Citations

BACKGROUND Several studies have highlighted the poor outcomes observed among patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (MM), particularly those with triple-class refractory (TCR; refractory to at least one PI, one IMiD, and one anti-CD38 mAb) disease. The aim of this study was to describe the longitudinal changes in quality of life (QOL) and other patient-reported outcomes (PROs) among TCR MM patients in real-world clinical practice who initiate a new line-of-therapy. METHODS A prospective, multi-site observational study of patients with TCR MM was conducted through the Mayo Clinic system. Patients initiating a new post-TCR therapy (defined as the index date) were followed for a 12-month observation period during which PRO surveys were administered for the first 6 months. For patients initiating a CAR-T therapy, a survey assessment was conducted at apheresis, lymphodepletion chemotherapy, and every month after T-cell infusion until Month 6. All other patients received a survey assessment before index and then every month thereafter until Month 6. PRO measures included the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Questionnaire (QLQ-C30; including the Global Health Score [GHS]), the EORTC Multiple Myeloma Questionnaire (QLQ-MY20; including the Disease Symptoms [DS] domain score), the EORTC QLQ for Chemotherapy-Induced Peripheral Neuropathy (CIPN20), the EuroQoL-5 Dimensions (EQ-5D), the Patient Global Impression of Severity (PGIS), and the Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC). Patient surveys were supplemented with retrospective chart reviews conducted 3 months and 12 months following the index date to obtain clinical information. Descriptive data were reported at each timepoint separately for patients who received CAR-T and non-CAR-T index therapies. The study is ongoing and this abstract reflects all patient visit data as of April 2023. RESULTS N=55 patients (60% male, 96% White, mean age 66 years) were included in this interim analysis. The median time interval between becoming TCR and the index date was 3.9 months (interquartile range [IQR]: 1.7, 15.5). Most patients had an ECOG score of 0 or 1 (53% and 38%, respectively) and were R-ISS I or II (36% and 54%, respectively); 53% of patients had high-risk cytogenetics and 20% had extramedullary disease. The median (IQR) number of prior treatment lines was 4 (4.0, 5.5). N=24 patients initiated a CAR-T therapy as their index therapy (equally split between ide-cel and cilta-cel); the remaining N=31 patients predominantly initiated a treatment regimen containing an IMiD (52%), a PI (55%), an anti-CD38 antibody (13%), or an alkylating agent (36%). Among CAR-T patients, QOL and disease-related symptoms worsened from baseline through Month 2-3 (eg, mean GHS was 65.9 at apheresis, 64.9 at lymphodepletion, and 53.3 at Month 2 [higher scores indicate better QOL]; mean DS domain score from the QLQ-MY20 was 24.1 at apheresis, 23.4 at lymphodepletion, and 33.7 at Month 2 [higher scores indicate more symptoms]; see Table 1). These decrements were followed by improvement back to baseline levels and, in some cases, improvement above baseline levels (eg, GHS was 67.9 and 65.0 at Months 4 and 5, respectively; DS was 18.3 and 17.8 at Months 4 and 5), though few patients had sufficient follow up to analyze QOL at later timepoints. Based on the PGIC, 77.8% of patients reported being “a little better” or “much better” as early as Month 1, though this number declined over time. Among non-CAR-T patients, QOL largely plateaued (GHS was 62.2 at baseline and 58.3 at Month 6), though disease symptoms improved over time (DS was 28.6 at baseline and 24.5 at Month 6; pain was 42.3 at baseline and 29.2 at Month 6). Based on the PGIC, 34.7% of patients reported being “a little better” or “much better” at Month 1, which improved to 50% by Month 6. CONCLUSIONS In this interim analysis of an ongoing prospective observational study, QOL and symptom measures generally worsened over the first few months for CAR-T patients in the real-world though improved to baseline levels and beyond at later time points. Patients did, however, directly report improvement in their disease state as early as Month 1 based on the PGIC. Non-CART patients generally showed a QOL plateau with some modest improvement in disease symptoms which was also reflected in their self-reported assessment of disease state improvement based on the PGIC.

