Lin, Yi

Abstract Idecabtagene vicleucel (ide-cel) is a chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy approved for relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). Out-of-specification (OOS) CAR T cells not meeting criteria for commercial release are considered an investigational product; the expanded access protocol (EAP) allows release of OOS product for administration. The manufacturing analysis of capability, reliability, and timely delivery of ide-cel in the United States over >3 years since its approval included patients with RRMM who underwent leukapheresis for ide-cel treatment after ≥2 prior lines of therapy between 23 February 2021 and 1 November 2024. Additionally, the BB2121-EAP-001 study evaluated safety and efficacy of OOS ide-cel and included patients who had undergone leukapheresis for commercial ide-cel treatment not meeting commercial release specifications, most commonly due to high CD137 activation or low-infused dose. Primary end point was safety. Secondary end points were overall response rate (ORR) and complete response rate (CRR). At data cutoff (1 November 2024), the manufacturing success rate of ide-cel improved from 95.3% in 2021 to 96.8% in 2024. Turnaround time also improved from 31 days in 2021 to 24 days in 2024. In BB2121-EAP-001, 68 (72.3%) patients experienced ≥1 cytokine release syndrome event (mostly grade 1/2) and 15 (16.0%) had neurological toxicities (2 grade 3, 13 grade 1/2). ORR was 75.4% (95% confidence interval [CI], 63.1-85.2), and CRR was 35.4% (95% CI, 23.9-48.2). The manufacturing success of ide-cel is reliable and consistently high, and when OOS ide-cel products emerged, they demonstrated consistent clinical efficacy and safety. The BB2121-EAP-001 study was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as NCT04771078.

Abstract Introduction: Liso-cel is an autologous, CD19-directed, 4-1BB CAR T cell product. TRANSFORM (NCT03575351) is a global, randomized, open-label, phase 3 study of liso-cel versus SOC as second-line therapy in adults with R/R LBCL. In the TRANSFORM study, liso-cel showed superior, more durable efficacy versus SOC, with a potential long-term survival benefit and a favorable safety profile, highlighting the curative potential of liso-cel for second-line R/R LBCL. Upon completion of TRANSFORM, patients who received liso-cel could enroll into a separate, long-term follow-up (LTFU) study (NCT03435796). Here, we report results after approximately 4 years of follow-up in patients from TRANSFORM who consented to the LTFU study. Methods The TRANSFORM study compared liso-cel versus SOC (chemotherapy [R-DHAP, R-ICE, or R-GDP] followed by high-dose chemotherapy [HDCT] + ASCT) in adults aged ≤ 75 years with LBCL primary refractory to or relapsed within 12 months of first-line therapy and eligible for ASCT. Patients in the liso-cel arm underwent lymphodepletion followed by liso-cel (100 × 106 CAR+ T cells). Crossover to receive liso-cel was allowed for patients in the SOC arm. The LTFU study enrolled patients who received liso-cel and discontinued early or completed TRANSFORM; liso-cel was not administered during the LTFU study and subsequent therapies were administered at investigator discretion. Selected AEs considered related to liso-cel (malignancies, neurologic, hematologic, or rheumatologic/autoimmune disorders) and OS would be assessed at each visit (month 3 and then every 6 months from years 1 to 5, and then annually) for up to 15 years from liso-cel infusion until study withdrawal or death, whichever occurred first. OS for the combined study was defined as the time from randomization to death due to any cause. PFS for the combined TRANSFORM and LTFU studies incorporated data from TRANSFORM, assessed by an independent review committee, and from LTFU, assessed by investigators, and