Soumerai, Jacob D

Patients in the liso-cel plus ibrutinib cohort of the phase 1/2, open-label TRANSCEND CLL 004 study had relapsed/refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL)/small lymphocytic lymphoma (SLL) and received liso-cel (50×106 [dose level (DL)1] or 100×106 [DL2] chimeric antigen receptor-positive T cells) with concurrent ibrutinib from enrollment through 90 days after liso-cel infusion or longer per investigator discretion. Primary end point was complete response/remission (CR)/CR with incomplete marrow recovery (CRi) by investigator assessment. Among 56 patients who received ibrutinib plus liso-cel (DL1, n=5; DL2, n=51), median (range) age was 64.5 years (44‒77), 98% had high-risk cytogenetics, 55% had progression on Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitor and venetoclax failure, and median (range) number of prior therapies was 5 (1‒13). Median (range) follow-up was 24.8 months (3.1‒51.8). At DL2, CR/CRi rate was 45% (95% confidence interval [CI], 31‒60) and overall response rate was 86% (95% CI, 74‒94). Median (95% CI) duration of response was not reached (NR; 28.7‒NR) for patients with CR/CRi and 41.4 months (23.3‒NR) for all responders. Median (95% CI) progression-free survival was 31.4 months (20.1‒NR). In DL1+DL2, most common grade ≥3 treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAE) were neutropenia (52%) and anemia (41%). Cytokine release syndrome was reported in 80% of patients (grade 3, 4%; no grade 4/5), and neurological events in 41% (grade 3/4, 11%; no grade 5). Ibrutinib-related TEAEs were reported in 68% of patients (grade 3/4, 43%; no grade 5). Liso-cel plus ibrutinib demonstrated notable efficacy in patients with relapsed/refractory CLL/SLL with predictable and manageable safety. Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT03331198; NCT03435796.

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: The first-generation BCL2 inhibitor,venetoclax, is an effective treatment for CLL/SLL, but its usage may be limited by toxicity. Sonrotoclax, a next-generation BCL2 inhibitor, is a more selective and pharmacologically potent inhibitor of BCL2 than venetoclax, with a shorter half-life and no drug accumulation. BGB-11417-101 (NCT04277637) is an ongoing, phase 1/1b, dose-escalation/expansion study in patients with B-cell malignancies. Presented here are preliminary data for sonrotoclax + obinutuzumab in patients with treatment-naive (TN) CLL/SLL in BGB-11417-101. Methods: Obinutuzumab is administered intravenously at 100 mg on day (D) 1, 900 mg on D2, 1,000 mg on D8 and D15 of cycle (C) 1, and then 1,000 mg on D1 of C2-6 of each 28-day cycle. Beginning on C2D1, sonrotoclax is administered orally once daily with ramp-up to the target doses, 160 or 320 mg. Patients can continue treatment until progressive disease (PD), unacceptable toxicity, or undetectable minimal residual disease (uMRD4; <1 CLL cell per 10,000 leukocytes [<0.01%]) in peripheral blood (PB) by next-generation sequencing (NGS; ClonoSEQ) after 15 treatment cycles. Study endpoints include safety per NCI-CTCAE v5.0, overall response rate (ORR) per iwCLL guidelines, and MRD status in PB per modified ERIC flow cytometry (FC) assay or NGS, depending on the timepoint. Tumor lysis syndrome (TLS) is assessed per Howard (2011) criteria. Results: As of May 16, 2025, 55 patients with TN CLL/SLL were enrolled (160 mg, n=20; 320 mg, n=35), and 21 patients (all 320 mg) have discontinued sonrotoclax + obinutuzumab (due to uMRD4 per NGS as protocol-mandated [n=17], PI decision uMRD4 per FC [n=2], and PD [n=2]). Four