS after adjusting for positron emission tomography (PET) response, while interaction testing revealed a significant interaction between PET status and treatment arm for EFS. Liso-cel achieved deeper, more durable molecular clearance by ctDNA, consistent with superior EFS and PFS versus ASCT for second-line LBCL treatment. ctDNA-MRD provided prognostic value beyond PET, supporting its role as a complementary biomarker for treatment response and relapse prediction.

The phase III AUGMENT trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01938001 ) demonstrated improved efficacy for lenalidomide plus rituximab (R 2 ) versus rituximab with placebo (R-placebo) in patients with relapsed or refractory (R/R) indolent non-Hodgkin lymphoma (iNHL). Here, we present the long-term follow-up results and prespecified subgroup analyses of patients with follicular lymphoma (FL), including those 70 years and older. Patients with R/R grade 1 to 3a iNHL were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive R 2 or R-placebo. In this long-term follow-up report, progression-free survival (PFS) was assessed per the investigator. Secondary end points included overall survival (OS) and safety. Of the 358 randomly assigned patients (intent-to-treat [ITT] population), 295 had FL (≥70 years, n = 66). At long-term follow-up (median, 65.9 months), in the ITT iNHL population, PFS (hazard ratio [HR], 0.50 [95% CI, 0.38 to 0.66]) and OS (HR, 0.59 [95% CI, 0.37 to 0.95]) were improved with R 2 versus R-placebo. Safety findings were consistent with the primary analysis. Improved long-term efficacy with R 2 versus R-placebo and manageable safety with R 2 were observed in patients with FL, including those 70 years and older. With a follow-up of >5 years, data from the AUGMENT trial continue to support the use of R 2 as a standard of care for patients with R/R iNHL.

We report 3-year follow-up results from TRANSFORM comparing lisocabtagene maraleucel (liso-cel) versus standard of care (SOC) for second-line primary refractory/early relapsed (≤12 months) large B-cell lymphoma (LBCL). Adults eligible for autologous stem cell transplantation (N = 184) were randomly assigned 1:1 to liso-cel (100 × 10 6 chimeric antigen receptor–positive T cells) or SOC. Results are reported descriptively. With a median follow-up of 33.9 months, median (95% CI) event-free survival was 29.5 months (9.5 to not reached [NR]) for liso-cel versus 2.4 months (2.2 to 4.9) for SOC (hazard ratio [HR], 0.375; 95% CI, 0.259 to 0.542). Median progression-free survival was NR (12.6-NR) for liso-cel versus 6.2 months (4.3-8.6) for SOC (HR, 0.422; 95% CI, 0.279 to 0.639) with 36-month rates of 51% versus 26.5%. Median overall survival (OS) was NR for both arms (HR, 0.757; 95% CI, 0.481 to 1.191), with 66% of patients crossing over to receive liso-cel; 36-month OS rate was 63% for liso-cel versus 52% for SOC. OS HR (0.566 [95% CI, 0.359 to 0.895]) favored liso-cel when accounting for the treatment effect of crossover. Safety results were consistent with previous reports. At 3-year follow-up, liso-cel confirmed superior, more durable efficacy versus SOC with a favorable safety profile and no new safety signals. These data support liso-cel as an effective second-line treatment with curative potential for relapsed/refractory LBCL.

PURPOSE Pirtobrutinib is a highly selective, noncovalent (reversible) Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitor (BTKi). We report the safety and efficacy of pirtobrutinib in patients with covalent Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitor (cBTKi) pretreated mantle-cell lymphoma (MCL), a population with poor prognosis. METHODS Patients with cBTKi pretreated relapsed/refractory (R/R) MCL received pirtobrutinib monotherapy in a multicenter phase I/II trial (BRUIN; ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03740529 ). Efficacy was assessed in the first 90 consecutively enrolled patients who met criteria for inclusion in the primary efficacy cohort. The primary end point was overall response rate (ORR). Secondary end points included duration of response (DOR) and safety. RESULTS The median patient age was 70 years (range, 46-87), the median prior lines of therapy was 3 (range, 1-8), 82.2% had discontinued a prior cBTKi because of disease progression, and 77.8% had intermediate- or high-risk simplified MCL International Prognostic Index score. The ORR was 57.8% (95% CI, 46.9 to 68.1), including 20.0% complete responses (n = 18). At a median follow-up of 12 months, the median DOR was 21.6 months (95% CI, 7.5 to not reached). The 6- and 12-month estimated DOR rates were 73.6% and 57.1%, respectively. In the MCL safety cohort (n = 164), the most common treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were fatigue (29.9%), diarrhea (21.3%), and dyspnea (16.5%). Grade ≥3 TEAEs of hemorrhage (3.7%) and atrial fibrillation/flutter (1.2%) were less common. Only 3% of patients discontinued pirtobrutinib because of a treatment-related adverse event. CONCLUSION Pirtobrutinib is a first-in-class novel noncovalent (reversible) BTKi and the first BTKi of any kind to demonstrate durable efficacy after prior cBTKi therapy in heavily pretreated R/R MCL. Pirtobrutinib was well tolerated with low rates of treatment discontinuation because of toxicity.