was defined as the time from randomization to disease progression or death from any cause. For LTFU only, OS and PFS were measured from LTFU consent to event or censoring. In cases where the patient was censored at last assessment date (without receiving new therapy) in TRANSFORM and enrolled in LTFU, LTFU data were used. For patients from the liso-cel arm of TRANSFORM who did not enroll in the LTFU study, the data from TRANSFORM were considered (ie, either an event or censored) at their last adequate assessment date or before starting new therapy. Results are reported descriptively. Results In total, 184 patients were randomized in TRANSFORM (92 per arm); key demographics and baseline characteristics were previously reported (Abramson, et al. Blood 2023). The LTFU study enrolled 67 patients who received liso-cel (liso-cel arm, n = 43; crossover from SOC arm, n = 24). The median follow-up (range) for the liso-cel arm was 16.9 months (1.3–29.7) in the LTFU study and 40.1 months (2.2–61.9) combining the TRANSFORM and LTFU studies. The median follow-ups for OS and PFS for the liso-cel arm in the LTFU study were 17.1 (16.1–21.9) and 16.9 months (16.0–21.8), respectively. In patients from the LTFU study in the liso-cel arm (n = 43), median PFS and OS were both not reached (NR) with 95% CIs of NR–NR. The 24-month rates (95% CI) of PFS and OS were 94.7% (87.4–100.0) and 95.1% (88.4–100.0), respectively. In the 92 patients randomized to the liso-cel arm, using combined data from the TRANSFORM and LTFU studies, median (95% CI) PFS was NR (12.6–NR); 48-month PFS rate was 52.2% (41.5–62.8). Median (95% CI) OS was NR (NR–NR); 48-month OS rate was 61.5% (51.2–71.7). Safety results from the LTFU study in the liso-cel arm showed no new signals compared with previous reports from TRANSFORM. AEs of any grade occurred in 2 patients (hypogammaglobulinemia and dyspnea; n = 1 each), with no second primary malignancies or serious infections. AEs of grade 3 or 4 occurred in 1 patient (dyspnea). No AEs led to death.Conclusions: After a median follow-up of approximately 4 years combining data from the TRANSFORM and LTFU studies, liso-cel continued to demonstrate long-term clinical benefit with high PFS and OS rates in patients with second-line R/R LBCL. The safety profile of liso-cel continued to be manageable with no new safety signals observed during LTFU. These results further support liso-cel as an effective second-line treatment with curative potential for R/R LBCL.

Abstract Introduction: Liso-cel, an autologous, CD19-directed CAR T cell product, has demonstrated consistent efficacy in a broad population of pts with B-cell malignancies, including R/R LBCL. Its well-established safety profile has made OP delivery commonplace. This, combined with recent changes to postinfusion monitoring requirements, offers pts the potential for greater access to care. Here, we describe real-world safety and effectiveness outcomes for pts with R/R LBCL who received liso-cel as standard of care (SOC) therapy in the inpatient (IP) or OP setting. Methods: This was an observational study of pts in the US with R/R LBCL who received commercial liso-cel as second-line (2L) or later treatment (tx) in the IP or OP setting between 02/2021 and 02/2025 and had ≥1 postinfusion assessment reported in the Center for International Blood & Marrow Transplant Research (CIBMTR). Safety outcomes included rates of AEs of special interest and nonrelapse mortality (NRM). Postinfusion hospitalizations in the OP group were also assessed. Effectiveness outcomes included ORR, CR rate, duration of response (DOR), PFS, and OS. All results are reported descriptively. Results: Of 1116 eligible pts, 34% (n=375) were intended for OP tx, as reported to the CIBMTR, including 82 of 195 (42%) pts who received liso-cel as 2L tx. Among pts treated