Introduction There is no prospective data to guide the utilization of peri-transplant radiation (PTRT) in patients with relapsed or refractory (R/R) classical Hodgkin lymphoma (cHL). In retrospective analyses, PTRT has been associated with local disease control, however evidence supporting improved progression free survival (PFS) is less well defined (Milgrom SA et al Cancer. 2017; 123(8):1363-1371). Furthermore, the added benefit of PTRT in the era of recent advancement in salvage strategies, including brentuximab vedotin (BV) and checkpoint inhibitors (CPI), is unclear. In a multicenter, retrospective analysis, we evaluated the impact of PTRT on PFS for patients with R/R cHL. Methods We identified consecutive pts ≥7 years old at time of diagnosis with R/R cHL treated with autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) at 5 US academic institutions between 2010-2021. PTRT was defined as radiation administered within 3 months of ASCT. The primary objective was to compare the post-ASCT PFS, defined as the time from ASCT to subsequent relapse or death from any cause, between the two groups. Univariable and Multivariable Cox regression was performed to evaluate the impact of various relevant clinical factors on post-ASCT PFS. Results A total of 958 eligible pts were identified ( Table 1). The median age at cHL diagnosis was 31 (range, 7-72). At the time of first relapse/primary refractory disease, 406 (54%) pts had early-stage disease, 167 (24%) pts had bulky disease (≥5.0 cm), 308 (36%) pts had extra-nodal disease, 182 (22%) pts had B-symptoms (B-sx), and 338 (45%) had primary refractory disease. A total of 302 (32%) pts received >1 line of salvage before ASCT. Salvage treatment at any time point before ASCT included chemotherapy only for 457 (48%) patients, BV(+/- chemotherapy) for 308 (32%) patients, and CPI (+/- BV or +/- chemotherapy) for 193 (20%) patients. In total, 239 (24.9%) pts received PTRT, 139 (58.1%) before ASCT and 100 (41.8%) after ASCT. Among pts with available dosing information (23.3%), the median radiation dose administered was 28 Gy. The most common doses administered were 30 Gy in 77 (31.7%) pts, 36 Gy in 62 (27.8%) pts, and 18 Gy in 43 (19.2%) pts. Radiated sites included mediastinum in 172 (80.7%) pts, neck/cervical lymph nodes in 68 (31.9%) pts, and supra/infra clavicular region and axilla, each in 31 (14.6%) pts. Compared to the 719 pts that did not receive PTRT, patients treated with PTRT were more likely to have early stage disease (73% vs 47%, p<0.001), bulky disease (30% vs 22%, p = 0.048), primary refractory disease (56% vs 40%, p <0.001), >1 line of salvage treatment prior to ASCT (40% vs 29%, p<0.001), and <CR prior to ASCT (36% vs 27%, p = 0.007) (Table 1). Patients treated with PTRT were less likely to have RT at initial diagnosis (5.9% vs 22%, p<0.001), extra-nodal disease (19% vs 42%, p<0.001), B-sx (17% vs 25%, p=0.035), salvage treatment that included CPI (11% vs 23%, p<0.001), and BV maintenance (20 vs 31%, p<0.001). After a median follow up from ASCT of 4.5 years (range, 2.4-7.2), 2-year PFS was 76% (73%, 79%) and 5-year PFS was 70% (67%, 73%). In univariable analysis, receipt of PTRT showed non-significant reduced hazard for PFS (HR 0.79, 95% CI 0.59-1.05, p = 0.093) (Figure 1). In a multivariable model, PTRT showed significant association with PFS (HR 0.56, 95% CI 0.36-0.88, p=0.009) when adjusting for other clinically relevant factors at relapse such as stage, B-sx, bulk, primary refractory disease, BV(+/- chemotherapy) or CPI (+/- BV or +/- chemotherapy) in salvage, PET response prior to ASCT, and BV maintenance after ASCT. To determine if specific subgroups benefited from PTRT, we tested for interaction effects between PTRT and clinically relevant factors. Only bulk (HR 0.37, 95% CI 0.16-0.85, p=0.013) and B-sx (HR 0.45, 95% CI 0.20-1.02, p=0.041) showed significant interaction with PTRT.Among pts with bulky disease, 5-year PFS was significantly improved with receipt of PTRT (81% vs 62%, p=0.013). Conclusion In this large multi-center analysis of pts with R/R cHL undergoing ASCT, there was no significant difference in PFS regardless of receipt of PTRT. However, after adjusting for known clinically relevant factors, receipt of PTRT was significantly associated with PFS and was particularly beneficial for patients with bulky disease or B-sx at relapse. We found decreased utilization of PTRT in pts receiving CPI-based salvage; therefore the role for PTRT for pts receiving CPI-based salvage is unclear.

