Ho, Carrie

Abstract Epcoritamab and glofitamab are CD20-directed bispecific antibodies (BsAbs) approved in the United States for relapsed or refractory (R/R) diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL). Limited data exist for patients treated outside of trials. Patients with R/R DLBCL receiving commercial epcoritamab or glofitamab between 1 January 2023 and 15 October 2024 were collected from 21 United States institutions. Among 245 patients, 156 received epcoritamab and 89 received glofitamab, 113 were refractory to front-line therapy, 40 had MYC and BCL2 and/or BCL6 rearrangements, 147 received prior chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy, and 174 patients would have been ineligible for registrational trials. The overall response rate (ORR) for epcoritamab and glofitamab was 51% (23% complete response, [CR]) and 53% (30% CR), respectively. Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 2.6 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 2.0-3.8 months), and median overall survival (OS) was 7.8 months (95% CI, 6.2-11.0 months). The 6-month PFS was 36% (95% CI, 30-44) and the 6-month OS was 60% (95% CI, 54-67). Both trial ineligibility and undetectable CD20 pre-BsAbs portended shorter PFS and OS. Of 17 individuals with paired biopsies, 15 (88.2%) lost CD20 expression after BsAbs with a median time to progression of 3.7 months. This analysis including patients with R/R DLBCL shows the ORR to CD3/CD20 BsAbs was comparable to pivotal trials, although PFS and OS were lower. Baseline undetectable levels of CD20 were associated with poor outcomes. These results demonstrate the activity of BsAbs in R/R DLBCL, and underscore the importance of target antigen expression.

Introduction: Complex karyotype (CK, ≥3 chromosome (chr) abnormalities (abn)) is an important adverse prognostic indicator in chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). CK at diagnosis (dx) of CLL, particularly with major structural chr abn (i.e. unbalanced translocation, add, marker, ring chr), called type-2 CK (CK2), has been associated with an increased risk of Richter transformation (RT) (Visentin Haematologica 2022). RT is defined as development of aggressive lymphoma, most often large B-cell lymphoma, in the setting of CLL. In patients (pts) with relapsed/refractory CLL treated with ibrutinib, CK as a continuous variable and the presence of polyploidy were independent predictors for RT. CK is a common finding at the time of RT, and high-CK (≥5) has been associated with short survival in RT, although previous studies predominantly included pts with prior chemoimmunotherapy (CIT) administration for their CLL. The prognostic significance of CK in pts with RT whose prior CLL-directed therapies include only non-CIT, as is the current standard of care for CLL, has not been evaluated. Methods: We conducted a multicenter, retrospective analysis of pts from 14 academic centers. Pts with RT diagnosed between 6/2011 to 6/2023, who had CLL-directed treatment that did not include prior CIT, with stimulated karyotype data available, were included. Pts who did not receive treatment for their CLL prior to developing RT were not included. Baseline pt, disease, and cytogenetics data were collected via chart review at time of CLL diagnosis and at the development of RT. Karyotype abn up to 20 were counted on both CLL tissue (peripheral blood or bone marrow) and RT tissue using IWGMC guidelines (Chun Leuk Res 2010). CK was categorized as CK1 (balanced abn, deletion, aneusomies) or CK2. Polyploidy was defined as ≥58 chrs. Karyotype was considered evolved if one or more chr abn were seen in a follow-up sample of CLL tissue that were not seen at CLL dx.TP53 disruption was defined as presence of del(17p) or TP53 mutation. Overall survival (OS) was measured from RT dx and estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Cox regression model was used to identify prognostic factors associated with OS. Results: A total of 64 eligible pts were identified. Median age at RT dx was 65 years (range 40-89) and 71.9% of pts were male. Of those evaluated (n=49), 79.6% had unmutated IGVH. Median number of therapies for CLL prior to RT was 1 (range 1-5) and included BTK inhibitor (n=37), BCL2 inhibitor (n=3), both (n=18), or other non-CIT treatment (n=6). At CLL diagnosis, 54.7% of pts had a CK, and the median number of chr abn was 3 (range 0-20). Of those with CK, 96.9% had a CK2, and 6.3% had a polyploid subclone. TP53 disruption was found in 46% of pts. At time of RT, chr analysis of CLL tissue was available for 38 pts and showed 