in the IP vs OP setting, median (range) age was 71.5 y (21.5–91.2) and 69.8 y (25.0–86.1), respectively, and most pts were male (59% and 61%). Proportions of pts with high-grade B-cell lymphoma (16% and 12%), ≥2 extranodal involvement sites (26% and 26%), and secondary CNS involvement (5% and 4%) were similar for the IP and OP groups, respectively. In contrast, 48% vs 37% of pts in the IP vs OP groups, respectively, had elevated LDH before infusion and 10% vs 3% had ECOG PS ≥2. One or more comorbidities were reported for 72% and 65% (including cardiac, 36% and 32%; pulmonary, 30% and 26%; active infections requiring ongoing tx, 6% and 3%) of pts in the IP and OP groups, respectively. Median (range) number of prior lines of therapy was 3 (1–13) in the IP group and 3 (1–16) in the OP group. Use of bridging therapy was reported in 65% of the IP group and 62% of the OP group. Median (95% CI) follow-up for this study was 12.7 mo (12.5–13) in the IP group and 12.6 mo (12.4–12.8) in the OP group. Safety was similar in both settings; any-grade CRS was reported in 52% of IP vs 49% of OP setting pts, with low rates of grade 2 CRS (15% vs 11%) and grade ≥3 CRS (3% vs 2%) in both groups. Any-grade immune effector cell–associated neurotoxicity syndrome (ICANS) rates were also similar in pts in the IP vs OP setting (28% vs 23%), with low rates of grade 2 ICANS (5% vs 4%) and grade ≥3 ICANS (10% vs 8%). Prolonged cytopenia (grade 4 thrombocytopenia and/or neutropenia at 30 d after infusion) was reported in 12% and 14% in the IP and OP groups; clinically significant infections at any time after infusion occurred in 48% of IP and 42% of OP setting pts. In the IP and OP groups, 37% and 30% of pts died, most commonly due to PD (25% and 21%) and the NRM rates at 12 mo were 7.1 (95% CI, 5.2–9.4) and 4.1 (95% CI, 2.2–6.8). Among OP setting pts, 46% were not hospitalized after infusion; of those hospitalized after OP infusion, median (IQR) time to hospitalization was 5 d (3-8) and duration of stay was 5 d (3-9). Response rates were high in both the IP (ORR, 80% [95% CI, 77–83]; CR rate, 70% [95% CI, 66–73]) and OP setting (ORR, 83% [95% CI, 79–87]; CR rate, 74% [95% CI, 69–79]). At ~12 mo follow-up, median (95% CI) DOR was not reached (NR; NR–NR) in either group with 12-mo DOR rates of 59% (95% CI, 54–63) and 63% (95% CI, 56–69), respectively. Median (95% CI) PFS was 11.8 mo (8.8–NR) in the IP group vs NR (NR–NR) in the OP group, with 12-mo PFS rates of 49% (95% CI, 45–53) and 56% (95% CI, 50–61), respectively. Median (95% CI) OS was NR (NR–NR) in both groups with 12-mo OS rates of 65% (95% CI, 61–68) in the IP group and 74% (95% CI, 68–78) in the OP group. Conclusions: These results continue to demonstrate that one-time tx with liso-cel results in deep, clinically meaningful efficacy in the SOC setting across a broad population of pts with R/R LBCL. Despite the few differences reported in baseline characteristics, outcomes were consistent among pts treated in the IP and OP care settings. The well-established safety profile of liso-cel is conducive to OP tx, allowing ~50% of pts to remain out of the hospital postinfusion.

Abstract Background Central nervous system involvement in multiple myeloma (CNS-MM) is a rare but highly aggressive manifestation. Limited data exists regarding its incidence, biology, treatment patterns, and outcomes. A deeper understanding of the features unique to CNS-MM will help inform risk stratification and management strategies. Methods We conducted a retrospective study of CNS-MM patients at our institution between January 2000 and December 2023. We identified 305 MM patients with pathology-proven extramedullary disease (EMD). CNS involvement was defined as the presence of parenchymal (brain or spine) or leptomeningeal involvement by MM. Univariate analysis was