patients discontinued obinutuzumab only per PI decision (160 mg, n=1), thrombocytopenia (320 mg, n=2), and prostate cancer prior to starting sonrotoclax (160 mg, n=1). For all patients, the median age was 62 y, 65% were male, and 89% were White. At baseline, 14% of patients (8/55) had high tumor burden and 58% (31/53) had unmutated IGHV. Median study follow-up was 8.9 months (range, 0.4-25.4 months) for all patients; 6.4 months (range, 0.4-9.0 months) for 160 mg; and 16.0 months (range, 2.9-25.4 months) for 320 mg. Maximum tolerated dose was not reached. The most common any-grade treatment-emergent AEs (TEAEs) were thrombocytopenia (56%), infusion-related reaction (56%), and neutropenia (49%). Neutropenia was the most common grade ≥3 TEAE (38%). No deaths due to TEAEs occurred, and no TEAEs led to sonrotoclax discontinuation. Two cases of laboratory TLS occurred after C1D1 of obinutuzumab prior to starting sonrotoclax; no clinical or laboratory TLS occurred during sonrotoclax ramp up. No meaningful safety differences were observed among sonrotoclax dose cohorts. In 37 efficacy-evaluable patients (160 mg, n=7; 320 mg, n=30), the ORR was 89%; for the 320-mg cohort, ORR was 93% (28/30). Complete response (CR) rates (CR + CR with incomplete marrow recovery [CRi]) were 46% (all patients) and 43% (320 mg). For 23 patients in the 320 mg cohort who reached the C15 MRD assessment, the best C15 uMRD4 rate per FC was 87% (20/23; 2 not evaluable; 1 missing); per NGS, the uMRD4 rate at C15 was 78% (18/23; 5 missing). All patients with an available C15 MRD assessment achieved uMRD4 and remain in remission as of the data cutoff date. The median time from reaching sonrotoclax target dose to uMRD4 was 2.3 months (range, 1.4-5.6 months) in the 320-mg cohort. Three patients experienced PFS events: 1 died from an indeterminate cause (160 mg, discontinued treatment after C1D9 of obinutuzumab) and 2 had PD (320 mg; both Richter's transformation at C6 and C2). Conclusions: Sonrotoclax + obinutuzumab was generally well tolerated in patients with TN CLL/SLL, with no sonrotoclax discontinuations or deaths due to TEAEs. No laboratory or clinical TLS events occurred during sonrotoclax ramp-up. Encouraging antitumor activity was observed with sonrotoclax 320 mg. High rates of blood uMRD4 occurred early and deepened over time. All patients with an available C15 MRD assessment by NGS or FC achieved uMRD4 and remain in remission. A registrational phase 3 study (CELESTIAL-RRCLL, BGB-11417-303) assessing this combination with sonrotoclax 320 mg is currently recruiting.

Background: In TRANSCEND CLL 004 (NCT03331198),monotherapy with liso-cel, an autologous, CD19-directed CAR T cell product (100 × 106 CAR+ T cells [dose level (DL) 2]), resulted in 43% ORR and 18% CR/CR with incomplete marrow recovery (CRi) rate per IRC in pts with third-line or later R/R CLL/SLL who had PD on Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitor (BTKi) and failed venetoclax (Siddiqi T, et al. Lancet 2023). Ibr + other CAR T cell therapies has shown high ORR and reduced cytokine release syndrome (CRS) severity in pts with R/R CLL/SLL. In the phase 1 dose-escalation ibr combination cohort, DL2 was the recommended dose of liso-cel for expansion (Wierda WG, et al. Blood 2020). Here, we report results of liso-cel + ibr in pts with R/R CLL/SLL from TRANSCEND CLL 004. Methods: Eligible pts ≥ 18 y of age with CLL/SLL had ≥ 1 of the following: 1) receiving BTKi with PD at entry, 2) high-risk disease and < CR after ≥ 6 mo on BTKi, 3) BTK/PLCγ2 mutation ± ibr PD, 4) prior BTKi with no contraindications