78.9% had a CK, and the median number of chr abn was 8 (range 0-20). Polyploidy was found in 29.6%. TP53 disruption (46 pts evaluated) was found in 52.2%. Karyotype evolution from dx (35 pts evaluated) occurred in 74.3% of pts. In RT tissue, of those evaluated (n=29), 96.6% were clonally related to the preceding CLL. MYC translocation (45 pts evaluated) occurred in 17.8%. CK (20 pts evaluated) was found in 70%, with a median number of chr abn of 8 (range 0-20). Of those with CK, 33.3% had a polyploid subclone. With a median follow-up of 17.8 months (range 2.1-83.0) there were 42 deaths, with a median OS of 14.3 months (range 6.9-29.1). For this subset of patients with karyotype data available who would go on to develop RT, an exploratory univariable analysis for OS from RT found that increasing number of chr abn as a continuous variable at CLL dx was associated with worse OS (HR 1.10, 95% CI 1.02-1.19, p=0.01). Similarly, at RT, increasing number of chr abn in CLL tissue (HR 1.09, 95% CI 1.02-1.16, p=0.01) and in RT tissue (HR 1.09, 95% CI 1.01-1.18, p=0.03) was also prognostic of survival. Karyotype evolution in CLL tissue at RT (HR 3.02, 95% CI 1.02-8.94, p=0.05) was borderline significant for worse OS. Conclusions: Our multi-center study identified increasing number of chr abn at CLL diagnosis and at time of RT, and clonal evolution in the CLL tissue, are associated with worse OS in pts with RT whose CLL was treated without CIT. Limitations include incomplete cytogenetics data across the cohort and potential variability across institutions in cytogenetics laboratory practices. This provides further evidence for the clinical utility of chr analysis in the modern era of CLL therapy.

Introduction: Bispecific antibodies (BsAbs) epcoritamab (Epco) and glofitamab (Glofit) are approved in the US for the treatment of patients (pts) with relapsed or refractory (r/r) large B-cell lymphomas (LBCLs) based upon high response rates and manageable toxicity profiles reported in pivotal trials. However, data on outcomes for pts treated with BsAbs outside of clinical trials are limited. As such, we sought to investigate the safety and efficacy of Epco and Glofit for the treatment of pts with r/r LBCLs in real-world settings. Methods: We performed a retrospective study including 19 US centers evaluating pts with r/r LBCLs receiving commercially available Epco or Glofit between 2023 and 2024. Baseline characteristics and outcomes were extracted from medical records. Efficacy outcomes included overall response rate (ORR), complete and partial response (CR, PR) rates, progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS), analyzed using the Kaplan Meier method. Key safety outcomes included cytokine release syndrome (CRS) and immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome (ICANS). Results: As of May 31, 2024, a total of 209 pts with r/r LBCLs were treated with Epco (n=139) or Glofit (n=70). Median age at BsAb start was 67 years (interquartile range [IQR] 58-76). Most were male (62.2%), and the most common histology was diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (n=155 [74.2%]). Of pts with molecular testing (n=168), 34 (20.2%) had double/triple hit lymphoma. Most (78.9%) had Ann Arbor stage III-IV disease and 91% had an ECOG performance status of ≤1. Median number of lines of treatment before BsAb was 3 (range 1-12). Of pts with known response assessment following front-line therapy, 54 (32.1%) had primary refractory disease, defined as failure to achieve PR or CR to front-line therapy. Most pts (n=126 [60.3%]) received prior chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy and 21 (10.0%) received prior autologous hematopoietic progenitor cell transplant. CD20 expression was assessed in 106 biopsies (50.7%) prior to BsAb and was positive in 90 (84.9%). A total of 172 pts were response-evaluable. The best ORR was 50.6%, with CR in 41 (23.8%), PR in 46 (26.7%), stable disease in 10 (5.8%), and progressive disease in 75 (43.6%). The ORR and CR rates were 49% and 23% for Epco, and 53% and 25% for Glofit, respectively. With a median follow-up of 5 months, the median PFS was 2.7 months (95% CI 2.0, 3.9) and median OS was 7.2 months (95% CI 6.1, not reached [NR]). The estimated PFS and OS at six months were 35% (95% CI 29%-43%) and 59% (95% CI 52%-67%), respectively. For pts who relapsed after CAR T-cell therapy, the median PFS and OS were 2.5 (95% CI 1.8, 4.7) and 7.8 (95% CI 6.2, NR) months, respectively. Pts without detectable CD20 expression via immunohistochemistry or flow cytometry prior to BsAb therapy had