Citations

Abstract Introduction: First-line therapy for mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) represents a critical opportunity for clinical benefit via sustained complete response. Multitargeted combinations, including optimized chemotherapy with novel agents targeted to MCL, may best address the biologic heterogeneity of this disease. Building on prior experience using modified VR-CAP and R-cytarabine, we enhanced this regimen by adding acalabrutinib while reducing cytarabine, aiming for improved efficacy and safety without impeding stem cell collection. To evaluate this regimen, we conducted a phase 2 multicenter trial at four centers in the Academic and Community Cancer Research United (ACCRU) network. Methods: CARiBOU (ACCRU-LY-1804) employs alternating VR-CAP and R-cytarabine with continuous acalabrutinib, in six 21-day cycles, for previously untreated MCL. Eligible patients (pts) were at least 18 years old with adequate organ function, measurable disease, no CNS involvement; and were ASCT-eligible per investigator. VR-CAP (cycles 1, 3, and 5) employed bortezomib 1.3 mg/m² subcutaneously days 1,8, and 15; rituximab 375 mg/m² day 1; cyclophosphamide 750 mg/m² day 1; doxorubicin 50 mg/m2 day 1; and prednisone 100 mg PO days 1-5. Cycles 2,4, and 6 used outpatient rituximab with cytarabine at 3 g/m² x 2 daily doses in the first 5 pts, after which the dose was reduced to 2 gm/m2 x 2 daily doses due to thrombocytopenia. Acalabrutinib 100 mg p.o. twice daily was given continuously but held for grade 4 thrombocytopenia or clinically significant toxicity. Growth factors and prophylactic antimicrobials were required. Responses were assessed after six cycles using FDG PET/CT, bone marrow aspirate/biopsy (BM Bx), and endoscopy when indicated (Lugano 2014). The primary endpoint was complete metabolic response (CMR) rate at end of treatment (EOT). Secondary endpoints included safety, feasibility of stem cell collection, proportion proceeding to ASCT, and progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Peripheral blood measurable residual disease (MRD) was evaluated using the ClonoSEQ assay (Adaptive Biotechnologies). A Simon two-stage design was used, targeting a CMR rate ≥ 70% versus a null rate of 50%, with a total sample size of 39 evaluable pts. Results: 41 pts were accrued from October 2021 through May 2025, 37 of whom completed all 6 cycles and are evaluable for response; two are still on therapy, and two discontinued therapy early for toxicity. Median age was 63 years (range 41-73), 22% were female, and 85% were White. MIPI risk groups were low (44%), intermediate (39%), and high (17%), and Ki-67 was ≥ 30% in 54% of pts. Three pts (7%) had known TP53 mutations by sequencing. At EOT, the CMR rate was 85.3% among all pts (35/41; 95% CI 67.9%-92.9%), or 94.5% among evaluable pts (35/37). BM Bx was performed in 31 pts at EOT, 30 of which (96.8%) were negative for MCL. Undetectable peripheral blood MRD using a 10^6 threshold (uMRD6) was achieved at EOT in 78.1% (25/32) of tested pts, and 93.8% (30/32) achieved uMRD5. Nine of 41 pts underwent ASCT; no patient failed stem cell collection. Maintenance therapy was not protocol-defined but included rituximab in 91.9% of pts and a BTK inhibitor in 21.6% of pts. With a median follow-up of 16.7 months, PFS and OS rates at 18 months were 76.7% (95% CI: 60.7%-96.9%) and 95.5% (95% CI: 87.1%-100%). Toxicities were primarily hematologic. Grade 3+ toxicities included thrombocytopenia (66.6%), neutropenia (28.2%), and anemia (25.6%). Grade 3+ febrile neutropenia was observed in 10.2% of pts. Peripheral neuropathy was seen in 20.5% of pts and all grade 1-2. Bleeding events included purpura in 2 pts (5.2%) and epistaxis in 1 patient (2.6%). One case of atrial fibrillation was observed. Eighteen pts required temporary dose hold of acalabrutinib for toxicity (mainly thrombocytopenia), and 2 had acalabrutinib dose reductions. Serious adverse events occurred in 6 pts, and no treatment-related deaths occurred. Conclusions: CARiBOU is an efficient, highly effective outpatient regimen for 1st line MCL, employing intermediate dose cytarabine with continuous acalabrutinib. With supportive care and platelet monitoring, this approach safely yielded high rates of CMR and uMRD6, supporting multitargeted induction therapy for appropriate pts with untreated MCL.