performed to compare the clinical characteristics between EMD patients with and without CNS-MM. Results Out of 305 patients with EMD, we identified 22 patients with CNS-MM. Common symptoms prompting evaluation of CNS-MM were headaches (32%), numbness or tingling (32%), weakness (27%), confusion (23%), falls (23%), and visual disturbances (14%). Among these patients, 17 (77%) had detectable disease in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF), 12 (55%) in the brain parenchyma, 4 (18%) in the spinal cord parenchyma and 6 (27%) in the leptomeninges. Of the CNS-MM patients, the median age at diagnosis of MM was 58.3 years and the median time to CNS-MM involvement was 16.2 months, with 3 (14%) patients having CNS involvement at diagnosis. The predictors of CNS-MM development were high-risk cytogenetics (OR 2.9, p=0.04) and presence of additional visceral organ involvement outside of the CNS (OR 3.4, p=0.03). EMD was multifocal in 20 CNS-MM patients (83%) and visceral organ involvement [most commonly lymphadenopathy (27%), solid organ (18%) and pleural fluid (14%)] was present in 14 (64%) of these patients, compared to 54% in EMD patients without CNS-MM. High-risk cytogenetics [del(17p), 1q gain/amplification, t(4;14), t(14;16), t(14;20)] were seen in 16 (73%) patients, most commonly 1q gain or amplification (40%), t(4;14) (23%), and del(17p) (18%). Five (23%) exhibited a double-hit profile. In comparison, 113 (40%) EMD patients without CNS-MM had high risk cytogenetics. The median overall survival (OS) from diagnosis of CNS-MM was 6 months (95%CI:1.26-36) compared to 15.6 months (95%CI: 12-18) from diagnosis of EMD in EMD patients without CNS-MM (p=0.05). Median OS from diagnosis of MM in the CNS-MM cohort was 36 months (95%CI: 22.8-NA) compared to 55.2 months (95%CI: 45.6-68.4) in EMD patients without CNS-MM (P=0.11). When excluding CAR-T or bispecific therapy recipients, median OS from diagnosis of MM for CNS-MM was 22 months versus 48 months in EMD patients without CNS-MM (P=0.02). Overall response rate in our CNS-MM cohort with first treatment for EMD was 32% compared to 48% in EMD patients without CNS-MM (p=0.04). In patients with CNS-MM, median progression-free survival (PFS) from CNS-MM diagnosis was 3.3 months (95%CI: 0.8-12) versus 3.9 months (95%CI: 3-5.1) in EMD patients without CNS involvement (p=0.2). Six (27%) CNS-MM patients received CAR-T; 3 received cilta-cel, 2 received ide-cel and one received a BCMA CAR-T on trial. Bispecific therapy was used in 4 (18%) patients, with 2 receiving Teclistamab and 2 Talquetamab. Three (14%) CNS-MM patients received both CAR-T and bispecific therapy. The median PFS on CAR-T therapy was 10.5 (95%CI: 5.6-NA) months and 12.7 (95%CI: 10.2-NA) months on bispecific therapy. The median OS from diagnosis of CNS-MM for patients who received CAR-T or bispecific therapy was 36 months (95%CI: 14.0-NA), compared to 1.2 months (95%CI: 0-14.4) for those who did not (p=0.002). Six (27%) patients with CNS-MM, all of whom had CSF involvement of disease, received intrathecal therapy; methotrexate in 3, cytarabine in 2, and one receiving both. Two of these patients demonstrated improvement in cerebrospinal fluid findings following intrathecal chemotherapy, in conjunction with other therapies. Patients who received intrathecal chemotherapy had a median OS measured from development of EMD of 10.8 (95%CI: 3.6-NA) months, compared to 15 months (95%CI: 4.8-NA) in those without IT chemotherapy (p=0.59). Conclusion Central nervous system involvement in MM is relatively uncommon and associated with dismal outcomes. High-risk cytogenetics and involvement of other visceral sites are associated with a higher risk of CNS involvement. Intrathecal therapy offers limited value and immune effector therapies represent efficacious options for treatment.

