Andersen, Clark R.

Abstract Background: Despite advances in LBCL treatment, 35–45% of patients relapse or have refractory disease highlighting an unmet clinical need. Clinical trials are essential to advancing lymphoma treatment, yet participation remains low – especially among certain populations. We hypothesized that participation in clinical trials as part of first-line therapy is associated with improved survival outcomes and conducted this retrospective study in a multi-center cohort. Methods: The LEO cohort prospectively enrolled newly diagnosed patients with LBCL between 2015 and 2020 at 8 academic medical centers in the United States. LBCL histology's included T-cell/histiocyte rich LBCL, Primary mediastinal LBCL, high grade B-cell lymphoma and DLBCL NOS. Pathology was reviewed and classified by a LEO pathologist. Clinical and treatment data (including trial participation) were abstracted from medical records. The primary outcome endpoint is overall survival (OS) defines as the time from diagnosis to death from any cause or last follow up. Univariable and multivariable Cox proportional hazards models were used to evaluate the association between OS and therapeutic trial participation. Univariable models assessed each baseline covariate, with and without interaction with trial participation. The multivariable model adjusted for age, sex, race/ethnicity, diagnosis to treatment interval [DTI], and IPI, including an interaction between IPI and trial participation which was justified per minimal Akaike information criteria. All models clustered on institution. Results: Among the 2636 patients with LBCL, the median age was 63 (range 18 – 99), 57% were male, 75% non-Hispanic white (NHW), 12% Hispanic (H) and 7.3% African American (AA), 62% had Stage III/IV disease, and 214 (8.0%) participated in a clinical trial as part of first line therapy. Overall, between ages 18 – 80, clinical trial participation increased with age (55 % in ages 18-30 vs 11% in ages 71-80) but dropped significantly for patients > 80 (3.4%). There were no significant differences in the rate of trial participation by sex (male 8.6 % vs female 7.5%; p=0.35), race/ethnicity (NHW 8.9% vs H 5.5% vs AA 6.3%; p=0.061), body mass index (underweight [<18.5] 4.5% vs normal [18.5-24.9] 7.7% vs overweight [25-29] 8.3% vs obese (>30) 8.5; p = 0.75) or Rural-Urban Continuum Codes (Metro[1-3] 8.5% vs non-metro Urban [4-6] 7.6% vs non-metro Rural [7-9] 5.4 %; p=0.49). Patients with advanced disease more commonly participated in a trial. Most patients received systemic treatment (98%), with 94% of patients receiving an anti-CD20 antibody and 91% of patients receiving anthracycline-based therapy. Importantly, there was no difference in anthracycline use in trial participants vs nonparticipants (92 vs 91%; p=0.53). Patients with high IPI scores [3-5] were more likely to participate on trials compared to those with low scores [1-2] (8% vs 5.9% respectively, p= 0.012). Patients who participated in clinical trials had significantly longer median DTI (26 days vs 21 days; p <0.0001) and had a significantly lower number of comorbidities compared to non-participants (mean 0.55 vs. 0.69; p=0.032). Among patients with low IPI (0–2), 5-year OS was 89% trial participants (CTP) compared to 82% for non-participants (CTNP). Among patients with high IPI (3–5), 5-year OS was 78% for CTP vs 60%for CTNP. The multivariable Cox model demonstrated a significant interaction between trial participation and IPI, with trial participation with low IPI having a non-significant hazard ratio (HR) of 0.87 with 95% CI (0.57,1.32), while trial participation with high IPI had a significant HR of 0.57 (0.44, 0.74). Additionally, increased age, male sex, black race, and lower DTI were associated with increased hazard. Conclusion: Patients at high risk of poor outcomes such as those with advanced age (80+), higher comorbidities burden, and those needing more urgent therapy (shorter DTI) were less likely to participate in clinical trials. In this multi-institutional cohort of patients with LBCL treated at academic centers, frontline trial participants had outcomes that were equivalent or better than those receiving standard care. These finding underscore the value of clinical trial participation even in the frontline setting and support trial designs that expand inclusion- allowing participation of patients who are older, medically complex or in need urgent therapy.