Abstract Introduction: Primary mediastinal B-Cell lymphoma (PMBCL) is a rare form of large B-Cell lymphoma (LBCL) with around 90% of patients (pts) cured with first line (1L) treatment. For pts with relapsed or refractory (RR) PMBCL, the optimal treatment is unclear. Prior retrospective analysis in the rituximab (R) era have shown high response rates to platinum salvage and high-dose chemotherapy followed by autologous stem cell transplant (HDT/ASCT) in second line (2L) RR PMBCL (Bakos et al. ASH 2023 and Dumke et al. ASCO 2024). The pivotal phase III LBCL trials in early relapsing pts that compared CD19 chimeric antigen receptor-T cell (CAR-T) with HDT/ASCT as 2L treatment had few PMBCL pts: none on ZUMA-7 and 17 PMBCL on TRANSFORM, of whom only 8 were randomized to 2L CAR-T. This study aims to evaluate outcomes of 2L therapies for RR PMBCL, including pts treated with 2L CAR-T. Methods: We performed a multicenter retrospective study in pts with RR PMBCL treated between 2001 and 2025. Clinical and pathologic characteristics, treatment regimens, and efficacy outcomes were collected and analyzed. Results: 139 pts were included with 43% male, 69% Caucasian, 7.9% Black, 8.6% Asian and 79% Non-Hispanic. R-EPOCH (64%) and (32%) were the most common 1L treatments and all pts received R. Consolidative radiation was used in 21 pts (15%) as part of 1L therapy, 28% after RCHOP. Primary refractory disease with relapse ≤6 month (mo), or early relapse ≤12 mo, occurred in 83% (N = 115) and 93% (N = 129 pts), respectively. At relapse, median age was 34 years (yrs), 44% had advanced stage disease, 31% had bulky disease (≥ 7.5cm). CNS relapse occurred in 8.6% of pts. Overall and complete response rate (ORR and CR) to any 2L treatment was 44% and 27%, respectively. At median follow-up of 40 months (mo) from the start of 2L treatment, median PFS of the entire cohort was 3.2 mo with a 3 yr OS of 70%. For 2L treatment, N=93 (67%) pts were treated with platinum salvage with intention to proceed with HDT/ASCT. Most commonly used platinum salvage regimens were ICE± R (n= 53, 38%), R-DHAP (n=23, 17%), R-GemOx (n= 5, 3.6%), and GDP ± R (n= 10, 7.2%), and the majority (95%) of pts received R with 2L therapy. ORR and CR to platinum salvage was 46% and 15% respectively. With a median follow up of 30 mo from start of 2L therapy, median PFS was 2.6 mos, and 3 yr PFS and OS was 15% and 64%, respectively. Of the 93 pts treated with platinum salvage, only 25 pts (27%) proceeded with HDT/ASCT- of whom, N = 17 (68%) achieved a CR after ASCT. In patients that proceeded to ASCT, relapses occurred in 10 pts (40%) with a 3 yr PFS and OS 56% and 83%, respectively. CAR-T was used as 2L in 20 pts (14%)- most commonly either axi-cel (N =7) or liso-cel (N = 8). ORR and CR to CART was 89% and 55% respectively, median PFS and OS was NR after CAR-T infusion and 3 yr PFS and OS was 55% and 95%, respectively. Other 2L treatments included pembrolizumab (N =3), brentuximab vedotin (BV) + nivolumab (N= 4) or single agent BV (N=2). Radiation was given as part of 2L treatment in 25.9% of pts. 2L CAR-T therapy was associated with improved ORR (OR 7.60, 95% CI 1.68 – 34.55, p = 0.002), improved CR rate (OR 4.15, 95% CI 1.49 – 11.53, p = 0.008) and improved PFS (HR 0.18, 95% CI 0.06 – 0.57, p = 0.004) compared to pts treated with 2L platinum salvage. There was no difference in OS between pts treated with platinum salvage or 2L CAR-T. A total of 96 patients progressed on 2L therapy, and 92 pts (95.8%) received third-line (3L) treatment. Third line treatments included chemoimmunotherapy +/- HDT/ASCT (N= 23), CD19 CAR-T (N = 35), clinical trial (N=7), check point inhibitor-based regimen (N= 11), BV based regimen (N= 8), allogeneic stem cell transplant (N = 3) or other (N = 5), with 7 pts receiving radiation as part of 3L therapy. Median PFS and OS from start of 3L therapy was 6.7 mo and 6.4 mo, respectively. Conclusions: We report the largest cohort of pts with RR PMBCL treated in the rituximab era and the largest number of PMBCL pts treated with 2L CAR-T. This is the first analysis, to our knowledge, to show a statistically significant benefit in PFS, ORR and CR rate of CAR-T compared to platinum salvage followed by HDT/ASCT as 2L treatment in a study of exclusively RR PMBCL pts. Our dataset was largely (93%) compromised of pts with primary refractory or early relapsing disease and provides support for using CAR-T as 2L treatment in this high-risk subset of RR PMBCL patients.

