Hu, Boyu

Abstract Background: MCL is a B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma for which auto-HCT is often employed in first CR, based on non-randomized phase 2 trials, and a randomized trial (Dreyling et al, Blood 2005) conducted before the advent of more effective induction and maintenance regimens. The TRIANGLE trial (Dreyling et al, Lancet 2024) suggested that auto-HCT may not add benefit to more effective induction and maintenance regimens containing high-dose cytarabine, rituximab and BTK inhibitors. E4151 explored whether auto-HCT benefits pts achieving deep first remission, as measured by a highly sensitive immunoglobulin high throughput sequencing minimal residual disease (MRD) assay. Methods: EA4151 is a four arm trial conducted through the U.S. National Clinical Trials Network (NCTN) and Blood and Marrow Transplant Clinical Trials Network (BMT-CTN). Pts with MCL between the ages of 18 and 70 and in first remission were eligible. After induction, pts underwent PET/CT, bone marrow biopsy, and the clonoSEQ® MRD assay from peripheral blood. Pts in CR with uMRD at 1 in 10-6 sensitivity (uMRD6) were randomized 1:1 to Arm A (auto-HCT + 3 years of maintenance rituximab [MR]) or Arm B (3 years of MR alone), stratified by MIPI-c score and intensive vs non-intensive induction. Pts with either MRD-positive (MRD+) CR or MRD-indeterminate CR (Arm C and Arm D, respsectively) both received auto-HCT + 3 years of MR. Pts who were MRD+ pre-transplant had MRD repeated at day 100. Primary endpoint was to compare overall survival (OS) in Arms A and B, with secondary endpoints including progression-free survival (PFS). Primary analysis population included all randomized pts. As some pts refused their assigned treatment (N=65 [25.3%] for arm A and N=2 [0.8%] for arm B), a “treated as assigned” analysis was also performed. Stratified logrank test was used to compare survival distributions. P-values are two-sided. Results: From Aug 2017 to July 2024, 650 pts were assigned to a treatment arm with 257, 259, 49, and 85 pts enrolled on Arms A, B, C, and D, respectively. Pts were 79% male and 92% white race. Median age was 60 years (range 27-70). MIPI-c was low/low-intermediate (LI) in 63% and high/ high-intermediate (HI) in 37%. Induction was intensive (defined as high-dose cytarabine-containing) in 73% and non-intensive in 27%. A BTK inhibitor was given during induction in 7.2% of pts, and during maintenance in 0.3% of pts. The third pre-planned interim analysis was based on data as of 7/15/24, with median follow up of 2.7 years. The futility boundary was an OS hazard ratio (HR) of 0.984 for Arm A vs B. The estimated OS HR for Arm A vs B in all randomized (n=516) and pts treated as assigned (n=375) were 1.11 (CI 0.71-1.74, p=0.66) and 1.00 (CI 0.58-1.74, p=0.99), respectively and crossed the futility boundary. The 3 year (yr) OS for Arms A and B were 82.1% and 82.7% in all randomized pts, and 86.2% and 84.8% in pts treated as assigned. The estimated PFS HR for Arm A vs B in all randomized and pts treated as assigned were 1.05 (CI 0.71-1.56, p=0.79) and 0.95 (CI 0.59-1.54, p=0.84), respectively. The 3 yr PFS for Arms A and B were 76.6% and 77.4% in all randomized pts, and 81.5% and 80.4% in pts treated as assigned. For Arm C, 3 yr OS and PFS were 81.9% (CI 69.6-96.4%) and 76.9% (CI 64.4-91.7%), respectively. For Arm D, 3 yr OS and PFS were 85.1% (CI 76.0%-95.4%) and 73.4% (62.7-85.9%), respectively. For the MIPI-c low/LI group, 3 yr OS was 84.6% vs 85.7% for Arm A vs B (p=0.96), while in the MIPI-c high/HI group, 3 yr OS was 77.4% vs 77.6% for Arm A vs B (p=0.71). For the intensive induction group, 3 yr OS was 83.0% vs 86.2% for Arm A vs B (p=0.30), while in the non-intensive induction group, 3 yr OS was 79.5% vs 72.8% for Arm A vs B (p=0.48). Exploratory analysis of MRD+ pts (Arm C) showed that pts who converted to uMRD6 post auto-HCT (n=17) had 3 yr OS of 100% and PFS of 100%, whereas those who remained MRD+ (n=13) post auto-HCT had 3 yr OS of 63.6% and PFS of 48.8%. Causes of death (COD) in Arm A were 4.7% lymphoma, 5.1% COVID-19, and 5.0% other/unknown. COD in Arm B were 3.5% lymphoma, 6.6% COVID-19, and 4.6% other/unknown. In Sept 2024, the DSMC recommended termination of accrual and release of trial findings based on these results. Conclusion: In this interim analysis, in the era of highly effective induction and maintenance regimens, MCL pts in first CR with uMRD6 did not benefit from consolidative auto-HCT. Pts who remain MRD+ after induction may benefit from auto-HCT. Longer follow-up will be important to confirm these findings.

