Citations

Abstract Background Primary central nervous system lymphoma (PCNSL) is a rare but aggressive non-Hodgkin lymphoma with limited prospective data to guide optimal therapy. This study evaluates real-world treatment patterns and survival outcomes using a large national cohort. Methods We analyzed data from the National Cancer Database (NCDB) for patients diagnosed with PCNSL between 2004 and 2020. Baseline demographics and treatment characteristics were analyzed using descriptive statistics. Survival outcomes were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method and compared using log-rank tests. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards models were constructed to identify independent predictors of overall survival (OS). Results A total of 14,450 patients with PCNSL were included; 14,439 had first-line treatment data available, and 13,390 had survival data. Median age at diagnosis was 67 years (range 18-90), 49.2% were female, and 6.6% were African American. Chemotherapy alone was the modality of treatment for 81.6% (n=11,787), 12.2% (n=1,769) received chemoradiation, 3.8% (n=545) received chemotherapy and underwent autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) but no radiation, and 2.4% (n=348) received radiation only. The median follow-up time was 73.5 months (95% CI 71.4-75.6), and the median OS for the group was 17.4 months (95% CI 16.2-18.6). Survival differed significantly by age group (median OS: <65 yrs, 46.1 months [95% CI 41.7 -50.6]; 65-79 yrs, 12.5 months [95% CI 11.2-13.7]; ≥80 yrs, 3.2 months [95% CI 2.9-3.5]; p<0.001), by year of diagnosis (median OS: 2004-2009, 11.0 months [95% CI 9.9-12.1]; 2010-2015, 20.0 months [95% CI 17.4-22.6], 2016-2020, 29.7 months [95% CI 26.0-33.4]; p<0.001), and by frontline treatment strategy (p<0.001). Patients treated with chemotherapy followed by ASCT had the longest median OS (not reached), while those receiving radiation alone had the poorest outcomes with a median OS of 3.9 months (95% CI 3.2-4.7); chemoradiation patients had a median OS of 31.8 months (95% CI 27.5-36.1), and chemotherapy only patients had a median OS of 13.9 months (95% CI 12.7-15.1)(p<0.001). African American patients had an inferior outcome with a median OS of 10.2 months [95% CI 7.2-13.1], compared to “other” races with a median OS of 36.9 months [95% CI 27.6-46.1] (p<0.001), although this is more similar to the median outcome for white patients (17.0 months [95% CI 15.8-18.3]). Treatment at an academic center (25.7 vs 11.0 months) and a high case-volume center (defined as >median number of cases per facility) (18.6 vs 10.5 months), and lower Charlson-Deyo comorbidity scores (CDS) (defined as CDS 0-1) (21.7 vs 6.8 months) were also associated with superior OS (p<0.001). In multivariable analysis, increasing age ( 65-79 y.o HR 1.60 [1.52-1.1.68], ≥80 y.o HR 2.95 [2.75-3.17]), CDS≥2 (HR 1.36 [1.28-1.44]), and African American race (HR 1.12 [1.02-1.24]) were adverse predictors of OS (all p<0.001), while treatment strategy (ASCT [HR 0.17], chemoradiation [HR 0.53], chemotherapy only [HR 0.68] compared to radiation alone), more recent year of diagnosis (2010-2015 [HR 0.81], 2016-2020 [0.70]), and treatment at an academic center [HR 0.81] remained predictors of superior OS (all p<0.001). Conclusion In this large national cohort of patients with PCNSL, treatment with chemotherapy followed by ASCT was associated with the most favorable survival outcomes. Patients treated with chemoradiation or multi-agent chemotherapy also demonstrated improved survival compared to those receiving radiation monotherapy or single-agent chemotherapy alone, respectively. Age, comorbidities, race, and treatment at academic centers were also significant independent predictors of OS. These findings highlight substantial disparities in outcomes and underscore the importance of optimizing treatment strategies, improving access to high-intensity therapies, and supporting timely referral to academic or high case-volume centers, particularly for younger and medically fit patients.