to ibr, and 5) (per amendment) PD on BTKi and received prior venetoclax. At enrollment, pts started or continued ibr (420 mg daily or less for toxicity) through leukapheresis and for up to 90 d (or longer per investigator [inv]) after liso-cel (target dose of 50 × 106 CAR+ T cells [DL1] or DL2). Response was per inv by 2018 iwCLL criteria. Primary endpoint was CR/CRi rate at DL2; secondary endpoints included safety, ORR, duration of response (DOR), duration of CR/CRi (DOCR), time to response, time to CR/CRi, PFS, OS, and undetectable MRD (uMRD) rate in blood. Cellular kinetics was exploratory. Efficacy analyses were at DL2 and safety at DL1 + DL2. Treatment-emergent AEs (TEAE) occurred the latter of ≤ 90 days after liso-cel or ≤ 30 days of ibr completion. Liso-cel-treated pts who completed or withdrew from study could enroll in a separate long-term follow-up (LTFU) study (NCT03435796) for safety and OS ≤ 15 y after liso-cel. Results: A total of 65 pts underwent leukapheresis; 56 received ibr + liso-cel (DL1, n = 5; DL2, n = 51). At data cutoff (01/12/2024), 28 of 56 (50%) pts had discontinued the study, 11 (20%) completed the study, and 17 (30%) were ongoing; 5 of 28 (18%) eligible pts enrolled in LTFU. Median (IQR) on-study follow-up (including LTFU) was 24.8 mo (14.2-34.6). Median (range) age was 65 y (44-77); 55 (98%) pts had high-risk cytogenetics, such as del(17p) (n = 25), TP53 mutation (n = 24), and unmutated IGHV (n = 39); 43% had LDH ≥ ULN; and median (range) SPD was 27 cm2 (1-218). Pts had a median (range) of 5 (1-13) prior therapies (≤ 2, n = 13 [23%]). Median (range) time from leukapheresis to liso-cel availability was 25 d (17-79). Median (range) ibr exposure was 34 d (15-188) before and 94.5 d (6-1517) after liso-cel. At DL2, ORR (95% CI) was 86% (73.7-94.3), median (range) time to first response was 1.0 mo (0.9-6.0), and median (95% CI) DOR was 41.4 mo (23.3-not reached [NR]). CR/CRi rate (95% CI; primary endpoint) was 45% (31.1-59.7), median (range) time to first CR/CRi was 3.1 mo (0.9-12.1), and median (95% CI) DOCR was NR (26.6-NR). Median (95% CI) PFS and OS was 31.4 mo (20.1-NR) and NR (27.5-NR), respectively. uMRD rate (95% CI) in blood and marrow was 86% (73.7-94.3) and 84% (71.4-93.0), respectively. Grade (gr) ≥ 3 TEAEs occurred in 48 (86%) pts (most commonly neutropenia [52%] and anemia [41%]) with no gr 5 TEAEs. Liso-cel-related gr ≥ 3 TEAEs occurred in 32 (57%) pts and ibr-related gr ≥ 3 TEAEs in 24 (43%) pts including cardiovascular events of hypertension (7%) and atrial fibrillation (2%). Any-gr CRS occurred in 45 (80%) pts (gr ≥ 3, n = 2 [4%]) and any-gr neurological events (NE) in 23 (41%) pts (gr ≥ 3, n = 6 [11%]). Eight (14%) pts had gr ≥ 3 infections and 5 (9%) had second primary malignancies. Twenty-five (45%) pts had prolonged cytopenias (gr ≥ 3 at D30); most recovered to gr ≤ 2 by D90. Sixteen pts died after infusion (PD, n = 6; unknown, n = 6; COVID-19, n = 3; mixed septic/cardiogenic shock, n = 1). Liso-cel showed rapid expansion (median tmax, 10 d) and was detected up to 42 mo after infusion. Conclusions: Combined liso-cel + ibr demonstrated substantial efficacy with deep remissions (86% ORR, 45% CR rate, and 86% blood uMRD rate) and manageable safety in pts with R/R CLL/SLL. Though comparisons should be made with caution and there were differences in disease characteristics between cohorts, liso-cel + ibr showed a numerically higher ORR/CR rate and lower gr ≥ 3 CRS/NE rates vs liso-cel monotherapy, supporting the combination as a promising new therapeutic strategy for pts with R/R CLL/SLL.