Introduction: The optimal induction for younger fit patients (pts) with mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) is unknown; though intensive chemoimmunotherapy (CIT) containing high dose cytarabine has been shown to prolong remission. Achieving molecular remission is an independent predictor of outcomes post induction therapy in patients with MCL. Incorporating undetectable measurable residual disease (uMRD) status into the primary endpoint may be preferable to progression-free survival (PFS), particularly when approaches following induction are varied (e.g., ASCT, maintenance treatment, observation). Induction with 3 cycles of bendamustine and rituximab followed by 3 cycles of cytarabine and rituximab (BR/CR) is associated with high complete metabolic response (CMR) and uMRD rates (Armand et al., BJH 2016; Merryman et al., Blood Adv 2020). Bruton's tyrosine kinase inhibitors (BTKi) including ibrutinib and acalabrutinib (A) in combination with CIT are highly effective in MCL (Wang et al., EHA 2024, LBA 3439). In 2019, the US Intergroup activated EA4181 to explore the efficacy with the addition of fixed duration BTKi, to BR or BR/CR for patients with MCL ≤ 70 years old. Patients and methods: Patients were randomized 1:1:1 (stratified by MIPI risk status) to 6 cycles of BR/CR (control arm), BR/CR-A, or BR-A. Cytarabine was dosed at 2 g/m2 Q12 hours x 4, with dose reductions based on age and creatinine clearance. Acalabrutinib was dosed at 100 mg BID continuously on BR cycles with the BR/CR-A and BR-A arms and at 100 mg BID on days 1-7 and 22-28 with CR cycles on the BR/CR-A arm to mitigate hematologic toxicity. Consolidation approaches following induction were at the discretion of the treating physician. The primary endpoint was a composite of PET/CT CMR and peripheral blood uMRD rate (< 1 in 105). ClonoSEQ (Adaptive Biotechnologies) was performed at baseline and MRD testing was obtained at the end of induction. Secondary clinical objectives included PFS and overall survival (OS) at 36 months (mo), objective response rates (ORR), and toxicity rates. With 108 patients per arm expected, there was 86% power to detect an increase in PET/CT CMR/uMRD rate from 60% in the control arm to 75% in either BR/CR-A or BR-A arms using a Z-test with a 10% alpha (1-sided). Results: Between October 2019 and March 2023, 359 participants were randomized to BR/CR (n = 128), BR/CR-A (n = 129), and BR-A (n = 102). BR-A was closed to further accrual by the DSMC based on interim futility analysis for superiority in Fall 2022. The median (range) age was 61 (25, 70), 30% were ≥ 65 years, 77% were male, 89% were white, 89% were non-Hispanic, 18%/43%/39% were low/intermediate/high risk MIPI. Baseline clonal sequence was identified in 308/326 (95%) among samples received. 281/308 were eligible and treated and 260/281 had an end of treatment MRD test result (BR/CR = 85, BR/CR-A = 98, BR-A = 77). This subset (n = 260) is the focus of the primary analysis; sensitivity analysis included 281 eligible and treated pts with trackable clonal marker. In the primary analysis subset, 94%, 91%, and 90% in BR/CR, BR/CR-A, and BR-A arms, respectively, completed 6 cycles of protocol therapy. The PET/CT CMR/uMRD rates were 82% (BR/CR), 82% (BR/CR-A; p = 0.55 vs BR/CR), and 78% (BR-A; p = 0.76 vs BR/CR). In the sensitivity analysis set, PET/CT CMR/uMRD rates were 74% with BR/CR (n = 94), 76% (p = 0.44) with BR/CR-A (n = 106), and 74% (p = 0.52) with BR-A (n = 81). ORR (CMR) rates were 94% (91%), 99% (90%), and 94% (91%) with BR/CR, BR/CR-A, and BR-A, respectively. At a median follow-up of 27.9 mo, estimated 12-mo PFS/OS were 86%/94% (BR/CR), 89%/98% (BR/CR-A) and 87%/95% (BR-A). The proportion of treatment-related