Background Immunotherapies targeting the PD-1/PD-L1 pathway have been shown to induce high response rates in patients with relapsed/refractory (r/r) classical Hodgkin lymphoma (cHL). However, most responses are partial and not durable. T cell immunoglobulin and mucin domain-containing protein-3 (TIM-3) is implicated as a resistance mechanism following anti-PD-1 therapy, and increased TIM-3 expression has been observed on T cells of patients with cHL post anti-PD-1 therapy. Therefore, we hypothesized that dual targeting of PD-1 and TIM-3 may reinvigorate immune responses and lead to more durable antitumor activity. Sabestomig is a monovalent, bispecific, humanized IgG1 monoclonal antibody that binds PD-1 and a unique epitope in the TIM-3 IgV domain without blocking phosphatidylserine binding, eliciting differential functionality. In preclinical mouse models, sabestomig was more effective at inhibiting growth of solid tumors than treatment targeting only PD-1, and sequential sabestomig after anti-PD-1 therapy increased antitumor responses. Here we report preliminary data from the ongoing dose escalation portion of a Phase I/II, open-label, multicenter study to assess the safety and preliminary efficacy of sabestomig in patients with r/r cHL (NCT05216835). Methods Eligible patients are aged ≥16 years with r/r cHL, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0-1, at least one positron emission tomography-avid measurable lesion according to modified Lugano Criteria, and exposure to at least 2 prior lines of systemic therapy including a minimum of 3 cycles of an anti-PD-(L)1-based therapy. Sabestomig is intravenously infused over 1 hour following pretreatment with diphenhydramine and acetaminophen every 3 weeks, with planned doses ranging from 2 to 2000 mg across 8 cohorts (A1-A8); cohorts A1 to A4 (2, 7, 22.5 or 75 mg) follow an accelerated titration design with a single patient treated at each dose level, while cohorts A5 to A8 (225-2000 mg) follow a modified toxicity probability interval-2 algorithm. The primary endpoint of the dose escalation part of the study is safety, including dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs). Secondary endpoints include efficacy, pharmacokinetics, and immunogenicity. Data cutoffs were May 17, 2023 for safety and June 20, 2023 for efficacy. Results As of May 17, 2023, 14 patients were treated across the first 6 cohorts (A1-A6; 2-750 mg). They were predominantly male (64.3%) with Stage IV disease (85.7%) and a median age of 41.5 years (range, 25-77). Patients received a median of 6 prior lines of therapy (range, 3-13). Baseline disease characteristics are summarized in Table 1. Four patients received sabestomig 2-75 mg in cohorts A1-A4 (n=1 each), 5 patients received 225 mg in cohort A5, and 5 patients received 750 mg in cohort A6. Median duration of exposure to sabestomig was 8.9 weeks (range, 3.0-34.3) with a median of 3 cycles received (range 1-12). Sabestomig was well tolerated with no Grade ≥3 treatment-related adverse events (AEs) (Table 2). One Grade ≥3 AE occurred, which was fatal (sepsis secondary to gastric ulcer rupture, not related to sabestomig but deemed a DLT by the safety review committee). No immune-mediated AEs were reported, and no AEs led to treatment discontinuation. At the safety data cutoff, treatment was ongoing for 6 patients (42.9%). As of June 20, 2023, 11 patients had their first disease assessment and 4/11 had an objective response based on modified Lugano Criteria: 1 patient in cohort A3 (22.5 mg, a partial response [PR]) and all 3 patients who had their first disease assessment in cohort A6 (750 mg, 2 CRs and 1 PR). Two of these 4 responders (both in cohort A6) had experienced a best overall response of progressive disease during prior anti-PD-1 therapy; the other two initially had a response (1 CR [cohort A6] and 1 PR [cohort A3]) but subsequently progressed on anti-PD-1 therapy. Sustained PD-1 receptor occupancy (≥90%) was observed in peripheral blood at doses ≥225 mg. Conclusions Sabestomig was well tolerated with a manageable safety profile. Early efficacy data at 750 mg is encouraging with objective responses in 3/3 patients who had their first disease assessment, including those who were anti-PD-1 refractory or who relapsed on treatment. Updated data will be presented from ongoing and subsequent patients treated during dose escalation with doses of up to 2000 mg.