Abstract Introduction: Cilta-cel is approved in the US and the EU for the treatment of patients (pts) with lenalidomide-refractory multiple myeloma (MM) after ≥1 prior line of therapy (pLOT), including a proteasome inhibitor and an immunomodulatory agent based on the CARTITUDE-1 (CART-1, NCT03548207) and CARTITUDE-4 (CART-4, NCT04181827) studies. Cilta-cel led to deep and durable responses and significant survival benefit in pts with relapsed/refractory MM (RRMM) after ≥3 pLOT in CART-1. In CART-4, cilta-cel led to a significant overall survival benefit with a higher proportion of pts achieving deep, sustained minimal residual disease negativity vs standard of care in pts with lenalidomide-refractory MM after 1–3 pLOT. We investigated the mechanism of action of cilta-cel by correlating biomarkers from peripheral blood and the bone marrow TME with progression-free survival (PFS) and number of pLOT in pts with RRMM from CART-1 and CART-4. Methods: Biomarker analyses were performed using peripheral blood and bone marrow aspirates (BMAs) collected in both CART-1 and CART-4 studies. Immunophenotyping by flow cytometry was performed using peripheral blood at baseline/time of apheresis in samples from both studies. Immune fitness at baseline was assessed in pts by pLOT and in association with PFS. Gene set enrichment scores were derived from RNA sequencing data of the TME using BMAs. Mixed-effects models were used to identify signatures/pathways modulated over time (day [D] 28 and at 6 months [mo] post infusion vs screening) and in association with PFS and pLOT. Results: In total, 176 CART-4 and 97 CART-1 pts received cilta-cel as study treatment. Immunophenotyping data were available from 248 peripheral blood samples (1 pLOT, n=56; 2 pLOT, n=61; ≥3 pLOT, n=131). At apheresis, CD4+ naïve T cells (%) were higher in pts with 1 or 2 pLOT, compared with those with ≥3 pLOT, while no difference was found in pts with ≥3 pLOT with further breakdown (i.e., 3–4 vs 5–6 vs ≥7 pLOT). Further, higher baseline levels of CD4+ naïve T cells were associated with longer PFS. These data suggest that the negative impact on peripheral immune fitness with the addition of LOT may plateau when pts have received ≥3 pLOT. TME gene expression data were available from 148 BMA samples (screening, n=50; D28, n=50; 6 mo, n=48) from CART-4. Analyses of gene expression signatures suggest depletion of B cells and antibodies at D28 post cilta-cel infusion, with partial recovery at 6 mo. This was corroborated in parallel by flow cytometry and immunoglobulin quantification. Further, elevated expression of genes associated with myeloid cells, including tumor-associated macrophages (TAM, likely M1), and of genes associated with cytotoxic T cells were also observed at D28. Elevated expression of genes associated with B-cell receptors, T-cell differentiation and activation, and cytokine signaling pathways were found at both D28 and 6 mo. Pts with longer PFS (>18 mo) had higher levels of M1 TAM at D28, while those with shorter PFS had higher levels of regulatory T cells and more suppressed interferon pathway genes at 6 mo, suggesting that relapse may be associated with a more suppressive immune response. In pts with fewer pLOT, more profound B-cell depletion on D28, better recovery at 6 mo, and elevated B-cell receptor signaling were inferred from gene expression data. Pts with 1 pLOT also demonstrated higher elevation of M1 TAM expression on D28 from screening as compared with pts with 3 pLOT, similar to what was observed in pts with longer PFS. Conclusions: Correlative biomarker data suggest that longer PFS is associated with better immune fitness at baseline and stronger immune responses post cilta-cel infusion, as observed in peripheral blood and within the TME of pts with RRMM in CART-1 and CART-4. The peripheral immune fitness was more pronounced in pts with 1 and 2 pLOT vs 3 pLOT and beyond, where deterioration plateaued. This suggests the impact of T-cell immune fitness on PFS may be limited beyond the third LOT. Importantly, other covariates, including factors within the immune TME and tumor burden, may play a significant role in balancing this compromised intrinsic T-cell immune fitness at apheresis, thereby contributing to PFS durability after 3 pLOT. Overall, these results support increased benefits in treating pts with MM with cilta-cel in earlier LOTs.