grade 3 or higher adverse events (AE) was 78%/88%/73%, with neutropenia in 52%/58%/27%, anemia in 23%/32%/3%, thrombocytopenia in 55%/66%/6%, and febrile neutropenia in 11%/12%/4%; treatment discontinuation due to AE occurred in 5%/7%/8% in BR/CR, BR/CR-A, and BR-A arms, respectively. Conclusion: High PET/CT CMR uMRD rates were seen in all 3 arms. BR/CR can be considered as a standard induction in pts ≤ 70. Addition of acalabrutinib to the standard arm added toxicity without improvement in efficacy, suggesting acalabrutinib should be avoided during Ara-C cycles. BR-A was found not superior and closed early by the DSMC; however, it is the least toxic arm with similar efficacy, and represents an appealing option to avoid high dose cytarabine.

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.

TPS7100 Background: Despite the promising efficacy of CAR-T for patients with relapsed or refractory (R/R) large B-cell lymphomas (LBCL), more than 60% of patients will relapse, the majority of which occur in the first 6 months. Approximately 30% of patients with LBCL treated with CAR-T achieve a partial response (PR) on day 30 (D30) PET-CT assessment. Of patients in a D30 PR, 70% will eventually progress, yet the standard of care remains close observation. Early consolidative treatment strategies utilizing therapies with a different mechanism of action may improve outcomes, but there are currently no reliable biomarkers. Epcoritamab (Epco), a bispecific antibody directed against CD20 and CD3, has been approved by the FDA for LBCL patients who relapse after at least 2 lines of therapy. In the phase 2 study, Epco was associated with an overall response rate (ORR) of 63% and a complete response (CR) rate of 39%, including similar responses in a subset of patients who were relapsed 100 days post CAR-T. This study is a trial-in-progress that will evaluate the efficacy of epco compared to observation for patients with LBCLs achieving a PR on D30 post CAR-T PET-CT assessment. Methods: This is an investigator-initiated, randomized, phase II, multicenter, open-label study (NCT06238648) evaluating epco monotherapy for a fixed duration of 12 cycles compared to observation for LBCL patients with D30 PR after standard of care CAR-T. A maximum of 120 patients will be randomized 1:1 to epco or observation across 10 academic centers. Stratification factors include line of CAR-T (second vs third line) and costimulatory domain (CD28 vs 4-1BB). Key inclusion criteria include PET evidence of a D30 PR. non-bulky disease ( <7.5cm), ANC of >1000, hemoglobin >7 g/dL if asymptomatic or >8 if symptomatic, platelet count >50,000. G-CSF, pRBCs and platelet transfusions are allowed. Key exclusion criteria include prior anti CD20xCD3 bispecific antibody therapy, ongoing or uncontrolled CRS or ICANS, and active or symptomatic CNS disease. Epco is administered subcutaneously at a dose of 0.16mg on day 1, 0.8mg on day 8, prior to full dose of 48mg on day 15. Epco is administered weekly in 28 day cycles (C) for C1-3, on day 1 and 15 of C4-9 and on day 1 of C10-12. PET-CT response is assessed by the 2014 Lugano criteria after 2 cycles, and then every 3 months during active treatment. The primary objective is efficacy, measured as conversion from D30 PR to CR. The secondary endpoints include frequency and severity of treatment emergent adverse events, ORR, duration of response, duration of complete response, progression free survival, event free survival, and overall survival. Peripheral blood samples will be collected pre-treatment and during treatment to assess for biomarkers of response and resistance. The study was activated in January 2024 and recruitment is ongoing. Clinical trial information: NCT06238648 .