Abstract Introduction The International Prognostic Index (IPI) is widely used to stratify risk in large B-cell lymphoma (LBCL) across all ages, with age-adjusted (aa)IPI applied to younger patients. While there have been efforts to develop prognostic indices (PIs) tailored to older patients, few are adopted in clinical practice due to their complexity and reliance on functional assessments, which are not routinely collected in real-world registry datasets. Recently proposed SENIOR-IPI (Dubois, ASH 2024) was developed for older patients with LBCL receiving anthracycline (A)-based therapy. We assessed the performance of standard and novel PIs in patients aged 80+ years and externally validated the SENIOR-IPI. Methods We harmonized and pooled data of patients aged 80+ years with newly diagnosed LBCL from a national registry and two prospective cohorts: NiHiL (Czech Republic, enrolled 2010–2023), LEO (USA; n=222, 2015–2020), and MER (USA; n=77, 2010–2015), forming a cohort of 819 individuals. We included 536 individuals with complete data on IPI components and albumin, including 485 treated with chemotherapy and 397 with A-based regimens (primary cohort). Following PIs were evaluated: IPI, NCCN-IPI, (aa)IPI, and SENIOR-IPI (age per year, aaIPI components, LDH >3x ULN as extra point, and albumin, all weighted six-fold; extranodal involvement excluded due to lack of prognostic significance). Multivariable hazard ratios (HR) were estimated using Cox proportional hazards models; discriminative ability was assessed using C-index and calibration plots. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS); event-free survival results were consistent (230/357 events were deaths) and are not reported here. Results Among the 397 A-treated patients (median age 82 years, range 80–99), ECOG performance status (PS) 2–4 was observed in 35% of patients, clinical stage III–IV in 67%, elevated LDH in 65% (8% with >3x ULN), >1 extranodal (EN) site in 32%, and albumin levels < 3.5 g/dL in 27%. In multivariable modeling, only age per year (HR=1.07, P<0.01), and clinical stage (HR=1.36, P=0.048) were independent predictors of OS, whereas ECOG PS (HR=1.27, P=0.12), trichotomized LDH by ULN (HR=1.23, P=0.08) and albumin (HR=1.17, P=0.35) were not significant. SENIOR-IPI had the highest discrimination (C-index 0.631) in A-treated patients, outperforming IPI (0.617), NCCN-IPI (0.591), and aaIPI (0.620), with consistent results across cohorts: NiHiL (0.633), LEO (0.619), and MER (0.621). SENIOR-IPI stratified patients into low- (L-Risk, 0–9 points, 28%), low-intermediate (L-Int, 10–19 points, 42%), high-intermediate (H-Int, 20–29 points, 23%), and high-risk (H-Risk, 30–40 points, 7%) categories, with OS medians of 6.3, 3.8, 2.4, and 1.4 years, respectively (P<0.01), and significant separation between L-Int and H-Int (HR=1.47, P=0.02). By comparison, IPI categorized patients as L-Risk (12%), L-Int (24%), H-Int (27%), and H-Risk (37%), with median OS of 8.7, 4.6, 4.8, and 1.9 years, resp. (P<0.01). aaIPI yielded following distributions: 13%, 29%, 37%, and 21%; and median OS: 8.7, 5.3, 3.4, and 1.5 years; P<0.01. NCCN-IPI stratified patients into three groups: L-Int (13%), H-Int (49%), and H-Risk (39%), with respective OS medians of 8.7, 4.1, and 2.5 years (P<0.01). All PIs showed modest overestimation of mortality (calibration slopes: SENIOR-IPI 1.36; IPI 1.24; aaIPI 1.30; NCCN-IPI 1.26; intercept: -0.97, -0.87, -0.92, -0.87, resp.). In the entire cohort (n=536), SENIOR-IPI showed highest C-index (0.651 vs IPI 0.622, aaIPI 0.631, NCCN-IPI 0.606), and stratified patients into L-Risk (26%, 2-year OS: 6.4 years), L-Int (40%, 3.2 years), H-Int (24%, 1.5 years), and H-Risk (10%, 0.6 years). Calibration slope was 1.18 (intercept -0.33). Among patients not receiving chemotherapy, SENIOR-IPI also performed best (C-index 0.759 vs IPI 0.738, aaIPI 0.757, NCCN-IPI 0.728). Conclusion SENIOR-IPI enables effective risk stratification of patients aged 80+ years with LBCL into four prognostically distinct groups, outperforming traditional indices (IPI, NCCN-IPI, aaIPI) in patients receiving A-based therapy, as well as in the entire cohort and in patients not receiving chemotherapy. While its discrimination is superior, modest miscalibration suggests that future recalibration may improve precision. These findings support SENIOR-IPI as a clinically relevant prognostic tool for the elderly LBCL patient population. Funding: NU21-03-00411, P50 CA97274, U01 CA195568.