significantly inferior outcomes (PFS 1.1 vs 3.4 months, P < 0.001 and OS 1.3 vs 13 months, P < 0.001) compared to pts with detectable CD20. CRS of any grade occurred in 82 pts (39.2%), corresponding to 51.1% and 28.6% of pts treated with Epco and Glofit, respectively. Grade ≥3 CRS occurred in 9 (4.3%), all of whom received Epco. CRS was treated with tocilizumab in 43 pts (53.1%). ICANS occurred in 24 (11.5%) pts; any grade ICANS occurred in 13.7% and 7.1% of pts treated with Epco and Glofit, respectively. Grade ≥3 ICANS occurred in 6 pts (2.9%), 5 of which received Epco (3.6%). Of those experiencing ICANS, 66.0% were treated with corticosteroids. Two pts had deaths attributed to ICANS and one to CRS. A total of 122 (58.4%) pts discontinued therapy after a median of 3 cycles (range 0-48), 91 (74.6%) due to disease progression and 31 (25.4%) due to adverse events (15 due to infection, 3 due to ICANS, 2 due to CRS, and 11 for other reasons). Conclusions: In this heavily pretreated group with adverse disease features and high rate of CAR T exposure, the response rates, PFS, and OS following BsAb therapy were lower compared to pivotal trials. Poor outcomes were observed for those without detectable CD20. Rates of ICANS and grade ≥3 CRS were higher than reported in pivotal trials, as was the rate of discontinuation of therapy due to adverse events. Future efforts to improve outcomes may include intensified dose escalation protocols to more rapidly achieve disease control, combination therapies, and characterization of clinicopathologic factors that predict response to BsAb to identify subgroups of pts who can derive maximal benefit from these agents.

Background: Richter Transformation (RT) refers to the development of an aggressive lymphoma in the setting of chronic lymphocytic leukemia/small lymphocytic lymphoma (CLL/SLL). Small molecule inhibitors (SMI), such as the Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitors (BTKi) and BCL2 inhibitors (BCL2i), have revolutionized the treatment of CLL/SLL. Prior studies evaluated outcomes of patients (pts) with RT in an era where chemoimmunotherapy (CIT) was typically used to treat CLL/SLL. Now that SMI are standard of care, fewer pts with CLL/SLL receive CIT, therefore we sought to determine which variables predict survival in pts who developed RT without prior CIT exposure for CLL/SLL. Methods: We conducted an international multicenter retrospective study of pts from 11 academic centers. Pts with RT occurring as large B-cell lymphoma who did not previously receive CIT (e.g., fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, bendamustine, chlorambucil) for their CLL/SLL were included. We collected pt, disease, and treatment (tx) characteristics. RT was categorized into 3 groups: “Concurrent RT,” defined as RT and CLL/SLL diagnosed simultaneously (within 3 months [mos]); “RT w/o prior CLL/SLL tx,” defined as RT and CLL/SLL diagnosed >3 mos apart with the CLL/SLL never treated; and “RT with prior non-CIT tx for CLL/SLL” defined as having received prior CLL/SLL tx. Overall survival (OS) was measured from RT diagnosis (Dx) and estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Cox regression model was used to identify prognostic factors associated with OS. Results: 242 pts were identified. At CLL/SLL Dx, 66% of pts had unmutated IGHV, 37% had del17p/ TP53 disruption, and 20% had trisomy 12. At RT Dx, 56% of the RT with prior non-CIT tx for CLL/SLL group had a del17p/ TP53 disruption versus 27% for the concurrent RT group and 18% for the RT w/o prior CLL/SLL tx groups. Median time from CLL/SLL Dx to RT Dx was 47 mos (range 3-394) for RT w/o prior CLL/SLL tx and 46 mos (range 4-218) for RT with prior non-CIT tx for CLL/SLL. Pts with prior non-CIT tx for CLL/SLL received a median of 1 (range 1-5) prior tx. 86% of pts previously received a BTKi or a BCL2i for tx of CLL/SLL (54% BTKi only, 5% BCL2i only, 27% both). The remaining 14% had been treated with an anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody (MoAb), steroids, lenalidomide, radiation, or alemtuzumab. 