Background: Chemotherapy in combination with radiotherapy (RT) is the standard for early-stage (ES) Hodgkin lymphoma (cHL). Despite high cure rates (12-year overall survival (OS) &gt;93%), there is room to improve short and long-term outcomes for children and adults with ES cHL. Incorporation of immunotherapy (IO) into front line treatment of ES cHL is an opportunity to both improve progression-free survival (PFS) and maintain OS, while minimizing long-term morbidity and mortality by reducing exposure to RT and high-dose chemotherapy. Study Design and Methods: HL leaders of the NCTN groups, expert HL researchers and physicians, and representatives from the Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program (CTEP) formed a working group in April 2020 with the goals of harmonizing treatment approaches for ES cHL across pediatric and adult patients and reaching consensus regarding the optimal study design for incorporating IO therapy into frontline treatment. Study champions identified from each of the North American cooperative groups [Children's Oncology Group (COG), SWOG, ECOG-ACRIN, Alliance, NRG] and experts in imaging, radiation oncology, lymphoma biology and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) were included. The resulting COG-led clinical trial, AHOD2131, represents the largest ES cHL trial in the history of North American cooperative groups and the first to enroll patients across the age continuum. AHOD2131 (NCT05675410; Figure) is a randomized, phase 3 trial enrolling patients ages 5 to 60 years with newly diagnosed, previously untreated stage I and II cHL and will investigate the addition of the CD30-antibody drug conjugate brentuximab vedotin (Bv) with PD-1 blockade (nivolumab) compared to standard chemotherapy +/- RT. Since the April 2023 activation, 97 North American sites have activated the trial, and 21 participants have enrolled. Target enrollment is 1875 patients over 5 years of accrual, for an estimated 1782 eligible and evaluable patients. The primary objective is to compare the 3-year PFS of patients with ES cHL treated through a response-adapted, superiority design with either standard therapy or with an IO approach (BV + nivolumab). All patients will be stratified as favorable or unfavorable based on disease risk features at enrollment. Based on initial response assessment by PET/CT (via central review) after 2 cycles of ABVD, patients were classified to PET2 positive (SER, defined as 5 Point Score 4 or 5, ~15% of patients) and PET negative (RER). Those who are PET positive will receive involved site RT (ISRT). The SER and RER patients will be randomized to standard chemotherapy vs. IO therapy respectively. In addition to the primary outcome of PFS, there are 11 secondary and 10 exploratory aims. The secondary aims focus on OS, PFS of subgroups, and event-free survival at 12 years, physician-reported treatment-related adverse event (AE) rates, patient-reported AE using pediatric and adult versions of Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE), and the capture of representation by self-report and the use of electronic PRO data collections. The exploratory aims include the assessment of imaging central review as compared to local institutional review and the use of convolutional neural networks through artificial-intelligence machine learning. The study will examine the effect of therapy on acute and long-term adverse effects including health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and OS for up to 12 years. The study will compare patient self-report and provider AE reports and evaluate the associations of self-reported race/ethnicity and social determinants of health (SDOH)and post-progression/post-relapse OS. AHOD2131 strengthens the effort between the North American cooperative groups to conduct collaborative clinical trials and aims to harmonize an improved standard of care for ES cHL across the age continuum.

