Thiéblemont, Catherine

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

Abstract Introduction FD Ibr+Ven is approved as first-line (1L) treatment (tx) for CLL/SLL in 78 countries across Asia, Europe, the Middle East, and South America, plus Australia, Canada, and New Zealand. Clinical trials with up to 5.5 years (yrs) of follow-up have demonstrated progression-free and overall survival benefits of 1L FD Ibr+Ven in pts with CLL/SLL (Wierda WG, ASH 2024; Jacobs R, EHA 2024). Despite established clinical benefits, there is a lack of RW evidence on the effectiveness and tolerability of FD Ibr+Ven outside of clinical trial settings. Here we present pooled data from REALITY-WW and REALITY-2 to understand the usage, factors for therapy decision, clinical response, and safety of FD Ibr+Ven in routine clinical practice. Methods REALITY-WW and REALITY-2 are prospective observational cohort studies. REALITY-WW is an international study; REALITY-2 is conducted in Germany. Both included previously untreated pts with CLL/SLL from hospitals and medical institutions where Ibr+Ven was routinely used. The decision to start FD Ibr+Ven was made prior to and independent of pt enrollment. Pts aged ≥18 yrs with a confirmed diagnosis of CLL/SLL requiring 1L tx per iwCLL 2018 criteria received 3 cycles of Ibr, followed by 12 cycles of FD Ibr+Ven orally (Ibr, 420 mg/d; Ven, 5-week ramp-up to 400 mg/d). Primary end point was overall response rate (ORR) per iwCLL 2018 criteria. Secondary end points and outcomes of interest included tx-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), tumor lysis syndrome (TLS) risk, and factors associated with physician decision to initiate FD Ibr+Ven in routine clinical practice. Results At data cutoff (REALITY-WW: May 2025; REALITY-2: March 2025), 129 pts from both studies received FD Ibr+Ven (REALITY-WW, 81; REALITY-2, 48). The median (range) time on study was 6.4 (0.1-19.0) months (mo). Median (range) age was 65.0 (37.0-87.0) yrs, with 46.5% of pts aged <65 yrs and 53.5% of pts aged ≥65 yrs; 62.8% were male. Median (range) time from diagnosis to FD Ibr+Ven initiation was 38.1 mo (0.1-238.0) and median (range) duration of tx was 6.0 mo (0.1-15.9) for Ibr and 3.2 mo (0.1-8.4) for Ven. A Cumulative Illness Rating Scale score of >6 was observed in 12.6% of pts, with a higher score in pts aged ≥65 vs <65 yrs (18.0% vs 6.9%). TP53 mutations were seen in 7.4% of pts; 52.8% had an unmutated IGHV status. ORR was assessed in the 44 pts with ≥ 1 post-baseline assessment in REALITY-WW. Of these, 39 showed a response by the end of 6 tx cycles (3 cycles of Ibr + 3 cycles of FD Ibr+Ven) and 5 had stable disease. ORR at 6 mo per iwCLL 2018 criteria (partial response [PR] with lymphocytosis [PR-L] or better) was 88.6% (95% CI, 79.3-98.0), including complete responses in 29.5%, PR in 34.1%, and PR-L in 25.0% pts. Among 129 treated pts, TEAEs were reported in 61.2%; diarrhea was the most common TEAE (14.0%). Serious TEAEs and grade 3/4 TEAEs were reported in 12.4% and 8.5% of pts, respectively. The most common grade 3/4 TEAE was myocardial infarction (1.6%). Dose reduction was observed in 13.2% (Ibr) and 2.3% (Ven) of pts, mainly due to tx-associated TEAE/toxicity/TLS. Rates of TEAEs leading to discontinuation, dose reduction, and interruption of ≥1 study tx were 4.7%, 10.9%, and 20.9%, respectively. At baseline (n=129), 18.6%, 45.0%, and 14.7% of pts had high, intermediate, and low TLS risk, respectively, while 20.2% were not assessed and 1.6% had missing data. After the 3-cycle Ibr lead-in, the distribution shifted to 9.3%, 24.8%, and 24.0%, respectively, with 14.7% not assessed and 27.1% missing. There were no TEAEs of TLS and no hospitalizations due to TLS. Seven pts (6 aged ≥65 yrs and 1 <65 yrs) were hospitalized prophylactically for TLS. Prophylactic hospitalization was observed in 8.5% (11/129) of pts with high or medium TLS risk and impaired renal function for whom the Ven ramp-up was initiated; no pts were hospitalized due to laboratory/clinical TLS during the Ven ramp-up period. Physician questionnaire responses (n=126) indicated the most common factors associated with decision to initiate FD Ibr+Ven were administration route advantage (91.3%), overall health status (87.3%), anticipated superior efficacy of tx (84.1%), and general risk factors such as high tumor burden/genetic risk factors (81.0%). Conclusions Overall findings suggest that FD Ibr+Ven is an effective and safe tx for pts with CLL/SLL in a RW population, including those aged ≥65 yrs. Data with longer follow-up will be presented at the meeting.