Background: The primary analysis of the phase 1/2, single-arm, multicenter TRANSCEND CLL 004 (NCT03331198) study with a median follow-up of 21.1 mo showed that a single administration of liso-cel achieved rapid, deep, and durable responses and a manageable safety profile in pts with heavily pretreated, high-risk R/R CLL/SLL, including those with progression on a previous Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitor (BTKi) and venetoclax failure (primary efficacy analysis set [PEAS]; Siddiqi T, et al. Lancet 2023). With 5 mo of additional follow-up (median of 23.5 mo), liso-cel continued to demonstrate durable CR/CR with incomplete marrow recovery (CRi) and high undetectable MRD (uMRD; 10−4 by next-generation sequencing) rates with no new safety signals. Median duration of response (DOR) was 35.3 mo (95% CI, 12.4-not reached [NR]), and median OS was 30.3 mo (95% CI, 15.0-NR) (Siddiqi T, et al. Blood 2023). Here, we report updated results from TRANSCEND CLL 004 with 16 mo of additional follow-up since primary analysis and a median on-study follow-up of 23.8 mo (range, 0.4-59.6). Methods: Pts must have received ≥ 2 prior lines of therapy (LOTs), including a BTKi (full population). Eligible pts received liso-cel at a target dose of either 50 × 106 (dose level [DL] 1) or 100 × 106 (DL2) CAR+ T cells after lymphodepleting chemotherapy. The primary endpoint was CR/CRi per independent review committee in the PEAS at DL2. Key secondary endpoints were ORR and blood uMRD rate. All pts who received liso-cel and completed or discontinued early from the study were asked to enroll in a separate long-term follow-up (LTFU) study (NCT03435796) assessing safety and OS for up to 15 y after liso-cel. Results: As of the data cutoff (01/12/2024), 118 of 137 leukapheresed pts received liso-cel (safety set), 97 (DL1, n = 9; DL2, n = 88) were efficacy evaluable, and 54 (DL1, n = 4; DL2, n = 50) were in the PEAS. A total of 22 pts were ongoing in TRANSCEND CLL 004, and 19 of 60 eligible pts enrolled to the LTFU study. In the safety set, pts had a median age of 65 y (range, 49-82), and 83% had high-risk cytogenetic markers (del[17p], 42%; TP53 mutation, 47%; unmutated immunoglobulin heavy-chain variable gene, 47%). Median prior LOTs was 5 (range, 2-14); 86% of pts had prior chemoimmunotherapy. In the PEAS at DL2, CR/CRi rate remained at 20%, ORR at 44%, blood uMRD rate at 64%, and marrow uMRD rate at 60%. Median DOR was NR (95% CI, 12.4-NR), with a median follow-up of 31.7 mo (95% CI, 21.3-35.5). Estimated 36-mo DOR rate was 61% (95% CI, 30-81). Median (95% CI) DOR was NR in pts with CR/CRi. Median (95% CI) PFS was 11.9 mo (5.7-26.2) overall, 26.2 mo (11.9-NR) in pts with blood uMRD, and 2.8 mo (0.8-3.2) in pts with detectable blood MRD. Median OS, including 19 pts in the LTFU, was 43.2 mo (95% CI, 14.5-NR). Efficacy outcomes were similar in the full population at DL2. A subgroup of 23 pts who had only prior BTKi exposure and were venetoclax naïve was less heavily pretreated, with a median of 3 prior LOTs (range, 2-11); all pts had prior chemoimmunotherapy. In the efficacy-evaluable pts of this subgroup at DL2 (n = 18), the CR/CRi rate was 22%; ORR was 61%; and median (95% CI) DOR was NR (17.1-NR), PFS was NR (18.0-NR), and OS was 52.2 mo (26.9-NR). In the safety set, rates of any-grade/grade ≥ 3 cytokine release syndrome (85%/8%), any-grade/grade ≥ 3 neurological events (45%/19%), prolonged cytopenia (grade ≥ 3 at Day 30 after liso-cel infusion [54%]), grade ≥ 3 infections (18%), and second primary malignancy (9%) remained the same as previously reported (Siddiqi T, et al. Blood 2023); most pts with prolonged cytopenia had resolution to grade ≤ 2 by Month 3. Forty-six (34%) of 137 leukapheresed pts died after CAR T cell infusion, including 1 additional pt since the previous report with an unknown cause of death at ~14.5 mo after infusion. Persistence of the liso-cel transgene was detected up to 48 months after liso-cel infusion (2/5 evaluable pts at DL2 at Month 48). Conclusions: In this updated follow-up, liso-cel continued to demonstrate durable responses with an extended median OS of 43.2 mo in pts with R/R CLL/SLL. The safety results were similar to those previously reported with no new safety signals. These data confirm the sustained clinical benefit and favorable benefit-to-risk profile of a single treatment of liso-cel in pts with R/R CLL/SLL.

Background:Patients with R/R CLL/SLL who experience intolerance to or disease progression after Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitor (BTKi) and venetoclax treatment have no established standard of care and poor outcomes, indicating a critical unmet need. Liso-cel, an autologous, CD19-directed, 4-1BB CAR T cell product, has demonstrated efficacy in large B-cell lymphoma and CLL/SLL. In the primary analysis of the phase 1/2, single-arm, multicenter TRANSCEND CLL 004 (NCT03331198) study, a single administration of liso-cel demonstrated rapid, deep, and durable responses and a manageable safety profile in patients with R/R CLL/SLL, including those with progression on previous BTKi and venetoclax failure (Siddiqi T, et al. Lancet 2023). The primary endpoint was met in the prespecified subset of efficacy-evaluable patients with disease progression on BTKi and venetoclax failure (primary efficacy analysis set [PEAS]) at a target dose of 100 × 10 6 CAR + T cells (null hypothesis: ≤ 5%) with the rate of complete response/remission (CR) and CR with incomplete marrow recovery (CRi) by an independent review committee (IRC) per 2018 International Workshop on CLL (iwCLL) criteria at 18.4% ( P = 0.0006). Here we report results from TRANSCEND CLL 004 with a median follow-up of 23.5 months. Methods: Patients must have received ≥ 2 prior lines of therapy, including a BTKi. Eligible patients received liso-cel at a target dose of either 50 × 10 6 (dose level [DL] 1) or 100 × 10 6 (DL2) CAR + T cells after lymphodepleting chemotherapy. The primary endpoint was CR/CRi in the PEAS at DL2. Key secondary endpoints were ORR and rate of undetectable MRD (uMRD; 10 −4 by next-generation sequencing) in blood. All null hypotheses were tested at the primary analysis and not retested in this analysis. Results:Of 137 leukapheresed patients, 118 received liso-cel (safety set), 97 (DL1 = 9; DL2 = 88) were efficacy evaluable, and 54 (DL1 = 4; DL2 = 50) were in the PEAS. In the safety set, median (range) age was 65 years (49-82), 83% had high-risk cytogenetics (del[17p], 42%; TP53 mutation, 47%; unmuted immunoglobulin heavy-chain variable gene, 47%; ≥ 3 chromosomal aberrations, 61%), median (range) lines of prior therapy was 5 (2-14), and all patients had prior BTKi. As of data cutoff (February 28, 2023), median (range) on-study follow-up was 23.5 months (0.4-59.6) for the safety set. In the PEAS at DL2, CR/CRi rate was 20% (95% CI, 10.0-33.7; Table 1). ORR was 44% (95% CI, 30.0-58.7). One patient who had best overall response (BOR) of partial response/remission (PR) at primary analysis had deepened to CR/CRi at 18 months without any additional therapy. Of 9 patients who had BOR of CR/CRi at the primary analysis, 8 had ongoing CR/CRi and 1 completed the study with the last assessment as CR/CRi. The uMRD rate was 64% (95% CI, 49.2-77.1) in blood and 60% (95% CI, 45.2-73.6) in marrow. Median (95% CI) duration of response was 35.3 months (12.4-not reached [NR]) and median duration of CR/CRi