AbstractBackgroundStudies suggest that immune checkpoint inhibitors may represent a promising strategy for boosting immune responses and improving the antitumor activity of standard therapies in patients with relapsed/refractory hematologic malignancies.AimsPhase 1/2 FUSION NHL 001 was designed to determine the safety and efficacy of durvalumab, an anti‐programmed death ligand 1 (PD‐L1) antibody, combined with standard‐of‐care therapies for lymphoma or chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL).Methods and ResultsThe primary endpoints were to determine the recommended phase 2 dose of the drugs used in combination with durvalumab (durvalumab was administered at the previously recommended dose of 1500 mg every 4 weeks) and to assess safety and tolerability. Patients were enrolled into one of four arms: durvalumab monotherapy (Arm D) or durvalumab in combination with lenalidomide ± rituximab (Arm A), ibrutinib (Arm B), or rituximab ± bendamustine (Arm C). A total of 106 patients with relapsed/refractory lymphoma were enrolled. All but two patients experienced at least one treatment‐emergent adverse event (TEAE); those not experiencing a TEAE were in Arm C (diffuse large B‐cell lymphoma [DLBCL]) and Arm D (DLBCL during the durvalumab monotherapy treatment period). No new safety signals were identified, and TEAEs were consistent with the respective safety profiles for each study treatment. Across the study, patients with follicular lymphoma (FL; n = 23) had an overall response rate (ORR) of 59%; ORR among DLBCL patients (n = 37) was 18%. Exploratory biomarker analysis showed that response to durvalumab monotherapy or combination therapy was associated with higher interferon‐γ signature scores in patients with FL (p = .02).ConclusionDurvalumab as monotherapy or in combination is tolerable but requires close monitoring. The high rate of TEAEs during this study may reflect on the difficulty in combining durvalumab with full doses of other agents. Durvalumab alone or in combination appeared to add limited benefit to therapy.

PURPOSEPatients with indolent non-Hodgkin lymphoma typically respond well to first-line immunochemotherapy. At relapse, single-agent rituximab is commonly administered. Data suggest the immunomodulatory agent lenalidomide could increase the activity of rituximab.METHODSA phase III, multicenter, randomized trial of lenalidomide plus rituximab versus placebo plus rituximab was conducted in patients with relapsed and/or refractory follicular or marginal zone lymphoma. Patients received lenalidomide or placebo for 12 cycles plus rituximab once per week for 4 weeks in cycle 1 and day 1 of cycles 2 through 5. The primary end point was progression-free survival per independent radiology review.RESULTSA total of 358 patients were randomly assigned to lenalidomide plus rituximab (n = 178) or placebo plus rituximab (n = 180). Infections (63% v 49%), neutropenia (58% v 23%), and cutaneous reactions (32% v 12%) were more common with lenalidomide plus rituximab. Grade 3 or 4 neutropenia (50% v 13%) and leukopenia (7% v 2%) were higher with lenalidomide plus rituximab; no other grade 3 or 4 adverse event differed by 5% or more between groups. Progression-free survival was significantly improved for lenalidomide plus rituximab versus placebo plus rituximab, with a hazard ratio of 0.46 (95% CI, 0.34 to 0.62; P < .001) and median duration of 39.4 months (95% CI, 22.9 months to not reached) versus 14.1 months (95% CI, 11.4 to 16.7 months), respectively.CONCLUSIONLenalidomide improved efficacy of rituximab in patients with recurrent indolent lymphoma, with an acceptable safety profile.