Background Hispanic patients continue to be underrepresented in clinical trials. To better understand the factors that impact clinical trial participation, we surveyed patients with NHL receiving care at an academic institution on their perspectives on clinical trials, barriers to care, and helpful aids to encourage clinical trial participation. Here we report the findings of the Hispanic patients and non-Hispanic white patients; accrual is ongoing for other cohorts of patients. Methods Consecutive patients ≥ 18 years old with histologically confirmed NHL who received care at MD Anderson Cancer Center in the Texas Medical Center in Houston, Texas were invited to participate regardless of treatment status. A self-administered questionnaire was used to assess patient sociodemographic factors, perceptions and willingness to participate in different clinical trial scenarios as well as participant perceived barriers to care and facilitators of trial participation. The questionnaire included a total of 53 items with an additional 13 demographic items. The questionnaire was available in English and Spanish. Results Of the 1204 patients invited, 316 consented to participate and 285 ultimately completed the survey (participation rate 23.7%). Among the total participants, this cohort included 100 self-identified Hispanic (H) participants and 103 non-Hispanic white (NHW) participants diagnosed with NHL who completed the survey and were included here. The histology of our cohort included Follicular Lymphoma (FL) [35.6%]; Diffuse Large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) [18.2%], Mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) [18.7%], T-cell Lymphoma (TCL) [9.4%] Marginal Zone Lymphoma [7.8%]. Compared with NHW participants, Hispanic patients were younger (Median age of 60 vs 66 years), less likely to be male (H 54% vs NHW 66%), less likely to commute more than an hour away from the doctor's office (54% vs 71.8%), had lower household income (income > $100,000 was 32% vs 41.7%) and less likely to have a bachelors' degree or higher (38% vs 50.5%). There were similar prevalence histologies such as DLBCL (H 20% vs NHW 16.5%) and FL (H 36% vs NHW 35%) compared to rarer histologies such as MCL (H 11.1% vs NHW 26.2%) and MZL (H 12% vs NHW 3.9% ) which had disproportional prevalences. Hispanic patients were less likely to have previously participated in a clinical trial (28% vs 51.5%) and less likely to have discussed clinical trials as an option (49% vs 70.9%). A majority of Hispanic (81.0%) and NHW (92.3%) respondents stated that they understood what was meant by a “clinical research study” or “clinical trial” somewhat well or very well. Less than half of Hispanic participants (38.0%) and NHW participants (48.5%) reported being very willing to participate in a cancer clinical trial as their initial course of treatment. The most prevalent concern of both Hispanic and NHW participants respectively was the cost of a clinical trial (34.0%, 22.3%). Other top concerns included distance to the treatment center (32.0%, 13.6%) and frequency of contact with the care team (26.0%, 14.6%). Participants identified access to written materials (69.0%, 60.2%), insurance aid (65.0%, 68.0%), and access to videos (64.0%, 51.5%) as extremely helpful resources that could reduce the burden of participating in a clinical trial. Participants identified that it was most important that a treatment may improve their quality of life by decreasing pain level, increasing activity level, or other symptoms (76.0%, 91.3%). Conclusions Although most Hispanic and NHW participants reported a very good understanding of clinical trials and similar facilitators/barriers for trial participation, Hispanic patients were less likely to have discussed trials as an option with their care teams and less likely to have previously participated in a trial. Evidence-based interventions to address various barriers to clinical trials exist but data on their effectiveness and application is limited. Implementing strategically designed evidence-based interventions to address identified barriers and facilitators will be necessary to improve participation in lymphoma clinical trials.

Abstract BACKGROUND Diffuse intrinsic pontine glioma (DIPG) carries a poor prognosis with a median survival of less than 12 months. Histone mutation, K27M, and AKT pathway dysregulation play key roles in tumorigenesis. There is no curative treatment with radiation therapy, which currently remains the standard treatment. METHODS This is a phase I study of vorinostat and temsirolimus in newly diagnosed (stratum 1) and progressive (stratum 2) DIPG. The primary aims are to determine the safety, maximum tolerated dose, and toxicities (NCT02420613). Stratum 1 received radiation concurrently with vorinostat, followed by vorinostat and temsirolimus for up to 10 cycles. Stratum 2 received vorinostat and temsirolimus for up to 12 cycles. In stratum 1, vorinostat was administered daily at 230 mg/m2. The maintenance phase (both strata) included concurrent vorinostat 230 mg/m2 daily and temsirolimus 25 or 35 mg/m2 (Days 1 and 8). RESULTS Six patients were enrolled, three in each stratum. Three of the six patients had confirmed H3 K27M mutations. No dose-limiting toxicity was observed, and most adverse effects were limited to grades 1 or 2, including fatigue, nausea, vomiting, myelosuppression, hyperlipidemia, hyperglycemia, elevated liver enzymes, and creatinine. However, one patient experienced grade 3 leukopenia. Two of the three patients in stratum 1 showed evidence of radiographic response after the chemoradiation phase, of whom one patient had progression-free survival of 12 months and completed the 10 maintenance cycles. All patients at stratum 2 had disease progression with no radiographic response. CONCLUSION Overall, the combination of temsirolimus and vorinostat is well tolerated and safe, prompting the need for larger studies to investigate its efficacy. Due to the small number of patients, the study’s findings are limited, and trends in efficacy should be interpreted with caution.