was NR. Median (95% CI) PFS was 11.9 months (5.7-26.2). Median (95% CI) OS was 30.3 months (15.0-NR). The efficacy outcomes were similar in the full population at DL2. Of 16 patients who had BOR of CR/CRi at primary analysis, 10 had ongoing CR/CRi. In the safety set, rates of any-grade and grade ≥ 3 treatment-emergent AEs were similar across age groups (Table 2). The rate of any-grade cytokine release syndrome (CRS) was 85% (grade 3, 8%; no grade 4/5) and neurological events (NE) was 45% (grade 3, 18%; grade 4, 1%; no grade 5); 69% received tocilizumab and/or corticosteroids for CRS/NEs. Median (range) time to onset and resolution was 4 days (1-18) and 6 days (2-37) for CRS and 7 days (1-21) and 7 days (1-83) for NEs, respectively. Prolonged cytopenia (grade ≥ 3 at Day 30 after liso-cel infusion), grade ≥ 3 infections, hypogammaglobulinemia, tumor lysis syndrome, second primary malignancy, and macrophage activation syndrome occurred in 54%, 18%, 15%, 11%, 9%, and 3%, respectively. Forty-five (33%) of 137 leukapheresed patients died after liso-cel infusion (disease progression, n = 27 [20%]; AE, n = 6 [4%]; other reasons, n = 12 [9%]). Conclusions: With longer follow-up, liso-cel continued to demonstrate durable CR/CRi, high uMRD rates, and a manageable safety profile in patients with heavily pretreated, high-risk R/R CLL/SLL. The safety results from longer follow-up were similar to those reported in the primary analysis with no new safety signals and were consistent across age groups.

7501 Background: In patients (pts) with R/R CLL/SLL that progressed on BTKi and failed venetoclax (ven)-based regimens, achieving CR with current treatment is uncommon. New therapies that achieve deep and durable responses are needed. We report the primary analysis of the phase 1/2, single-arm, multicenter TRANSCEND CLL 004 (NCT03331198) study evaluating liso-cel in pts with R/R CLL/SLL. Methods: Pts must have received at least 2 prior lines of therapy, including a BTKi. Eligible pts received liso-cel at a target dose of either 50 (DL1) or 100 (DL2) × 106 CAR+ T cells. The primary endpoint was rate of CR and CR with incomplete marrow recovery (CRi) by IRC per 2018 iwCLL criteria in the prespecified subset of efficacy-evaluable pts with disease progression on BTKi and ven failure (primary efficacy analysis set [PEAS]) at DL2 (null hypothesis [H0]: ≤ 5%). Key secondary endpoints were ORR (H0: ≤ 40%) and rate of undetectable minimal residual disease (uMRD; 10−4) in blood (H0: ≤ 5%). Results: Of 137 leukapheresed pts, 117 received liso-cel (safety set), 96 (DL1 = 9; DL2 = 87) were efficacy evaluable, and 53 (DL1 = 4; DL2 = 49) were in the PEAS. In the safety set, median (range) age was 65 y (49–82), 83% had high-risk features, median (range) lines of prior therapy was 5 (2–12), and all pts had prior BTKi. Median (range) on-study follow-up was 21.1 mo (0.4–55.6) for the safety set. In the PEAS at DL2, the primary endpoint of CR/CRi rate was met at 18.4% (95% CI, 8.8–32.0; 1-sided P = 0.0006; Table). ORR was 42.9% and was not statistically significant (95% CI, 28.8–57.8; 1-sided P = 0.3931). The uMRD rate was 63.3% in blood and 59.2% in marrow. Median (95% CI) DOR was 35.3 mo (11.01–not reached [NR]) with a median follow-up of 19.7 mo. Median duration of CR/CRi was NR. In the safety set, rate of any-grade CRS was 84.6% (gr 3, 8.5%; no gr 4/5) and neurological events (NE) was 45.3% (gr 3, 17.9%; gr 4, 0.9%; no gr 5); 69.2% received tocilizumab and/or corticosteroids for CRS/NEs. Rate of gr ≥ 3 infections, hypogammaglobulinemia, and prolonged cytopenia was 17.1%, 15.4%, and 53.8%, respectively. One death related to liso-cel was due to hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis. Liso-cel exhibited rapid in vivo expansion and was detected by qPCR in blood up to 36 mo after infusion. Conclusions: Liso-cel demonstrated durable CR/CRi, high uMRD rates, and a manageable safety profile in pts with heavily pretreated, high-risk R/R CLL/SLL and high unmet need. Clinical trial information: NCT03331198 . [Table: see text]