Abstract Background: Given a potential risk of extravasation with vesicants and irritants, central venous catheters (CVCs), such as port-a-cath or peripherally inserted central catheters (PICC), are commonly used for the administration of anthracycline-based chemotherapy. However, CVC placement can result in treatment delay, deep vein thrombosis (DVT), catheter malfunction, and added burdens (eg, financial, travel, etc), partly due to the need for regular flushing. Peripheral intravenous (PIV) access is often utilized in the academic setting with select frontline chemotherapy regimens. However, there is limited data reporting on the safety of PIV in this setting. This large, multicenter RWA evaluated the use and associated complications of PIV and CVC for administering CHOP- or ABVD-based chemotherapy in patients (pts) with lymphoma. Methods: We conducted a retrospective RWA across 8 U.S. centers among pts aged ≥18 years with non-Hodgkin lymphoma and Hodgkin lymphoma who were consecutively treated with ABVD or CHOP-based anthracycline chemotherapy via PIV or CVC access between 2010-2024. Choice of catheter placement was at the discretion of the pt's treating physician. Detailed baseline and safety data were collected. The primary outcome was extravasation; secondary outcomes included infiltration, DVT, cellulitis, erythema, and pain. Standard definitions of extravasation and other complications were used (Jackson-Rose J. CJON 2017). Rates of complications were compared via Fischer exact testing. Results: A total of 1,414 pts were included in the analysis: 790 in each arm (ie, PIV vs CVC). Of these, 624 were unique to each group, while 166 pts received chemotherapy via both modalities (PIV and CVC during the treatment course). Overall, 78.9% of pts completed all treatment as planned via PIV. Median age was 63 years (IQR 45–75) in the PIV group and 61 years (IQR 40–73) in the CVC group. Male sex comprised 57% vs 51%, ECOG 0–1 performance status was 83% vs 76%, and advanced-stage disease (stage III/IV) was present in 51% vs 62%, respectively. Lymphoma subtypes were comparable: DLBCL/high-grade/B-cell NOS (54.5% vs 56.1%), Hodgkin lymphoma (27.2% vs 27.5%), T-cell lymphoma (12.4% vs 6.6%), and indolent/mantle cell lymphoma (5.6% vs 6.7%). Among those receiving chemotherapy via CVC, 78.5% were treated through a port-a-cath and 21.5% via PICC. CHOP-based and ABVD-based regimens were administered to 68% and 32% of PIV pts, and 69.6% and 30.4% of CVC pts, respectively. A total of 4,084 (PIV) vs 3,859 (CVC) treatment cycles were delivered, corresponding to 4,347 (PIV) vs 4,884 (CVC) anthracycline infusion days. There was 1 documented case of extravasation in the CVC group and 2 suspected cases in the PIV group (p=0.9); for PIV, this translates to a per pt risk of 0.3% (or 0.05% of infusion days). The two PIV cases involved elderly women with DLBCL receiving CHOP. Both developed localized symptoms post-infusion and were treated conservatively (DMSO/warm compresses or dexrazoxane/ice), with full symptom resolution within 1 week and 1 day, respectively. No tissue or vascular injury occurred. Additionally, there were no significant differences between the PIV and CVC groups in the rates of induration/swelling (1.8% vs 2.0%, p=0.85), phlebitis/cellulitis (2.4% vs 2.4%, p=0.9), venous thromboembolism (VTE; 1.4% vs 2.0%, p=0.32), or erythema (3.8% vs 5.1%, p=0.27). Pain or tenderness at the infusion site (8.5% vs 2.9%, p=0.001) and infiltration (1.4 vs 0.13%, p=0.006) were more frequent in the PIV group. Chronic vascular complications related to prior VTE was slightly lower in the PIV group (0.13% vs 0.9%, p=0.06), but not significant. Additional details from a propensity score-matched analysis will be presented at the meeting. Conclusions: This is the largest known analysis to date evaluating the safety of PIV access for anthracycline-based chemotherapy in >1,500 lymphoma pts over a recent 15-year period, representing >9,000 total treatments with CHOP or ABVD. PIV access was found to be safe and associated with a low rate of serious complications. Moreover, extravasation was rare and there was not a significant difference observed between PIV and CVC use. While PIV use was associated with higher rates of local pain/tenderness and infiltration, the events were uncommon and self-limited. Despite the widespread default to CVC placement in many centers, these findings support the selective use of PIV in appropriate pts as elucidated here.