Background: The anti-apoptotic protein Mcl-1 contributes to the pathophysiology of certain B-cell malignancies and AML, and dependence on Mcl-1 is associated with resistance to venetoclax. Efforts to target Mcl-1 through direct inhibition have faced challenges due to cardiovascular toxicities. Voruciclib, a potent oral CDK9 inhibitor (CDK9i), was shown to indirectly downregulate Mcl-1 protein levels and synergize with venetoclax in preclinical models in lymphoid and myeloid malignancies. In solid tumors, voruciclib maximum tolerated dose (MTD) was defined as 350 mg with continuous daily dosing, and 600 mg when used on days 1-14 on a 21-day cycle. This phase 1 study is the first to evaluate the safety, dose-limiting toxicities (DLT), preliminary efficacy, pharmacokinetics, and pharmacodynamics of voruciclib in R/R hematologic malignancies (NCT03547115). Methods: Patients (pts) with relapsed B-cell NHL, CLL, or AML aged ≥18 years who had ECOG performance status ≤1, disease progression after standard therapies, adequate hepatic and renal function, and no prior CDK9i were eligible. The study followed a 3+3 design and DLTs were assessed in Cycle 1. Voruciclib was administered daily continuously at a starting dose of 50 mg on a 28-day cycle (Cohort I). After 2 DLTs were observed at 100 mg in AML pts, dosing was changed to daily on days 1-14 on a 28-day cycle (Cohort II). Also, pts with prior allogeneic transplant were excluded and dose escalation (100, 150, 200 mg) proceeded separately in AML and B-cell malignancies. Disease response was assessed by investigators using the Lugano, 2008 iwCLL, and 2017 ELN criteria. Results: 40 pts were enrolled: 21 AML, 19 NHL (9 DLBCL, 3 CLL, 3 MCL, 3 FL and 1 MZL). Cohort I enrolled 16 pts, 8 each at 50 mg and 100 mg. Cohort II enrolled 24 pts (17 AML and 7 B-cell malignancies), including 6 at 100 mg, 7 at 150 mg, and 11 at 200 mg. Dose escalation in Cohort II did not reach the MTD and was stopped at 200 mg, a dose that achieved plasma concentrations sufficient for target inhibition. Median age was 70 years (range 40-90), 72.5% of pts were ≥65 years, and 77.5% had ECOG performance status = 1. Pts had a median of 3 prior therapies (range, 1-8). Median duration on drug was 5 weeks (range 1-22). Drug-related serious adverse events (AEs) were reported in Cohort I only. Two pts with AML had a DLT of Grade (Gr) 3 interstitial pneumonitis at 100 mg; both had had allogeneic transplant and active graft versus host disease, one of whom also had a concurrent Gr 3 differentiation syndrome. One pt with DLBCL at 50 mg had Gr 3 hypoxemic respiratory failure in Cycle 4. In Cohort II, no DLTs were observed and there were no non-hematologic Gr 3-5 drug-related AEs. In the overall population, the most common AEs were diarrhea (30%), nausea (25%), anemia (22.5%), fatigue (22.5%), constipation (17.5%), dizziness (15%) and dyspnea (15%) [Table 1). One pt with AML had Gr 3 hyperbilirubinemia. There was no evidence of drug-related neutropenia in pts with NHL. No significant cardiovascular AEs were observed. One pt with AML in Cohort I achieved a morphologic leukemia-free state. At 200 mg, 5 of 10 AML pts (50%) had stable disease. Voruciclib pharmacokinetics was dose proportional, mean accumulation ratio was 2.4, mean T max was 4 hours, and at 200 mg, steady state C max was 925 ng/mL and mean C trough was 442 ng/mL (~1 microM). Analysis of Mcl-1 protein expression in normal lymphocytes by flow cytometry showed a trend of decrease in on-treatment samples compared to pre-treatment. Consistent with this, RNA-Seq analysis of 3 paired CLL samples confirmed rapid (after 6 hours) downregulation of Mcl-1 mRNA transcript in the malignant B-cells. Furthermore, scRNA-Seq analysis of 2 longitudinal AML samples demonstrated downregulation of MYC transcriptional program and oxidative phosphorylation in circulating AML blasts, both evident 24 hours after start of voruciclib and ongoing at C1D15. Conclusions: Voruciclib at doses up to 200 mg administered on 14 consecutive days on a 28-day cycle was well tolerated, with no DLTs observed, and no cardiovascular toxicities. There was no significant myelosuppression in pts with B-cell malignancies. As the safety profile suggested non-overlapping toxicities with venetoclax, the study is now evaluating voruciclib in combination with venetoclax in pts with R/R AML to exploit dual inhibition of Bcl-2 and Mcl-1.