Abstract Diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) poses a challenge in hematology given its varied symptoms, and the complex interplay between disease and treatment effects on health-related quality of life (HRQoL). The phase 3 POLARIX study demonstrated superior progression-free survival and a similar safety profile with polatuzumab vedotin plus rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and prednisone (Pola-R-CHP) vs R-CHOP (rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone) in patients with previously untreated DLBCL. Here, we evaluate HRQoL through patient-reported outcome (PRO) instruments to fully characterize the patient experience in the POLARIX study. Changes from baseline in HRQoL, lymphoma symptoms, and gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms were assessed, as well as incidence and severity of common symptoms by PROs vs clinician-reported adverse events (AEs). Baseline characteristics of PRO-evaluable patients (N = 874) were consistent. Comparison between PROs and clinician-reported AEs revealed a notable discordance; patients generally reported a higher incidence of symptoms than clinicians, emphasizing the need for patient-centric tools to accurately capture the patient experience. Both treatments exhibited rapid and sustained improvements in HRQoL and lymphoma symptoms, with the most substantial improvements seen in global health status/QoL, lymphoma symptoms, fatigue, role, emotional, and social functioning. GI symptoms (diarrhea, constipation, nausea, and vomiting) were generally similar between treatment arms and returned to baseline levels after treatment completion. These HRQoL data underscore the complementarity of PROs, as an adjunct to clinician-reported AEs, in evaluating the efficacy and tolerability of new treatments, including Pola-R-CHP, which may represent a new benchmark for patient-reported HRQoL in previously untreated DLBCL. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as NCT03274492.

ZUMA-12 is a multicenter phase 2 study evaluating axicabtagene ciloleucel (axi-cel) autologous anti-CD19 chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy as part of first-line treatment for high-risk large B-cell lymphoma (LBCL). In the primary efficacy analysis (n = 37; median follow-up, 15.9 months), axi-cel demonstrated a high rate of complete responses (CR; 78%) and a safety profile consistent with prior experience. Here, we assessed updated outcomes from ZUMA-12 in 40 treated patients after ≥3 years of follow-up. Eligible adults underwent leukapheresis, lymphodepleting chemotherapy, and axi-cel infusion (2 × 106 CAR T cells/kg). Investigator-assessed CR, objective response, survival, safety, and CAR T-cell expansion were assessed. The CR rate among response-evaluable patients (n = 37) increased after the primary analysis to 86% (95% confidence interval [CI], 71%-95%), with a 92% objective response rate. After a median follow-up of 47.0 months (range, 37.1-57.8 months), 36-month estimates (95% CI) of duration of response and event-free, progression-free, and overall survival were 81.8% (63.9%-91.4%), 73.0% (55.6%-84.4%), 75.1% (57.5%-86.2%), and 81.1% (64.4%-90.5%), respectively. In total, 4 patients had new malignancies, 2 occurring after the data cutoff of the primary analysis; none were axi-cel–related. Eight patients died on study, 2 of whom died from nonrelapse mortality causes. After long-term follow-up, axi-cel demonstrated a high durable response rate, with no new safety signals after the primary analysis, suggestive of an effective first-line therapy with curative intent in high-risk LBCL. Further assessments are needed to determine its benefit vs standard of care. This trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov, as NCT03761056.