Abstract Introduction: Several prognostic models for overall survival (OS) in chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) have been developed, but none were derived for patients (pts) with relapsed or refractory (R/R) CLL treated in the era of novel agents. We used a comprehensive approach to derive and validate a novel risk model for OS in 2,475 pts with R/R CLL who received therapy in randomized phase 3 trials evaluating ibrutinib (IBR), idelalisib (IDELA), and venetoclax (VEN) vs control arms, or the Mayo Clinic CLL Database (MCCD). Methods: In collaboration with Janssen, Gilead, Pharmacyclics, and Genentech/Roche, the analysis included 2,475 pts from 6 multicenter randomized phase 3 trials or the MCCD. Trials included were: IBR plus bendamustine-rituximab (BR) vs placebo plus BR (HELIOS: NCT01611090), IBR vs ofatumumab (RESONATE: NCT01578707), IDELA plus BR vs placebo plus BR (Study 115: NCT01569295); IDELA plus rituximab vs placebo plus rituximab (Study 116: NCT01539512); IDELA plus ofatumumab vs ofatumumab (Study 119: NCT01659021); VEN plus rituximab vs BR (MURANO: NCT02005471). All pts had R/R CLL and required treatment by iwCLL criteria. The model-building dataset (n=969) included pts from HELIOS and RESONATE, and was randomly assigned to the IBR/chemoimmunotherapy (CIT) training dataset (n=727) and IBR/CIT internal-validation dataset(n=242). Three independent external validation datasets included IDELA/CIT (n=897), VEN/CIT (n=389), and MCCD (n=220). We applied univariate and multivariate analyses (MVA) to 28 candidate clinical/laboratory and genetic prognostic factors to derive the risk model in the training dataset. The primary endpoint was OS. We assessed the need for separate models for targeted agents by interactions with treatment in univariate analyses. We proceeded to develop a single model for all pts with R/R CLL, as only one candidate factor (del(13q), interaction p value <0.1) demonstrated a marginal differential effect. We evaluated cutoffs for dichotomized covariates and for definition of risk groups after the final factors were selected. We fit a Cox regression on the training and internal/external validation datasets using the risk categories as the covariate to test the difference among the groups, and calculated the C-statistic as a measure of discrimination. Results: Of 11 selected factors with a significant univariate effect on OS (p<0.1), 6 were independently prognostic in the MVA of OS (p<0.05): Baseline β2-microglobubulin (B2M), lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), hemoglobin (HGB), IGHV mutational status, number of prior therapies, and time from initiation of last therapy. We excluded number of prior therapies from the model, reasoning that its optimal cutoff might change with advances in CLL therapies. IGHV did not remain significant (p=0.0592) in MVA of 5 remaining prognostic factors. Notably, del(17p) was not independently prognostic for OS. The final risk model consisted of 4 prognostic factors: B2M ≥5 mg/L, LDH elevated, HGB <110 mg/L for women or <120 mg/L for men, and time from initiation of last therapy <24 months. Because hazard ratios for each factor were similar (range, 0.55-0.68) with overlapping confidence intervals, 1 point was assigned to each factor. The resulting score separated pts into low (score 0-1), intermediate (score 2-3), and