Background: For patients with relapsed and refractory (R/R) classical Hodgkin lymphoma (HL), the standard of care remains salvage therapy followed by autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) for responding patients. Historical data suggest 40% of patients may relapse after ASCT, and these patients have generally a poor median overall survival (OS) of less than 2 years (Moskowitz et al., Br J Haematol. 2009;146(2):158-62). However, since these reports, the treatment landscape of R/R HL has dramatically improved, most notably with the introduction of two novel therapies, brentuximab vedotin (BV) and anti-PD1 agents. To refine our understanding of clinical outcomes in this context, we characterized patients who relapsed after ASCT in the modern era. Methods: We used a multicenter retrospective patient database at 5 transplant centers in the United States to identify patients with HL aged ≥ 12 years at diagnosis who had received ASCT on or after 1/1/2010. The primary objective was to determine the median OS for patients who relapsed after ASCT (post-ASCT-relapse OS), defining survival as the time from relapse after ASCT to subsequent death from any cause. Univariable Cox regression was performed to evaluate the impact of various factors on post-ASCT OS. Outcomes by era were evaluated using three different eras based on approval dates of novel agents: (1) pre-BV approval (pre-7/31/2011), (2) post-BV approval (8/1/2011-4/30/2016), (3) post-anti-PD1 approval (5/1/16-present). Results: A total of 215 patients were identified. The median age at ASCT was 34. Before ASCT, 128 patients (62%) had no exposure to novel agents, 76 patients (35%) had received BV and no anti-PD-1 therapy, and 11 patients (5.1%) had received anti-PD-1 therapy with or without BV. Conditioning was mostly with BEAM (59%) or CBV (32%). The median time to relapse after ASCT was 6 months (range: 1-109 months). Nearly half all relapses (47%) occurred within 6 months of ASCT. Only 14% of relapses occurred after 1 year. Among 126 patients with available treatment information, the median number of post-ASCT lines of therapy was 2 (IQR: 1, 4). Therapy for post-ASCT relapse included BV and no anti-PD-1 therapy in 41 patients (29%), anti-PD-1 therapy with or without BV for 70 patients (50%), and no novel agents for only 15 patients (11%). The median followup time from the date of ASCT among survivors was 5.0 (IQR: 2.8, 7.8) years. The median post-ASCT-relapse OS was not reached ( Figure 1). The 2- and 5-year post-ASCT-relapse OS were 75% (95% CI: 70%-81%) and 59% (95% CI: 53%-67%), respectively. On univariable Cox regression for post-ASCT-relapse OS ( Table 1), time to relapse greater than 6 (HR 0.55, 95% CI 0.35-0.85) or 12 months (HR 0.53, 95% CI 0.29-0.96) were significantly associated with improved post-ASCT-relapse OS. Increasing age at relapse was associated with worse OS (HR 1.05, 95% CI 1.04-1.07). Receipt of a novel agent (compared to chemotherapy alone) as the first salvage regimen for post-ASCT relapse was associated with improved post-ASCT OS (BV: HR 0.43, 95% CI 0.20-0.96; anti-PD-1: HR 0.44, 95% CI 0.18-1.08). Outcomes improved over time as regulatory approvals for novel agents occurred (post-BV-approval: HR 0.70, 95% CI 0.39-1.24; post-anti-PD-1 approval: HR 0.45, 95% CI 0.23-0.91). Conclusion: We show prolonged overall survival post-ASCT relapse compared to historical data likely due to the introduction of BV and anti-PD1 agents. This report represents one of the largest datasets of post-ASCT relapse in cHL, and this data should serve as an updated benchmark for future evaluations.