Abstract Over the past decade, classification systems using high-throughput genetic data have been developed to identify molecular subtypes of DLBCL. Although not a primary goal, these classifiers were also proposed as prognostic factors in their respective publications. To date, however, no study has directly compared these classifiers' ability to predict overall (OS) and event-free survival (EFS) in the same cohort. Herein, we sought to systematically compare predictive performance, benchmarked against the IPI, of several current established molecular classifiers and evaluate if any add significant independent prognostic information beyond the IPI. WES (including paired germline filter) and RNAseq data from newly diagnosed DLBCL patients (N=432; 2018 WHO criteria) in the Mayo Clinic/University of Iowa Lymphoma Molecular Epidemiology Resource (MER) were available for analysis (WES n=112, RNAseq n=40, or both n=280). The number of cases able to be classified (including as unclassified) for each classifier was as follows: IPI (432, 100%), cell-of-origin (COO, by Hans algorithm; 346, 80.1%), refined COO (by gene expression with Dark Zone Signature; 320, 100%), Haematological Malignancy Research Network (HMRN; 349, 89.0%), B-cell state (320, 100%), Lymphoma Ecotype (320, 100%), Lymphoma Microenvironment (LME; 320, 100%), Tumor microenvironment (TME26; 320, 100%), SubLymE (312, 97.5%), LymphGen (358, 91.3%), and DLBclass (223, 58.2%). OS was defined as time from diagnosis to all-cause death while EFS was defined as time from diagnosis to disease progression, initiation of second-line treatment, or all-cause death. We calculated Harrell's c-statistics for each Cox proportional hazards model evaluating the discriminative performance of each classifier in predicting OS/EFS. Using bootstrap validation, we obtained optimism-corrected c-statistics, which we report in the results. We performed likelihood ratio tests (LRT) comparing a univariable Cox model with IPI alone and models including both IPI and a given classifier to assess if a classifier provided independent prognostic information beyond the IPI. All patients were treated with immunochemotherapy (IC) with curative intent, 247 (57%) were male, median age at diagnosis was 65 years (IQR 55-72 years), 390 (96%) were White, 209 (60%) had GCB subtype by Hans, 22 (5.1%) had MYC double-hit by FISH (MYC and BCL2 or BCL6), and 162 (37.9%) had an IPI ≥ 3. The median follow-up was 7.0 years, 167 (39%) experienced an event, and 137 (32%) died. In a univariable Cox model, the c-statistic for IPI predicting OS was 0.66 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.61-0.70). All other classifiers had c-statistics of ≤0.56. The c-statistic for IPI predicting EFS was 0.64 (95% CI 0.60-0.69), and all other classifiers had c-statistics of ≤0.58. The univariate DLBclass results for OS and EFS were not significantly impacted when restricted to cases with confidence >0.7 (n=136). In Cox models of IPI alone versus IPI plus an individual classifier, the only classifier that provided statistically significant, independent information for OS was TME26 (LRT p=0.02). Adjusting for IPI, patients who were TME26-negative had significantly inferior OS compared to TME26-positive cases (HR 1.63, 95% CI 1.07-2.47; p=0.02). For EFS, DLBclass (restricted to confidence >0.7) added significant prognostic information beyond IPI (LRT p=0.02). This finding was largely driven by C5 subtype; relative to C1 subtype and adjusting for IPI, C5 subtype had significantly inferior EFS (HR 5.53, 95% CI 1.81-17.0; p=0.003). In summary, we compared prognostic performance of multiple DLBCL molecular classifiers with respect to OS and EFS in a single real-world, prospective cohort of newly diagnosed, IC-treated DLBCL. Our data supports two key findings: all classifiers had modest performance for prognosis, and none individually outperformed the IPI in predicting OS nor EFS. Second, only TME26 and DLBclass (confidence >0.7) provided additional prognostic information beyond that captured by the IPI for OS and EFS, respectively. This finding suggests that the tumor immune microenvironment and characteristics of C5 DLBCLs (ABC-subtype, CD79B mutations) can potentially offer significant independent information for predicting survival and response to front-line immunochemotherapy. If replicated, these findings could inform risk-adapted treatment approaches and aid in identifying high-risk patients for enrollment in genomically-informed clinical trials.

Abstract Introduction: THRLBCL is a rare disease accounting for less than 10% of all diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) subtypes. THRLBCL was associated with poor outcomes in the pre-rituximab era, with limited contemporaneous data. Optimal frontline treatment remains unclear with some studies advocating for intensive regimens. The goal of this international study is to analyze the survival and treatment-related outcomes in patients with newly diagnosed THRLBCL treated with rituximab-containing chemotherapy and to compare with a DLBCL, not otherwise specified (NOS) cohort. Methods: THRLBCL and DLBCL patients prospectively enrolled in the Lymphoma Epidemiology of Outcomes (LEO) (NCT02736357) (7/2015 to 5/2020), Molecular Epidemiology Resource (1/2010 to 6/2015), and Czech Lymphoma Study Group project (NiHiL) (NCT03199066) (2/2010 to 11/2023) were analyzed. Diagnosis was made in dedicated hematopathology centers in both registries. We excluded patients with prior nodular lymphocyte-predominant Hodgkin lymphoma, central nervous system involvement, and not treated with rituximab-containing therapy. Event-free survival (EFS) and overall survival (OS) were estimated by Kaplan-Meier.Univariate associations were derived via Cox model and multivariate models were constructed by forward selection of significant