ABSTRACT Light chain multiple myeloma (LCMM) is a subtype of multiple myeloma (MM) characterized by the exclusive production of immunoglobulin light chains and accounts for 15%–20% of newly diagnosed MM. A comprehensive comparison of LCMM with MM producing intact immunoglobulin (non‐LCMM) remains limited. In this retrospective study, we described distinct clinical and cytogenetic features and assessed long‐term outcomes in 852 LCMM patients diagnosed between 01/01/2004 and 12/31/2022, compared with non‐LCMM controls matched for age, sex, and year of diagnosis. On univariable analysis, LCMM patients were more likely to present with elevated creatinine (> 2 mg/dL), beta‐2‐microglobulin ≥ 5.5 mg/L, elevated LDH, hypercalcemia, t(11;14), del(13q), and t(6;14). Conversely, IMS‐IMWG high‐risk disease, hyperdiploidy, t(4;14), and serum albumin < 3.5 g/dL were less common. On multivariable analysis, elevated creatinine (OR: 5.1, 95% CI: 1.2–27, p = 0.04), t(11;14) (OR: 2.6, 95% CI: 1.3–5.2, p = 0.006), and del(13q) (OR: 4.1, 95% CI: 2.1–8.2, p < 0.001) were independently associated with LCMM, while IMS‐IMWG high‐risk disease (OR: 0.3, 95% CI: 0.1–0.8, p = 0.02) and hyperdiploidy (OR: 0.3, 95% CI: 0.1–0.7, p = 0.002) were less frequent. Despite these differences, progression‐free survival with frontline treatment (HR: 0.97, 95% CI: 0.84–1.11, p = 0.63) and overall survival (HR: 0.99, 95% CI: 0.87–1.13, p = 0.94) were similar between LCMM and non‐LCMM patients. This study highlights the distinct clinical and cytogenetic features of LCMM, marked by higher rates of renal failure, t(11;14), and del(13q), lower prevalence of IMS‐IMWG high‐risk disease, and comparable survival outcomes.

7507 Background: CARTITUDE-1 evaluated cilta-cel in pts with heavily pretreated RRMM who historically have an expected median progression-free survival (PFS) of <6 months (mo) and median overall survival (OS) of ~1 year (y). At 33.4 mo median follow-up, median PFS was 34.9 mo, and median OS was not reached (36-mo OS rate, 62.9%; Lin et al, ASCO 2023). We report OS, ≥5 y progression-free outcomes, and safety with a median study follow-up of 60.3 mo. Methods: Pts in CARTITUDE-1 received a single cilta-cel infusion. Correlative analyses were performed utilizing drug product, baseline, and postinfusion samples. Pts are followed for progression, survival, and safety in a 15-y follow-up study, CARTinue (NCT05201781), with pt evaluations per local standard of care (reported annually at a minimum). Results: Of 97 pts treated, 32 (33.0%) remain alive and progression free for ≥5 y after cilta-cel, without further MM treatment. For these 32 pts, prior to enrollment in CARTITUDE-1, median time from start of last line of therapy (LOT) to progression was 4.0 mo (range, 0.7–48.6). Among the 32, median age was 60 y (range, 43–78), median number of prior LOT was 6.5 (range, 3–14), 23.3% had high risk cytogenetics, 12.5% had extramedullary disease (EMD), 90.6% were triple-class refractory, and 46.9% were penta-drug refractory. Baseline characteristics of pts who were progression free for ≥5 y, including those with high-risk cytogenetics and EMD, were comparable to pts with progressive disease (PD) within 5 y. Compared with pts who had PD within 5 y, biomarkers significantly associated with ≥5 y progression free status included a higher fraction of naïve T cells in the drug product, lower neutrophil to T cell ratio, higher hemoglobin and platelets at baseline, and higher effector-to-target ratio (Cmax to sBCMA at baseline). At Cmax, these pts also had significantly higher CD4 central memory CAR+ T cell subsets and CAR+ T cells that were positive for the activation markers CD38, CD25, and PD-1. Data were collected on a subset of pts from a single center where local serial MRD assessments were performed. All 12 pts at this center who were progression free for ≥5 y were MRD negative at 10 –6 and imaging negative by PET/CT yearly for 5 y. Overall, at 60.3 mo median follow-up in CARTITUDE-1 (N=97), median OS was 60.6 mo (95% CI, 41.9–NE). With continued follow-up, 3 additional pts reported a second primary malignancy (1 of which was acute myeloid leukemia; onset, 2.8 y after infusion). No new cases of movement and neurocognitive disorders were reported. Conclusions: The median OS for pts enrolled in CARTITUDE-1 was 5 y, and 33% of pts remain progression free for ≥5 y following a single cilta-cel infusion. These data provide the first evidence that cilta-cel is potentially curative in pts with RRMM. Clinical trial information: NCT03548207 , NCT05201781 .