Background: Maintenance therapy with brentuximab vedotin (BV) after autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) improved progression-free survival (PFS) among high-risk patients (pts) with relapsed or refractory (R/R) classical Hodgkin lymphoma (cHL) in the phase III AETHERA trial. However, cHL treatment has changed significantly since that trial with frequent incorporation of BV and PD-1 inhibitors into earlier lines of therapy. The efficacy of BV maintenance may be different among pts who receive novel agents before ASCT. Methods: Pts with a diagnosis of R/R cHL who underwent ASCT between 2010 and 2022 were identified at 5 US transplant centers. Pts receiving no systemic post-ASCT maintenance or BV maintenance were included, while pts receiving investigational maintenance treatments were excluded. Medical records were reviewed to identify clinical variables. Results: 921 pts were identified. Median age was 32 yrs (IQR 24-44). 641 pts (70%) had primary refractory disease or relapsed within 12 months of frontline therapy, 326 (35%) had extranodal disease at relapse, and 173 (19%) had B symptoms at relapse. Pts received a median of 2 (1-9) lines of therapy before ASCT, including 295 (32%) who received ≥3 lines. 425 (46%) pts received BV before ASCT (including 24 pts as part of frontline treatment). 70 pts (8%) were BV-refractory (defined as failure to achieve an objective response to any BV-based treatment). 169 (18%) received a PD-1 agent with salvage treatment. 638 pts (69%) had a complete response on pre-ASCT positron emission tomography (PET). BEAM (71%) or CBV (21%) conditioning were used for most pts and 236 pts (26%) received peri-ASCT radiation. 224 pts (24%) received post-ASCT BV maintenance (including 37% of pts undergoing ASCT from 2015-2022). Compared to pts receiving no maintenance, pts receiving BV maintenance were more likely to have primary refractory/early relapsed disease (79% vs 67%, p<0.001), have received only 1 salvage regimen (79% vs 65%, p=0.001), and received BEAM conditioning (83% vs 67%, p<0.001). BV maintenance pts were less likely to receive peri-ASCT radiation (20% vs 28%, p=0.022). The median number of BV maintenance cycles was 10 (1-18) and the most common reason for discontinuation was neuropathy. Median post-ASCT follow-up was 4.9 yrs. 5-yr PFS and OS after ASCT were 70% (95% CI 67-74%) and 85% (83-88%), respectively. Because BV-refractory pts were much less likely to receive BV maintenance (p=0.0044) and had inferior PFS (HR 2.2, p<0.001) (and therefore would serve as a confounder), we excluded BV-refractory pts from additional analyses. Use of BV maintenance was associated with improved PFS (5-yr 81% vs 67%, HR 0.47 [0.33-0.69], p<0.001) and OS (5-yr 92% vs 83%, HR 0.38 [0.20-0.73], p=0.004). The benefit of BV maintenance depended upon pre-ASCT therapy. BV maintenance was associated with a significant improvement in PFS for pts who received no novel agents before ASCT (HR 0.41 [0.25-0.65], p<0.001), but not for BV-treated (HR 0.69 [0.38-1.25], p=0.22) or PD-1-treated pts (HR 0.63 [0.13-3.03], p=0.56) ( Figure). Among pts with 0-1 modified AETHERA risk factors, BV maintenance was not associated with a significant PFS benefit in any treatment subgroup (no novel agents, HR 0.50, p=0.087; BV-treated, HR 1.28, p=0.67; PD-1-treated, HR 2.97, p=0.44). For pts with 2+ modified AETHERA risk factors, BV maintenance significantly improved PFS in the no novel agent group (HR 0.35, p<0.001) but not in the BV-treated (HR 0.55, p=0.099) or PD-1 treated groups (HR 0.24, p=0.19). In multivariable analyses that included key variables (age, year of ASCT, conditioning regimen, peri-ASCT radiation, early relapse/primary refractory disease, B symptoms, extranodal sites, pre-ASCT PET, lines of therapy), BV maintenance was associated with a significant PFS benefit among pts who received no novel agents before ASCT (HR 0.27 [0.12-0.65], p<0.001), but not for pts treated with BV (HR 0.56 [0.28-1.10], p=0.091) or PD-1 blockade (HR 1.10 [0.22-5.56], p=0.91) before ASCT. Conclusions: In this large cohort, BV maintenance was associated with the clearest benefit among pts who received only chemotherapy before ASCT. We were unable to identify a significant improvement in PFS for pts receiving novel agents before ASCT (which could be due to insufficient power to detect a small benefit in this population), suggesting that if these pts benefit from BV maintenance, its impact is likely more limited.