85% of pts developed RT while on active tx with SMI. Median age at RT Dx was 69 years (range 37-92). At RT Dx, 38% and 21% of pts had del17p/ TP53 disruption, and trisomy 12 in CLL/SLL tissue, respectively. At RT Dx, there was no difference in highest SUV on PET (median 16, range 2.9-65.6), LDH (median 325, range 103-8162, ULN range 180-271), largest lymph node in diameter (median 4.9 cm, range 0-17.1), Ki-67 (median 80%, range 5%-100%), rate of GCB subtype (27%), presence of MYC translocation (20%), or CLL/SLL and RT clonal relationship (81%) for those pts tested amongst the 3 groups ( Table). The most common 1 st line tx for RT was CIT with or w/o radiation and/or steroids (76%), followed by CIT plus SMI (13%), SMI single agent or combination (7%), and other (4%, which includes anti-CD20 MoAb). Median follow-up from RT Dx was 42.3 mos; the median OS for the entire cohort was 25.8 mos (95% CI: 16.8-49.1). Pts with RT after non-CIT tx for CLL/SLL had a significantly worse OS (median 8.2 mos [95% CI: 5.6-14.3]) than pts with concurrent RT (median 46.3 mos [95% CI: 23.8-96.9]) and RT w/o prior CLL/SLL tx (median 63.5 mos [95% CI: 28.3-70.3]) ( Figure). From an exploratory univariable analysis, we found RT after non-CIT tx for CLL/SLL compared to concurrent RT (HR 2.32 [95% CI: 1.55-3.46]), RT Dx age (HR for 5-year increase 1.14 [95% CI: 1.05-1.23]), del17p/ TP53 disruption (HR 2.27 [95% CI: 1.45-3.56]), and LDH (HR for 2-fold increase 1.37 [95% CI: 1.20-1.58]) were prognostic for worse OS. Conclusions: This is the largest cohort of pts who developed RT having received only SMI with no CIT for their CLL reported, thus reflecting the current treatment landscape. Despite being CIT-naïve, pts in our series who received tx for their CLL/SLL and then developed RT had a short OS, underscoring the need to develop better therapies for these pts. In contrast, as in other published analyses (Wang Haematologica 2020), pts w/o prior tx for CLL/SLL had more favorable outcomes, with a median OS of approximately 5 years. Further analysis to determine PFS and OS by tx for RT for pts who have been treated with SMI for their CLL/SLL is ongoing.

Background: With the incorporation of positron emission tomography (PET) imaging as part of the standard staging evaluation of follicular lymphoma (FL), it is generally recommended to obtain the diagnostic biopsy from a lesion with the highest standardized uptake value (SUV) to rule out de novo histologic transformation (HT). In some cases such an approach might be impractical, while in other cases a biopsy from a diseased area with a high SUV may still demonstrate an indolent histology. To date, there is no data to guide treatment choices in patients (pts) with FL with high SUVmax but with no documented evidence of HT. Specifically, it remains unclear whether anthracycline-containing regimens, such as R-CHOP, provide a better outcome than R-Bendamustine (BR). Furthermore, it is unknown whether rituximab (R) maintenance is beneficial in this setting. Therefore, we aimed to compare the efficacy of R-CHOP vs BR in newly diagnosed FL pts with high SUVmax at baseline PET and to clarify the role of maintenance. Patients and Methods: We retrospectively identified 261 consecutive pts with newly diagnosed biopsy-proven FL1-3A and a SUVmax≥13 on baseline PET, who were treated with frontline R-CHOP (n=183) or BR (n=78) at 7 US cancer centers based on the physician's choice. Progression-free survival (PFS) was calculated from starting treatment until progression, relapse or death. Cut-offs of SUVmax ≥13≤18 and SUVmax>18 were used for sub-analysis (Haematologica;2020;105:1907-1913). Results: Median age was 59 years. The baseline characteristics of the two groups differed significantly for a younger age (58 vs 62 years, p=0.009), a higher rate of B-symptoms (26% vs 10%, p=0.005) and baseline SUVmax>18 (49% vs 36%, p=0.04) in the R-CHOP group. A diagnostic biopsy was obtained from the site at the highest SUV in 129 (71%) and 43 (55%) pts, respectively (p=0.01). These suggest a potential selection of R-CHOP in pts with adverse features. At the end of therapy (EoT), R-CHOP treated pts achieved higher PET-CT complete response rates (CR 82% vs 69%, p=0.02). This superiority held in pts with diagnostic biopsy at the highest SUV site (CR 83% vs 67%, p=0.03), but not in the others (CR 80% vs 71%, p=0.37). Progression occurred at EoT in 11 and 14 pts receiving R-CHOP and BR (6% vs 18%, p=0.02), with a higher rate of HT in the BR group (13% vs 4%, p=0.006). After a median follow-up of 76 months (range, 4-208 months), there was no significant difference in PFS between R-CHOP and BR treated pts (hazard ratio [HR] 1.22, p=0.34). PFS was strongly associated with FLIPI 2 (HR 2.32, p=0.01) and 3-5 (HR 2.69, p=0.003) in the univariate as well as in the multivariate analysis (FLIPI 2 HR 2.19, p=0.02; FLIPI 3-5 HR 2.51, p=0.01). There was a trend toward overall survival (OS) benefit in the R-CHOP group (Fig.1A). In the univariate analysis for OS, BR regimen (HR 2.12, p=0.03), age >60 (HR 2.54, p=0.006), FLIPI 3-5 (HR 5.13, p=0.03) and biopsy at the highest