high risk (score 4) groups. Our risk model was prognostic for OS in the IBR/CIT training dataset (C-statistic 0.74 [95% CI 0.60-0.85]; log-rank p<0.0001) and was validated in the IBR/CIT internal validation (C-statistic 0.79 [95% CI 0.56-0.97]; log-rank p<0.0001), as well as in all 3 external validations: IDELA/CIT dataset (CS=0.71, 95% CI 0.59-0.81; log-rank p<0.001); VEN/CIT dataset (CS=0.76, 95% CI 0.66-0.85; log-rank p=0.01); MCCD (CS=0.61, 95% CI 0.56-0.66; log-rank p<0.001). Conclusions: We present the first validated risk model for OS in R/R CLL in the era of targeted therapies. Our model consists of 4 readily available factors (B2M ≥5 mg/L, LDH elevated, HGB <110 mg/L for women or <120 mg/L for men, and time from initiation of last therapy <24 months), identifies 3 prognostic groups with significantly different OS, and has been validated for pts treated with all FDA approved targeted therapies: IBR, IDELA, and VEN. This identifies a well-defined cohort of pts with R/R disease with an unmet clinical need who are suitable for prospective trials targeting these pts. An exploratory analysis regarding prediction of MRD is ongoing. Figure. Figure. Disclosures Darif: Jannsen: Employment. Londhe:Jannsen: Employment. Xing:Gilead Sciences, Inc.: Employment. Mun:Genentech: Employment, Equity Ownership. Kay:Cytomx Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pharmacyclics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Tolero Pharmaceuticals: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Infinity Pharm: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Agios Pharm: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Morpho-sys: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Acerta: Research Funding; Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Shanafelt:Mayo Clinic: Patents & Royalties: Physician Well-being Index, Medical Student Well-being Index, Well-being index; GlaxoSmithKline: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Abbvie: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding. Furman:Loxo Oncology: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company: Consultancy; Sunesis: Consultancy; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy; Verastem: Consultancy; Gilead: Consultancy; Incyte: Consultancy, Other: DSMB; Acerta: Consultancy, Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; AbbVie: Consultancy. Hillmen:Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Abbvie: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis: Research Funding; Gilead Sciences, Inc.: Honoraria, Research Funding; F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Research Funding; Acerta: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Sharman:Acerta: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics, an AbbVie Company: Consultancy, Research Funding. Seymour:AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy; F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Genentech Inc: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding. Jones:Celgene: Employment, Equity Ownership. Ferrante:Jannsen: Employment. Dreiling:Gilead: Employment. Mobasher:F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Other: Ownership interests non-PLC; Genentech Inc: Employment. Stark:Genentech: Employment. Reddy:Actinium Pharmaceuticals: Employment, Equity Ownership; Pharmacyclics: Employment. Howes:Janssen: Employment. James:Pharmacyclics: Employment. Bhargava:Gilead: Employment. Zelenetz:Novartis/Sandoz: Consultancy; Abbvie: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; Gilead: Consultancy, Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Consultancy; Genentech/Roche: Consultancy, Research Funding.