Aim: Patients with R/R LBCL after first-line treatment have poor prognosis. Multiple novel therapies have been approved for R/R LBCL in recent years, but CIT regimens are still commonly used. This study evaluated the effectiveness of CIT and novel therapies in 2L+ in patients with R/R LBCL and the association between patient clinical characteristics and real-world outcomes. Methods: This was a multi-site retrospective observational study of patients aged ≥18 years with R/R LBCL in the Lymphoma Epidemiology of Outcomes (LEO) Consortium of Real-World Evidence (CReWE) cohort (patients followed from 1/1/2015 to 2/15/2023) who were treated with CIT or novel therapy in 2L+. CIT regimens included salvage/palliative chemotherapy, lenalidomide, rituximab, or obinutuzumab, used alone or in combination. Novel therapies included polatuzumab vedotin plus bendamustine and rituximab or variations thereof (i.e., pola-based regimen), tafasitamab plus lenalidomide or variations thereof (tafa-based regimen), and loncastuximab tesirine (lonca). Patients' demographic and clinical characteristics were assessed from the first confirmed R/R disease diagnosis and initiation of 2L+ therapy. When multiple lines of therapy (LOTs) were eligible for inclusion in the analysis, one was randomly selected as the index LOT. Real-world outcomes, determined by investigators at each clinical site, including overall response rate (ORR), complete response (CR) rate, duration of response (DOR), duration of complete response (DOCR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) were described for all patients in each treatment group and for the subgroup of patients with prior chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy. Multivariable Cox Proportional Hazards models were used to assess associations between select patient clinical characteristics and real-world outcomes. Results: The study population included patients treated with CIT (N=653), pola-based regimen (N=116), tafa-based regimen (N=55), and lonca (N=42) ( Figure 1A). The median (m) age at date of index treatment initiation across groups ranged from 63 to 74 years. Across groups, most patients had primary refractory disease-i.e., were refractory to the first LOT (69.5% CIT vs. 73.3% pola vs. 58.2% tafa vs. 71.4% lonca), whereas variable proportions had one prior LOT (65.5% vs. 17.2% vs. 43.6% vs. 7.1%) and prior CAR T-cell therapy (5.1% vs. 43.1% vs. 32.7% vs. 47.6%). In the CIT group, ORR was 33.8%, 15.5% of patients achieved CR, mPFS (95% CI) was 1.9 (1.7, 2.1) months, and mOS was 9.1 (8.1, 10.5) months. In the pola group, ORR was 42.2%, 24.1% of patients achieved CR, mPFS was 2.5 (2, 3.2) months and mOS was 7.8 (6.4, 11.8) months. In the tafa group, ORR was 25.5%, 14.5% of patients achieved CR, mPFS was 2.7 (2.1, 4.2) months, and mOS was 8 (5.3, 12.7) months. In the lonca group, ORR was 40.5%, 21.4% of patients achieved CR, mPFS was 3 (2.1, 5.1) months, and mOS was 4.7 (3.7, 10.8) months. Demographics and outcomes for all patients and those who received prior CAR T-cell therapy are summarized in Figure 1A. In the multivariable Cox regression analysis, International Prognostic Index (IPI) risk score ≥3, CIT as the index treatment type, and primary refractory status were significantly associated with time from response to progression/death (P<0.05; Figure 1B). IPI risk score ≥3, CIT as the index treatment type, and primary refractory status were significantly associated with worse PFS. IPI risk ≥3, ≥3 prior LOTs, and primary refractory status were significantly associated with OS. Conclusion: In this large clinical cohort of patients with R/R LBCL with high proportions having primary refractory disease, all common treatments were associated with modest ORR/CR and poor OS. Receiving CIT treatments, higher IPI score, primary refractory status, and higher number of prior LOTs were significantly associated with poor clinical outcomes. A study with larger sample size and longer follow-up may be warranted to further understand the clinical effectiveness of novel treatments. Thus, despite the availability of novel treatments during the study period, these findings highlight the need for more effective treatment alternatives beyond currently available options to improve outcomes.

AbstractBackground and objectivePleuroscopy with pleural biopsy has a high sensitivity for malignant pleural effusion (MPE). Because MPEs tend to recur, concurrent diagnosis and treatment of MPE during pleuroscopy is desired. However, proceeding directly to treatment at the time of pleuroscopy requires confidence in the on‐site diagnosis. The study's primary objective was to create a predictive model to estimate the probability of MPE during pleuroscopy.MethodsA prospective observational multicentre cohort study of consecutive patients undergoing pleuroscopy was conducted. We used a logistic regression model to evaluate the probability of MPE with relation to visual assessment, rapid on‐site evaluation (ROSE) of touch preparation and presence of pleural nodules/masses on computed tomography (CT). To assess the model's prediction accuracy, a bootstrapped training/testing approach was utilized to estimate the cross‐validated area under the receiver operating characteristic curve.ResultsOf the 201 patients included in the study, 103 had MPE. Logistic regression showed that higher level of malignancy on visual assessment is associated with higher odds of MPE (OR = 34.68, 95% CI = 9.17–131.14,p < 0.001). The logistic regression also showed that higher level of malignancy on ROSE of touch preparation is associated with higher odds of MPE (OR = 11.63, 95% CI = 3.85–35.16,p < 0.001). Presence of pleural nodules/masses on CT is associated with higher odds of MPE (OR = 6.61, 95% CI = 1.97–22.1,p = 0.002). A multivariable logistic regression model of final pathologic status with relation to visual assessment, ROSE of touch preparation and presence of pleural nodules/masses on CT had a cross‐validated AUC of 0.94 (95% CI = 0.91–0.97).ConclusionA prediction model using visual assessment, ROSE of touch preparation and CT scan findings demonstrated excellent predictive accuracy for MPE. Further validation studies are needed to confirm our findings.