SUV site (HR 0.44, p=0.01) were prognostic, however none of those remained significant in the multivariate analysis (BR regimen HR 1.84, p=0.09; age >60 HR 1.92, p=0.08; FLIPI 3-5 HR 3.11, p=0.14; biopsy at the highest SUV site HR 0.60, p=0.13; SUVmax>18 HR 1.87, p=0.055). Among pts with EoT response after R-CHOP or BR (n=170 and n=64, respectively), one third in each group (36% vs 41%, respectively) received R-maintenance for a median of 8 administrations (range, 2-12). A significant PFS advantage (landmark analysis) was observed with R-maintenance (Fig.1B; HR 0.53, p=0.02); however, this did not translate in survival benefit (HR 0.67, p=0.49). In a multivariable model, R-maintenance (HR 0.53, p=0.02), FLIPI 2 (HR 2.47, p=0.03) and 3-5 (HR 2.79, p=0.01) remained independent prognosticators of PFS, while no parameters significantly affected OS. The 2-year HT rate (10% vs 17%) and cumulative incidence did not statistically differ between R-CHOP and BR groups (Fig.1C, p=0.159). Early progression (POD24) occurred in 43 and 22 pts who received R-CHOP and BR, respectively (24% vs 28%) and resulted in a significantly higher risk of death (HR 4.12, p=0.006). Conclusion: In newly diagnosed FL pts with SUVmax≥13 at baseline PET, R-CHOP was more effective in achieving CR and reducing the risk of early HT compared with BR, and it was associated with a trend toward survival advantage. Rituximab maintenance significantly prolonged PFS. A prospective evaluation with a larger population will be needed to confirm our findings. Disclosures Joffe: Epizyme: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; AstraZeneca: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Ruella:Abclon, BMS, NanoString: Consultancy; Abclon: Consultancy, Research Funding; UPenn/Novartis: Patents & Royalties. Svoboda:Adaptive: Consultancy; Astra-Zeneca: Consultancy, Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy, Research Funding; Imbrium: Consultancy; Incyte: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Research Funding; TG: Research Funding; Genmab: Consultancy; Atara: Consultancy. Witzig:Immune Design: Research Funding; Spectrum: Consultancy; Karyopharm Therapeutics: Research Funding; Acerta: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy; MorphSys: Consultancy; Incyte: Consultancy. Smith:TG Therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Karyopharm: Consultancy, Research Funding; FortySeven: Research Funding; Acerta: Research Funding; Genentech/Roche: Consultancy, Other: Support of parent study and funding of editorial support, Research Funding. Armand:Affimed: Consultancy, Research Funding; Otsuka: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; IGM: Research Funding; Infinity: Consultancy; Genentech: Research Funding; Sigma Tau: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy; Adaptive: Consultancy, Research Funding; Tensha: Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; Merck & Co., Inc.: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy; ADC Therapeutics: Consultancy. Nastoupil:Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Gilead/KITE: Honoraria; Gamida Cell: Honoraria; TG Therapeutics: Honoraria, Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding; Genentech, Inc.: Honoraria, Research Funding; Karus Therapeutics: Research Funding; Bayer: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Pfizer: Honoraria, Research Funding. Ansell:Takeda: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; AI Therapeutics: Research Funding; ADC Therapeutics: Research Funding. Zelenetz:Novartis: Consultancy; Adaptive Biotechnology: Consultancy; Genentech/Roche: Consultancy; Gilead: Consultancy; Gilead: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy; Roche: Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy; BeiGene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Consultancy; Sandoz: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; MorphoSys: Research Funding; MEI Pharma: Research Funding. Younes:BioPath, Xynomic, Epizyme, and F. Hoffmann-La Roche: Consultancy; Janssen, Curis, Merck, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Syndax Pharmaceuticals, F. Hoffmann-La Roche, Curis (Inst), Johnson & Johnson (Inst), Novartis (Inst): Research Funding; Janssen, AbbVie, Merck, Curis, Epizyme, F. Hoffmann-La Roche, Takeda, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals, Celgene, Incyte, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Merck, Sanofi, Seattle Genetics, Takeda Millennium: Honoraria; AstraZeneca: Current Employment; MSKCC: Ended employment in the past 24 months.