Introduction: Chronic lymphocytic leukaemia (CLL) is the most common leukaemia type. In 2020, there were an estimated 207,463 people living with CLL, with an annual incidence of approximately 4.9 per 100,000 in the United States (US). Zanubrutinib is a Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitor that is FDA-approved and an NCCN preferred and recommended treatment of CLL. In the phase 3 ALPINE trial (NCT03734016), zanubrutinib elicited a significantly higher overall response rate and significantly longer progression-free survival (PFS) than ibrutinib. This study aimed to compare zanubrutinib versus ibrutinib in Relapsed/Refractory (R/R) CLL by calculating the number needed to treat (NNT) to avoid one progression or death and associated incremental costs. Methods:A health-economic model was developed to evaluate the number of R/R CLL patients needed to be treated to avoid a progression or death from the US payer perspective. Payer blend was assumed with 40% Commercial and 60% Medicare payer mix. Clinical efficacy data were extracted from the ALPINE trial. Final analysis result of 24-month PFS (79.5% for zanubrutinib and 67.3% for ibrutinib) was used for the base-case analysis in the model. Treatment, adverse event management, other medical resource use, and subsequent treatment costs were considered in the model. The NNT, incremental cost per treated patient, and incremental cost per additional patient with progression or death were captured. Deterministic sensitivity analyses were conducted to assess parameter uncertainties and explore key model drivers. Scenario analyses were conducted to test the impact of different PFS estimates. Results: The base-case results fromthe NNT model showed that for every 8 patients treated with zanubrutinib, 1 event of progression or death would be avoided compared to using ibrutinib. The total costs per patient treated with zanubrutinib and ibrutinib are $370,558 and $430,150, respectively, with a cost savings of $59,593 associated with using zanubrutinib (Table). Drug costs and PFS have the greatest impact on the incremental cost per patient. Varying the PFS scenarios, including adjustment with drug interruption, COVID death, or treatment discontinuation, change the NNT from 8 to 12, and are associated with cost savings of $58,179 to $67,153 per zanubrutinib-treated patient in a 24-month time frame. Applying the model result to a hypothetical scenario of a clinical practice of 100 patients treated with zanubrutinib versus ibrutinib suggest that approximately 13 patients will avoid disease progression events or death. Conclusions: The NNT model suggests thatusing zanubrutinib to treat R/R CLL patients, compared to ibrutinib, will result in more favorable clinical and economic outcomes in the US.