variables with P≤0.05. Propensity score matching (1:5, caliper 0.2) between THRLBCL and DLBCL NOS patients was performed using IPI score components and treatment as covariates. Results: We identified 158 patients (LEO: 67 and NiHiL: 91) with THRLBCL. Among them, 140 patients received rituximab-containing regimens and were included in this analysis. Median age was 58 years (range, 19-89) with 57% aged ≤60 years. Most patients were male (n= 88; 63%) and had ECOG performance status (PS) of 0-1 (n= 111; 79%), stage III-IV (n= 111; 79%), elevated LDH (n= 92; 66%), and B symptoms (n= 84; 60%). Fifty (36%) patients had ≥2 extranodal (EN) sites, mostly liver (n= 39; 28%) and lung (n= 16; 11%), bone marrow (BM) involvement was observed in 26% (n= 37). Bulky disease (≥7.5cm) was present in 50 (36%) and IPI score ≥3 in 68 (48%) patients. The median diagnosis-to-treatment interval was 23 days (IQ range, 13-38.5). Frequent regimens were R-CHOP (n= 106; 75.7%), followed by intensive regimens such as R-MegaCHOP/ESHAP, R-HyperCVAD/MA, and R-CODOX-M/IVAC (n= 15; 10.7%), and R-CHOEP/EPOCH-R (n= 10; 7.14%). With a median follow-up of 3.92 years, the 4-year EFS & OS were 71% and 80%, respectively. Lymphoma was the main cause of death (n= 15; 11%) among 30 events. No difference in 4-year EFS (70% vs. 76%; P= 0.55) & OS (80% vs 82%; P= 0.96) were observed between R-CHOP and intensive regimens. Factors associated with shorter EFS and OS in univariate analysis for THRLBCL were ECOG PS 2-4: (HR= 3.3; P<.001 & HR= 5.97, P<.001, respectively); ≥2 EN sites (HR= 1.85, P= 0.043 & HR= 2.54, P= 0.014, respectively); B symptoms (HR= 2.35, P= 0.014 & HR= 2.84, P= 0.023) and IPI score (HR= 1.5, P= 0.002 & HR= 2.16, P<.001). Stage III-IV and BM involvement were associated with shorter OS only (HR= 7.36, P= 0.05 & HR= 2.18, P= 0.036, respectively). Among them, only ECOG PS 2-4 (OS: HR= 3.6, P= 0.003) and B symptoms (EFS: HR= 2.3, P= 0.046) were independent predictors of survival in multivariate analysis. Finally, we compared baseline characteristics and survival between THRLBCL (n= 140) and DLBCL NOS (n= 6099; LEO/MER: 2069 & NiHiL: 4030) treated with rituximab-containing regimens. Patients with THRLBCL were younger (≤60 years: 57% vs. 38%; P<.001), more frequently had ECOG PS 0-1 (79% vs 76%; P= 0.012), stage III-IV (79% vs 63%; P<.001), B symptoms (60% vs 38%; P<.001), and liver involvement (28% vs 7%; P<.001), compared to DLBCL NOS. Subtype was not associated with survival (OS HR= 0.79, P= 0.262 & EFS HR= 0.93, P= 0.662) when adjusted for IPI score. With a median follow-up of 4.89 years in the DLBCL NOS cohort, we observed similar 4-year EFS (71% vs 67%; P= 0.197) & OS between histologies (80% vs 77%; P= 0.125). These results were confirmed in propensity matching for EFS (HR= 0.98, P= 0.897) and OS (HR= 1.07, P= 0.732). Conclusions: In this large international analysis of patients with newly diagnosed THRLBCL contemporaneously treated, we observed similar survival rates compared to DLBCL NOS treated with R-CHOP and intensive regimens. ECOG PS and the presence of B symptoms were independent factors associated with survival.

Abstract Background and Significance Diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) and other LBCLs account for 35–40% of non-Hodgkin lymphoma cases in North America, Europe, and East Asia. Rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (R-CHOP) is the standard first-line treatment for DLBCL, achieving cure rates in approximately 60–70% of patients. However, 30–40% of patients will relapse or become refractory (R/R) to treatment, facing poor prognosis. Patients with high International Prognostic Index (IPI) scores (3–5) and those with IPI 1–2 who have bulky disease and/or very high lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) are recognized as high-risk (HR) subsets with suboptimal outcomes (Maurer et al, ASH 2023, #4512). Novel combination strategies are an area of focus for improving efficacy in this population. GOLCA is a potential, first-in-class, oral CELMoD agent designed for the treatment of lymphoma, with preferential distribution to lymphoid organs and enhanced activity in lymphoma cell lines. GOLCA drives the closed, active conformation of cereblon to induce rapid and deep degradation of Ikaros and Aiolos, leading to direct cell killing (agnostic of cell of origin [COO]) and immunomodulatory activity. In the Phase 1b study CC-220-DLBCL-001, GOLCA in combination with R-CHOP demonstrated a predictable and manageable safety profile with high rates of durable responses, irrespective of COO, in previously untreated aggressive B-cell lymphomas (BCL), including promising activity in HR patients (Amzallag et al, ASH 2024, #579). The median relative dose intensity for GOLCA and CHO components was high (97–99%), indicating uncompromised delivery of curative standard-of-care treatment and combinability. GOLCA ± rituximab has also shown encouraging efficacy and safety in patients with R/R DLBCL (Bachy et al, ICML, #148). These findings support the further study of GOLCA + R-CHOP combination in the Phase 3 setting. Study Design and Methods GOLSEEK-1 (NCT06356129) is a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, Phase 3 study evaluating GOLCA + R-CHOP versus placebo + R-CHOP in patients with previously untreated HR LBCL. Approximately 850 patients with previously untreated LBCL will be randomized 1:1 to either GOLCA + R-CHOP or placebo + R-CHOP. Eligible patients include those with histologically confirmed LBCL per WHO 2022 criteria—including DLBCL (not otherwise specified [NOS], ABC/GCB), high-grade BCL with MYC and BCL2 rearrangements or NOS, T-cell/histiocyte–rich LBCL, or Epstein Barr Virus-positive DLBCL. HR status is defined by IPI ≥3, or IPI 1–2 with HR features: LDH >1.3× upper limit of normal and/or bulky disease (≥7 cm lesion). All