Background: Epcoritamab (epcor) is a first-in-class CD3xCD20 bispecific antibody (bsAb) approved for the treatment of 3L+ LBCL and follicular lymphoma. In the single-arm, phase 1/2, EPCORE NHL-1 trial (NCT03625037), epcor given until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity, demonstrated deep and durable responses, a median overall survival (OS) of 18.5 months, and a manageable safety profile in R/R LBCL. A second CD3xCD20 bsAb given as fixed-treatment duration, glofitamab (glofit), also demonstrated durable responses, conferring a median OS of 11.5 months in the pivotal study. Understanding how long-term outcomes compare among bsAb agents remains an important knowledge gap. With over 2 years of follow-up, in the absence of a head-to-head study, it is now relevant to compare the efficacy of these agents via indirect comparison. This study evaluated OS, progression-free survival (PFS), and duration of complete response (DoCR) of epcor vs glofit in R/R LBCL using data from the respective pivotal trials. Methods: Two analyses were conducted to compare the efficacy of epcor and glofit. First, a matching-adjusted indirect treatment comparison (MAIC) was conducted using published OS and PFS data from the full cohort of the glofit pivotal trial (12.6 months of follow-up, Dickinson et al, 2022) and the epcor pivotal trial (EPCORE NHL-1). Piece-wise hazard ratios (HRs) were calculated when proportional hazards assumptions were not met. Baseline characteristic prognostic variables were selected based on literature, clinical judgement, and empirical statistical testing and were adjusted between epcor and glofit cohorts. Second, in sensitivity analyses, indirect comparisons were conducted using an updated analysis of glofit with longer follow-up that included DoCR, together with OS and PFS data starting at cycle (C) 3 with 32 months of follow-up (Hutchings et al, ASH 2023). Sensitivity analyses with longer follow-up could not be adjusted because glofit pt baseline characteristics were not presented. Aggregate OS and PFS curves for glofit were derived from subgroups of pts with complete response/partial response/no response (CR/PR/NR) at C3 (Hutchings et al, ASH 2023). Aggregate epcor OS and PFS curves were similarly derived for pts with CR/PR/NR at C3 without prior disease progression. Weighted Cox proportional-hazards models were used to estimate the OS and PFS HRs between the 2 comparators. The DoCR comparison included all glofit and epcor pts achieving CR. All comparisons used EPCORE NHL-1 data with a median of 37.1 months of follow-up. Results: Pts enrolled into the pivotal trials of epcor and glofit were comparable by several key baseline characteristics before adjustment: age ≥65 y; male gender; Ann Arbor disease stage III-IV; primary refractory disease; refractory to most recent anti-CD20 therapy; previous chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy (CAR T); refractory to CAR T; and previous autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT). MAIC analysis revealed no significant difference in OS benefit from C1 until month 6 (HR 1.08, 95% CI 0.71, 1.64; P=0.72), but a demonstrable OS advantage from 6 months onward (HR 0.60, 95% CI 0.37, 0.98; P=0.04) in favor of epcor. An OS comparison starting at C3 with longer glofit follow-up demonstrated a consistent survival advantage in favor of epcor (HR 0.68, 95% CI 0.46, 1.01; P=0.05). The proportion of pts who received CAR T or ASCT subsequent therapy were similar for epcor and glofit (CAR T: 7.0% vs 8.9%; ASCT: 6.4% vs 6.3%) (National Institute for Health and Care Excellence Glofit Single Technology Appraisal, 2023). The MAIC analysis showed comparable PFS between epcor and glofit (HR 1.06, 95% CI 0.79, 1.41; P=0.71), although there was substantial censoring in the glofit PFS curve due to immature follow-up. With longer follow-up in the analysis starting at C3, with less censoring, the glofit PFS curve remained similar to the epcor PFS curve from C3 until month 6 (HR 0.67, 95% CI 0.42, 1.07; P=0.10), where separation of the PFS curves were observed favoring epcor (HR 0.56, 95% CI 0.33, 0.97; P=0.04). Median DoCR was longer for epcor (36.1 months) vs glofit (26.9 months). Conclusion: These indirect treatment comparisons suggest that epcor may provide an overall survival benefit over glofit through longer PFS with more mature follow-up, potentially driven by longer DoCR. Survival data with longer follow-up in the full glofit cohort are needed to confirm these findings.