Introduction: Single arm studies incorporating PD-1 blockade and/or brentuximab vedotin (BV) to salvage regimen have produced encouraging results in transplant-eligible relapsed/refractory classic Hodgkin lymphoma (R/R cHL) and are increasingly used in practice. As prospective randomized studies comparing PD1 based salvage to other salvage regimens are lacking, we conducted a retrospective study comparing post-transplant outcomes of R/R cHL patients who received PD1-based regimen and other novel and conventional regimen. Methods: Consecutive adult patients with R/R cHL who received salvage therapy and underwent autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) between 2010 and 2021 at 5 United States academic institutions were included. Demographics and clinical variables were recorded at relapse by electronic health records review. Study Objectives were post-ASCT progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Results: 981 pts of R/R cHL were identified. At relapse, median age was 31 (IQR: 21-43) years, 504 (52%) were male, 323 (49%) had advanced stage, 353 (41%) had extranodal disease (END), 185 (22%) had B symptoms, 345 (45%) were refractory to frontline therapy and 317 (32%) relapsed within a year of frontline therapy.308 (31%) received >1 line of salvage before ASCT. Patients were divided into 3 groups based on salvage therapy received: 1) 195 (20%) patients received a PD-1 agent with or without BV at any point before ASCT (PD-1 group), 2) 312 (32%) patients received BV at any point before ASCT without PD-1 (BV group), and 3) 474 (48%) patients received no novel agent before ASCT (chemo group). PFS was significantly higher in PD1 group (2-yr PFS 93.1 (CI 95: 89.4-96.9)%); compared to BV (2 yr PFS 73.9 (CI 95: 69.1-79.1)% , p <0.0001) or chemo groups (2 yr PFS 71.6 (CI 95: 67.6-75.9)% , p<0.0001). PFS was not different between the BV and chemo groups (p=0.88) (Figure 1). OS was not significantly different between PD-1 group (2 yr OS 96.2 % (CI 95: 93.2-99.2), p=0.06), BV group (2 yr OS 94.3% (CI 95: 91.7-97.0), p=0.2) and chemo group (2 yr OS 91.8% (CI 95: 89.3-94.4)). Amongst pts who were transplanted in complete metabolic response (CMR), we assessed post-ASCT PFS and OS based on salvage therapy received immediately before ASCT. Pts who received PD-1 as last salvage therapy had improved PFS compared to chemo (HR: 0.15 (CI 95: 0.07-0.3), p= <0.0001) and BV (HR: 0.2 (CI 95: 0.08-0.5), p= <0.001). Pts receiving PD-1 immediately before ASCT also had higher OS compared to those receiving chemo (HR: 0.2 (CI 95: 0.05-0.8), p= 0.02) but not BV (HR: 0.8 (CI 95: 0.4-1.3), p=0.1). There was no difference between BV and chemo group in regards to PFS and OS. In multivariable analysis that included time to relapse, B symptoms, END, pre-ASCT response, number of salvage therapy lines before ASCT, year of transplant and BV consolidation, PD-1 salvage therapy had significantly higher PFS compared to chemotherapy (HR: 0.3 (CI 95: 0.2-0.5), p= <0.001). BV group had significantly lower PFS (HR: 3.34 (CI 95: 1.8-6.0), group=0.002) compared to PD1 group. PFS was not different between BV and chemo group (p= 0.7). OS was similar between all 3 groups. Similar PFS and OS were seen among patients receiving PD-1 + BV (n=83) and PD-1 with or without chemo (n =112) (p=0.96 for PFS; p= 0.72 for OS); as well as for patients receiving PD-1 as part of their first salvage therapy (n=151) or later salvage treatments (n=44) (p=0.45 for PFS, p= 0.3 for OS). Patients who received PD1 based regimen as last salvage therapy pre-ASCT had significantly better PFS (HR: 6.8 (CI 95: 2.4-19.2), p= <0.0001) and OS (HR: 10.6 (CI 95: 2.5-44.8), p= 0.0001) compared to patients who received PD1 prior to their last line of salvage therapy per-ASCT. Conclusion: Receipt of PD-1 based salvage therapy at any point before ASCT is associated with significantly improved PFS compared to either BV or chemotherapy-based salvage treatments. In the subgroup of patients transplanted in CMR, PD1 based last salvage regimen were associated with higher PFS compared to chemotherapy and BV and higher OS compared to chemotherapy. PD1 based last salvage therapy pre-ASCT was associated with better survival compared to PD1 prior to last salvage therapy. Results of this study strongly support the use of PD-1 based salvage therapy for patients with R/R cHL. S.D., R.M., H.S contributed equally. R.S., M.M. contributed equally.

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.