patients must have measurable disease as defined by Lugano criteria. Key exclusion criteria are other lymphoma subtypes such as primary mediastinal LBCL; primary cutaneous DLBCL-leg type, grade 3b follicular lymphoma (FL); transformed indolent lymphoma; anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) positive LBCL; primary effusion lymphoma; and Burkitt lymphoma and known or suspected central nervous system involvement. Randomization will be stratified by IPI score (HR 1–2 and 3 vs 4–5) and bulky disease status (≥7 cm vs <7 cm). After a screening period of ≤4 weeks, patients will receive either GOLCA (0.4 mg) or placebo orally once daily for 7 consecutive days in each of 6 cycles, combined with R-CHOP every 21 days. The primary endpoint is progression-free survival (PFS) by investigator assessment per Lugano Response Criteria. Key secondary endpoints include PFS in non–high-grade BCL, event-free survival, independently assessed complete metabolic response, undetectable minimal residual disease by PhasED-Seq (defined as undetectable circulating tumor DNA levels at end of treatment), and overall survival. Patients will be followed up for up to approximately 67 months after beginning treatment. This study is currently recruiting at 309 sites in 36 countries , across the United States, Europe, Latin America, and East Asia. Acknowledgement BMS Artificial Intelligence was used to revise existing text with human author oversight.

Abstract Aggressive B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphomas represent a clinically heterogeneous group of malignancies characterized by rapid progression and varied molecular features. Diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) is the most common aggressive B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma and encompasses a biologically diverse group of diseases, now classified into 18 molecular subtypes (Alaggio et al. Leukemia, 2022). While first-line R-CHOP therapy cures approximately 60% of patients (Coiffier et al. N Engl J Med. 2002), those with relapsed or refractory (R/R) disease face poor outcomes. Although CAR T-cell therapies (e.g. axicabtagene ciloleucel, tisagenlecleucel, lisocabtagene maraleucel) have improved outcomes, access remains limited due to logistical and disease-related constraints (Locke et al. N Engl J Med. 2022). More recently, bispecific CD20xCD3 antibodies such as epcoritamab and glofitamab have shown clinical activity in the R/R setting after ≥2 prior lines, with complete response (CR) rates of ~40% (Dickinson et al. N Engl J Med. 2022; Thieblemont et al. J Clin Oncol. 2023). However, treatment sequencing and mechanisms of resistance to CD20-targeted therapies remain areas of active investigation. One emerging resistance mechanism to CD20 bispecific antibodies is the downregulation or loss of CD20 expression, which has been associated with treatment failure and disease progression (Bannard et al. Clin. Cancer Research, 2022). This highlights the need for novel strategies to overcome CD20 resistance. Dapolsertib (MEN1703) is a first-in-class dual PIM/FLT3 kinase inhibitor that targets key oncogenic and survival pathways in hematologic malignancies. PIM kinases (PIM1, PIM2, PIM3) regulate translation, metabolism, apoptosis, and immune modulation. Overexpression and mutations in PIM genes are associated with poor prognosis in DLBCL, particularly in the ABC subtype, and are known to cooperate with MYC and BCL6 (Szydłowski et al. Cancer Res. 2021). Simultaneous inhibition of all three PIMs downregulates MYC and induces marked cytotoxicity in preclinical models. In AML, dapolsertib has demonstrated preliminary clinical single-agent activity, with ~10% CR/CRi reported in the DIAMOND study (NCT03008187; Martinelli et al. Blood Neoplasia, in press). Dapolsertib has also shown strong antitumor activity in lymphoma models, both in vitro and in vivo (Bellon et al. Mol Cancer. 2023). Notably, dapolsertib demonstrated synergy with anti-CD20 antibody, rituximab, providing a rationale for combination strategies (Szydłowski et al. Cancer Res. 2021). The rationale for combining dapolsertib with a CD20 bispecific antibody lies in its potential to modulate survival pathways, sensitize malignant B-cells to immunotherapy, and circumvent resistance mechanisms such as CD20 loss by inducing CD20 expression. JASPIS-01 (NCT06534437) is an ongoing, international multicenter, Phase 2 study evaluating dapolsertib as monotherapy or in combination with glofitamab in patients with R/R aggressive B-cell lymphoma after ≥2 prior lines of therapy. The trial consists of three parts: a safety run-in (Part 1), optional enrichment (Part 2), and a potential randomized comparison vs. glofitamab (Part 3). Part 1 will include 2 groups of patients. Group 1 comprises bispecific-naïve patients randomized to a prospective dose-optimization evaluation of the combination with dapolsertib. Patients receive either 125 mg on a 2 weeks on / 1 week off schedule or 150 mg on a 1 week on / 2 weeks off schedule for up to 12 cycles to investigate optimal therapeutic window. Group 2 comprises patients who exhausted therapeutic standard options and who will receive dapolsertib monotherapy at 125 mg on a 2 weeks on / 1 week off schedule until intolerable toxicity or disease progression. The initial safety run-in (Parts 1 of both groups) informs dose selection for Part 2. Dose continuation in Part 2 will be guided by Data and Safety Monitoring Board safety assessments after ≥2 completed treatment cycles. The primary objectives are to assess safety, tolerability, and preliminary anti-lymphoma activity. Key endpoints include incidence of adverse events, overall/complete response rates, and duration of response. As of July 11, 2025, Part 1 is enrolling in France, Poland, Spain and the UK with additional sites activation ongoing.