Background: Axi-cel is an autologous anti-CD19 chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy approved for the treatment of relapsed/refractory (R/R) LBCL. ZUMA-12 (NCT03761056) is a Phase 2, multicenter, single-arm study of axi-cel as part of first-line treatment in patients with high-risk LBCL. In the primary efficacy analysis (n=37; median follow-up of 15.9 months), axi-cel demonstrated a high rate of investigator-assessed complete response (CR; 78%; 95% CI, 62-90) and an 89% objective response rate (ORR; 95% CI, 75-97). Axi-cel also had a manageable safety profile, with no new safety signals observed in the first-line setting (Neelapu et al. Nat Med. 2022). Here, we report updated efficacy and safety outcomes from ZUMA-12 in all patients treated with axi-cel after a median follow-up of ≥40 months. Methods: Eligible adults had high-risk LBCL, with MYC and BCL2 and/or BCL6 rearrangements (double- or triple-hit histology) per investigator or an International Prognostic Index (IPI) score ≥3, plus a positive interim PET per Lugano classification (Deauville score 4/5) after 2 cycles of an anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody and anthracycline-containing regimen. Patients underwent leukapheresis, followed by lymphodepleting chemotherapy (cyclophosphamide and fludarabine) on Days -5, -4, and -3, and a single axi-cel infusion of 2×10 6 CAR T cells/kg on Day 0. Per investigator discretion, non-chemotherapy bridging could be administered. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed CR rate per Lugano classification (Cheson et al. J Clin Oncol. 2014). Secondary endpoints included ORR, duration of response (DOR), event-free survival (EFS), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), safety, and levels of CAR T cells in blood and cytokines in serum. Results: As of May 3, 2023, 42 patients were enrolled and 40 were treated with axi-cel, with a median follow-up of 40.9 months (range, 29.5-50.2). In total, 37 patients were evaluable for response (centrally confirmed double- or triple-hit histology or IPI score ≥3). The CR rate was 86% (95% CI, 71-95), and 92% (95% CI, 78-98) of patients had an objective response. Patients with centrally confirmed double- or triple-hit histology (n=10) had a CR rate of 90%. Responses were ongoing in 73% of response-evaluable patients at data cutoff. Medians for DOR, EFS, PFS, and OS were not reached. The 36-month estimates for DOR, EFS (Figure 1), PFS, and OS (Figure 2) were 82%, 73%, 75%, and 81%, respectively. All treated patients (n=40) experienced adverse events (AEs) of any grade and 88% of patients had grade ≥3 AEs. Similar to the primary analysis, the most common any-grade AEs were pyrexia (100%), headache (70%), and neutrophil count decreased (55%). No new cases of cytokine release syndrome (CRS) or neurologic events of any grade occurred since the prior data cut and all cases of CRS and neurologic events reported were resolved by data cutoff. Prolonged cytopenias of any grade (present Day ≥30 post-infusion) occurred in 9 patients (n=7 neutrophil count decreased) and were resolved by data cutoff. There were 8 deaths due to progressive disease (n=5) and other causes not related to axi-cel (1 COVID-19, 1 esophageal adenocarcinoma, 1 septic shock on Days 350, 535, and 287 post axi-cel infusion, respectively). Two of the 8 deaths (1 progressive disease and 1 esophageal adenocarcinoma) occurred after the primary analysis. Among treated patients, post-infusion CAR T-cell expansion by peak and area under the curve was 36.9 cells/µL and 368.0 cells/µL×days, respectively, in those with ongoing responses at data cutoff (n=17), 45.1 cells/µL and 413.4 cells/µL×days in those who relapsed (n=6), and 34.7 cells/µL and 566.8 cells/µL×days in non-responders (n=3). Conclusion: In this updated analysis of ZUMA-12 with a median follow-up of ≥40 months, axi-cel demonstrated a high rate of durable responses and no new safety signals. Axi-cel may benefit patients exposed to fewer prior therapies and those with high-risk LBCL, a population with high unmet need and poor outcomes after standard first-line chemoimmunotherapy.

Abstract Extranodal marginal zone lymphoma (EMZL) has a very indolent course, and the validation of surrogate markers could accelerate novel therapies. Although prognostic markers do exist, no surrogate markers have been validated in EMZL. We hypothesized that time to complete response within 24 months (TTCR24) and complete response (CR) at 24 months (CR24) could be valid surrogate markers of progression-free survival (PFS). The International Extranodal Lymphoma Study Group 19 phase 3 trial showed the advantage of double therapy (rituximab + chlorambucil) over single therapy (rituximab or chlorambucil) on PFS. We used 2 recently published single-trial approaches to assess whether TTCR24 and CR24 were good surrogate markers of 8-year PFS (8y-PFS). Among the 401 patients, 264 (66%) reached a CR in the first 24 months, of which 222 (84%) remained in CR at month 24. The cumulative incidence of CR over time was significantly higher in patients under double therapy (hazard ratio, 1.75; P < .001). The double therapy arm was associated with a higher CR24 rate, a shorter TTCR24, and a longer 8y-PFS. The estimated proportion of treatment effect on 8y-PFS explained by TTCR24 was 95% (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.27-1.87). CR24 was also a strong surrogate marker because it mediated 90% (95% CI, 0.51-2.22) of the treatment effect on PFS and its natural indirect effect was significant throughout the follow-up. We found that TTCR24 predicted 95% and that CR24 mediated 90% of the treatment effect on long-term PFS. Therefore, TTCR24 and CR24 could be used in clinical trials as informative and valid early indicators of treatment effect on PFS. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT00210353.