Background: CLL is the most prevalent adult leukemia with a highly heterogenous genetic landscape leading to extremely varied clinical outcomes. Previously, CLL patients with immunoglobulin heavy chain variable region ( IGHV) mutated status and presence of deletion 13q14 [del(13q)] were identified as favorable-risk with most patients remaining on lifetime observation. However, other intrinsic factors contributing to CLL disease progression and leading to treatment initiation remain unknown. Our goal was to identify patients at high-risk of progression with added predictive value (APV) beyond IGHV-status and presence of del(13q). Methods: Flow cytometry was used to sort CD19+CD5+ malignant cells in peripheral blood from CLL patients at Huntsman Cancer Institute at University of Utah and triple sequencing generated (tumor whole transcriptome and paired tumor-normal whole exome data). We used SPECTRA, a novel dimension reduction transcriptome approach, to derive a set of independent, intrinsic, quantitative transcriptome tumor variables from 249 CLL patients with quality-controlled transcriptome sequence data. From this set, 182 treatment-naïve (TN) patients with quality-controlled clinical variables were used as a discovery cohort set to derive a SPECTRA-based risk score for TTFT using multivariable Cox proportional hazards modeling. Event time was date of patient specimen acquisition to initiation of frontline therapy with patients censored at last follow-up or death. Gaussian mixture modeling (GMM) was performed to identify evidence for distinct risk groups within the quantitative risk score. GMM-risk groups, and further stratifications by IGHV mutational and del(13q) status, were used in hazard ratios (HR) and to illustrate differences in Kaplan-Meier time-to-event curves. An independent publicly available dataset of 548 TN CLL patients with clinical and transcriptome data for CD19+ enriched cells was used for replication. Results: SPECTRA produced 19 quantitative spectra variables to describe most of the expression variation across the 249 CLL patients. In multivariable Cox modeling for TTFT, 7 spectra were significant and retained in a final model, which GMM separated into a bi-modal distribution and defined high (N=83) and low-risk (N=99) groups (HR=5.7, 95% confidence interval [CI] 3.4-9.7). In a post-hoc model including IGHV mutational and del(13q) status, the spectra-risk score showed significant APV beyond both factors (p&lt;0.001 for both). The discovery study timeframe was 6.3 years (y) and included 109 IGHV-mutated and 75 del(13q) patients. In the IGHV-mutated patients, median TTFT (mTTFT) was significantly shorter for spectra-high risk patients (3.1y) vs. spectra-low risk patients (median not reached [NR]; p&lt;0.001). Similarly, in the del(13q) patients, mTTFT was significantly shorter in high-risk patients (3.3y) compared to median NR for spectra-low (p&lt;0.001) ( Figure). Importantly, stratification of patients into low- and high-risk SPECTRA scores provided significant additional information for prediction of TTFT than IGHV mutational and del(13q) status ( Figure). For validation, we applied the same spectra-risk score to the independent data set containing 301 IGHV-mutated and 278 del(13q) CLL patients. In the replication set, the mTTFT in the IGHV-mutated patients who were spectra-high was 3.3y vs. 11.2y in spectra-low (p&lt;0.001). Similarly, in the replication set of del(13q) patients, spectra-high-risk patients had a mTTFT of 2.7y vs. 10.7y for spectra-low (p&lt;0.001). Conclusion: A transcriptome risk score utilizing novel SPECTRA variables identified a substantial subset of CLL patients with IGHV-mutated status and presence of del(13q) who have uncharacteristically short TTFT, but who would be classified as favorable risk under current best practice stratification. Future directions include validating our results with external patient cohorts from Mayo Clinic and investigating the genetic and transcriptomic profile of SPECTRA low- and high-risk cohorts to determine targetable pathways for treatment.

Novel targeted therapies (small molecule inhibitors, antibody–drug conjugates, and CD19-directed therapies) have changed the treatment landscape of relapsed/refractory B-cell lymphomas. Bruton’s tyrosine kinase (BTK) inhibitors continue to evolve in the management of mantle cell lymphoma (MCL), in both the relapsed/refractory and the frontline setting. Anti-CD19 CAR T-cell therapies are now effective and approved treatment options for relapsed/refractory follicular lymphoma (FL), diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), and MCL. Bispecific T-cell engagers represent a novel immunotherapeutic approach for relapsed FL and DLBCL after multiple lines of therapies, including prior CAR T-cell therapy. These NCCN Guideline Insights highlight the significant updates to the NCCN Guidelines for B-Cell Lymphomas for the treatment of FL, DLBCL, and MCL.

In the last decade, a better understanding of the molecular pathogenesis of B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphomas has resulted in the development of novel targeted therapies, such as small molecule inhibitors of select kinases in the B-cell receptor pathway, antibody–drug conjugates, and small molecules that target a variety of proteins (eg, CD-19, EZH2, and XPO-1–mediated nuclear export). Anti-CD19 CAR T-cell therapy, first approved for relapsed/refractory (R/R) diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, has also emerged as a novel treatment option for R/R follicular lymphoma and mantle cell lymphoma. These NCCN Guideline Insights highlight the new targeted therapy options included in the NCCN Guidelines for B-Cell Lymphomas for the treatment of R/R disease.