Abstract Introduction Diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) is a heterogenous disease with varied expressions of CD30. Brentuximab vedotin (BV) is a CD30-directed antibody-drug conjugate approved for treatment of patients with relapsed or refractory DLBCL in combination with lenalidomide (Len) and rituximab (R). In the phase 3 ECHELON-3 study (NCT04404283), BV + Len + R showed significant overall survival (OS) benefit compared with placebo + Len + R in patients with relapsed or refractory DLBCL. Subgroup analysis from this study showed that BV + Len + R provided clinical benefit regardless of CD30 expression level. We hypothesized that even sub-threshold levels of CD30 expression, below the detection limits of immunohistochemistry (IHC), may be sufficient to elicit the antitumor activity of BV. Here, we further investigated whether trace amounts of CD30 staining are required for patients to benefit from BV + Len + R. Methods In the ECHELON-3 study, patients with relapsed or refractory DLBCL were randomized 1:1 to receive BV + Len + R or placebo + Len + R. The primary endpoint was OS, with progression-free survival (PFS) and objective response rate (ORR), per Lugano 2014, as key secondary endpoints. CD30 expression was assessed by IHC by central and/or local testing. CD30 positivity was scored as the percentage of CD30 positive cells out of neoplastic cells or out of total lymphocytes, when neoplastic cells could not be distinguished. In this updated analysis, patients with CD30 <1% staining by central laboratory IHC were further grouped into CD30 <1% with trace staining and CD30 <1% with no staining. Results Overall, 60 patients in the BV + Len + R group had CD30 <1% expression; of these, 34 had CD30 <1% with trace staining and 26 had CD30 <1% with no staining. In the placebo + Len + R group, 63 patients had CD30 <1% expression; of these, 36 had CD30 <1% with trace staining and 27 had CD30 <1% with no staining. In the overall CD30 <1% groups, numerically greater OS and PFS benefits were observed with BV + Len + R vs placebo + Len + R (HR for OS, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.36-0.89 and HR for PFS, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.34-0.82). In patients with CD30 <1% with trace staining, BV + Len + R showed a numerically higher OS compared with placebo + Len + R, with HR of 0.48 (95% CI, 0.26-0.90); median OS was 15.6 vs 5.2 months. In patients with CD30 <1% with no staining, there was a trend toward higher OS with BV + Len + R vs placebo + Len + R, with HR of 0.66 (95% CI, 0.34-1.28); median OS was 14.8 vs 11.8 months. Similarly, in patients with CD30 <1% with trace staining, BV + Len + R showed a trend toward longer PFS compared with placebo + Len + R, with HR of 0.60 (95% CI, 0.33-1.11); median PFS was 2.8 vs 1.5 months. In patients with CD30 <1% with no staining, a numerically longer PFS benefit was observed with BV + Len + R vs placebo + Len + R, with HR of 0.41 (95% CI, 0.21-0.79); median PFS was 4.2 vs 2.7 months. In the overall groups, ORR was 60.0% with BV + Len + R and 34.9% with placebo + Len + R. Higher ORR was observed with BV + Len + R compared with placebo + Len + R in both CD30 <1% with trace staining (55.9% vs 25.0%) and CD30 <1% with no staining (65.4% vs 48.1%) groups. Conclusions Results from this updated analysis indicate that visible CD30 detection by IHC is not required for response to BV + Len + R in patients with relapsed or refractory DLBCL. Treatment with BV + Len + R showed efficacy benefit compared with placebo + Len + R regardless of CD30 expression level, including in patients with no visible CD30 IHC staining. These results are consistent with those from the overall ECHELON-3 study population, in which significant improvement in OS was demonstrated with BV + Len + R compared with placebo + Len + R.

Abstract Introduction Although chemo-free regimens are increasingly used in elderly patients with large B-cell lymphoma (LBCL), most still receive conventional chemoimmunotherapy. Patients up to 75–80 years old are usually treated with full-dose R-CHOP, while 80+ patients receive the attenuated R-miniCHOP regimen as standard of care. Prior studies have shown that in patients aged 65+ years, R-CHOP was associated with improved survival based on propensity score matching (PSM) analysis (Al-Sarayfi, Am J Hematol, 2023), though this did not include comorbidity data. Furthermore, no formal studies have focused specifically on 80+ patients. We aimed to perform a PSM comparison of R-CHOP versus R-miniCHOP to better inform treatment decisions in this population. Methods We harmonized and pooled data from 237 LBCL patients receiving chemotherapy with rituximab (out of all 263 80+ patients) from the prospective LEO cohort (USA, n=147; 2015–2020) and NiHiL registry (Czech Republic, single center, n=116; 2010–2023). Of them, 205 (86%) receiving anthracycline(A)-based regimens were included. Baseline characteristics, comorbidities, treatments, and outcomes were collected. PSM (1:1, caliper 0.2) was performed to compare R-CHOP and R-miniCHOP using age, ECOG performance status (PS), clinical stage, lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), and major comorbidities (heart disease, history of stroke, and other recent cancer) as matching variables. The endpoints were overall survival (OS), event-free survival (EFS), and lymphoma-specific survival (LSS, defined as death attributed to lymphoma progression). Results Among 205 A-treated patients, median age was 83 years (range 80–99); 30% had ECOG PS 2–4, 67% clinical stage III–IV, 34% ≥2 involved extranodal sites, 59% elevated LDH, and 58% had International Prognostic Index (IPI) scores 3–5. Median follow-up was 5.5 years; median OS and EFS were 4.1 and 3.4 years, resp. A-based regimens comprised full-dose R-CHOP-like (n=79; 39%; R-CHOP n=74, DA-EPOCH-R n=5) and R-miniCHOP (n=126; 61%). Patients receiving R-CHOP-like regimens had more favorable baseline characteristics (median age 82 vs 83 years, P=0.04; ECOG PS 2–4: 16% vs 39%, P<0.01; IPI 3–5: 46% vs 66%, P=0.03) and a lower, though not statistically significant, comorbidity burden (mean 1.14 vs 1.39; heart disease 35% vs 45%, P=0.22; history of stroke 4% vs 6%, P=0.64; other cancer 6% vs 5%, P=0.87). R-CHOP-like regimens vs R-miniCHOP had superior OS (median 6.3 vs 3.4 years; HR=0.61, 95% CI 0.42–0.90; P=0.01) and EFS (median 5.3 vs 2.1 years; HR=0.58, 95% CI 0.40–0.83; P<0.01), with no significant difference in LSS (2-year 89% vs 82%, HR=0.77, 95% CI 0.39–1.54, P=0.46). To mitigate selection bias, we performed PSM on patients with available baseline characteristics treated with R-CHOP (n=69) and R-miniCHOP (n=121), resulting in 63 matched pairs. Matched cohorts were well-balanced on age (median 82 years in both cohorts; P=0.68), ECOG PS 2–4 (17% vs 19%; P=0.82), IPI 3–5 (52% vs. 59%; P=0.41), and comorbidity burden (mean 1.10 vs. 1.29; P=0.30). The presence of heart disease (40% in both cohorts), history of stroke (5% vs 6%), and cancer (5% vs 6%) were similar. Survival modestly favored R-CHOP, but differences were not significant: median OS 5.3 vs 3.5 years (HR=0.73; 95% CI 0.46–1.15; P=0.17), median EFS 3.8 vs 2.8 years (HR=0.76; 95% CI 0.49–1.18; P=0.23), and 2-year LSS 88% vs 84% (HR=1.09; 95% CI 0.45–2.63; P=0.85). Treatment-related mortality was similar in both cohorts (16%). Among R-miniCHOP patients, survival outcomes did not differ between matched (n=63) and unmatched (n=63) groups (OS P=0.72; EFS P=0.23; LSS P=0.27). Unmatched (n=16) R-CHOP patients had a trend toward improved survival compared to matched (n=63) individuals (OS P=0.10; EFS P=0.049; LSS P=0.24). Conclusion This is the first PSM-based analysis comparing R-CHOP and R-miniCHOP in LBCL patients 80+ years old. Despite inherent limitations of a non-randomized design and limited number of matched patients, our findings – derived from two prospective cohorts – suggest that R-miniCHOP may offer outcomes comparable to R-CHOP, particularly with respect to LSS. While these results support R-miniCHOP as an appropriate frontline option, treatment decisions remain highly individualized. These data may help inform clinical decision-making and provide a basis for designing future trials targeting this population, where R-miniCHOP could serve as a comparator arm. Funding: NU21-03-00411, U01 CA195568.