Abstract Background: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have been established as standard of care for patients with classical Hodgkin lymphoma (cHL), including relapsed or refractory (r/r) disease. However, ICIs discontinued in some patients due to treatment-related toxicities or disease progression may later be re-initiated. The outcomes of this common clinical practice of ICI re-initiation, or ‘rechallenge,‘ have not been evaluated. Here, we present real-world efficacy and safety data of ICI rechallenge in patients with cHL. Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of patients with cHL treated with ICIs between 2015 and 2024 at Mayo Clinic sites. Patients were identified via institutional records using diagnostic and treatment codes. Included patients were adults ≥18 years with histologically confirmed diagnosis of cHL receiving ≥1 cycle of ICI therapy. Patients in the rechallenge cohort received a second course of ICI therapy following discontinuation of the initial ICI for any reason. The control cohort included patients with ICI discontinuation without subsequent rechallenge. Primary outcomes included progression-free survival (PFS), event-free survival (EFS), and duration of response (DOR), defined respectively as time from first ICI initiation to disease progression, time from first ICI initiation to disease progression, adverse events, treatment change, or death, and time from first recorded response per positron emission tomography–computed tomography until the occurrence of disease progression. Secondary outcomes included overall survival (OS), and incidence and severity of irAEs following ICI rechallenge. Survival outcomes were compared using propensity-score-matched (PSM) cohorts with a proportional Cox model. Results: A total of 145 patients were included. Of these, 30 (21%) underwent ICI rechallenge, while 115 (79%) received no subsequent ICI treatments. The median age was 40 years (interquartile range [IQR] 26-66). Most were male (59%), predominantly nodular sclerosis subtype (71%), Ann Arbor stage III-IV disease (65%), and ECOG ≤ 1 (96%). ICIs were utilized for r/r disease in 66%, with median 6 (IQR 4-13) cycles and follow up of 40.8 months (IQR 21.1–78.1). Patients received median 1 prior line of therapy (IQR 0-2.5). During initial ICI treatment, 34/145 patients (23%) experienced irAEs, including 17 patients (57%) in the rechallenge group and 17 (15%) in the non-rechallenge group. Most irAEs were of grade 1–2 severity, though 10 (30%) experienced grades ≥3 irAEs. irAE severity did not differ between groups. Among patients who underwent ICI rechallenge, the majority (53%) discontinued due to irAEs. The decision to pursue ICI rechallenge was driven predominantly by disease progression (63%). Among the 1:1 PSM cohorts using bone marrow transplant status and the International Prognostic Score, PFS did not significantly differ between rechallenged vs. non-rechallenged groups (HR 1.7, 95% CI 0.60–4.5, p=0.32). Similarly, no difference was noted among the groups in EFS and DOR using 1:3 PSM cohorts using the number of ICI cycles (HR 1.6, 95% CI 0.83–3.0, p = 0.16 and HR 1.6, 95% CI 0.37–7.0, p = 0.53, respectively). In the 1:1 matched cohort, ICI rechallenge was not associated with inferior OS compared to those without rechallenge (HR 1.6, 95% CI 0.48–5.4, p=0.43). irAE occurred in 20%, including pneumonitis (n=2), hepatitis (n=1), and pancreatitis (n = 1). Of the patients who had experienced irAEs during their initial ICI course, only two developed recurrent irAEs of the same type upon rechallenge, both at reduced severity. Overall, 80% of rechallenged patients did not experience any irAE with their second ICI course. Conclusions: ICI rechallenge was not associated with inferior PFS, EFS, DOR or OS compared patients without rechallenge. Among patients receiving ICI rechallenge after irAE, recurrence of same irAE was rare. ICI rechallenge may be a feasible and potentially effective strategy in selected patients with cHL.

Abstract Introduction: Brentuximab vedotin (BV) was approved by the US FDA for relapsed/refractory (R/R) classical Hodgkin lymphoma (cHL) in 2011 and for previously untreated advanced stage cHL in 2018. The immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) nivolumab and pembrolizumab were approved for R/R cHL in 2016 and 2017, respectively. These novel agents have significantly changed the landscape of cHL management in recent years. In this study, we analyzed data from the National Cancer Database (NCDB) to investigate whether survival outcomes have improved in the novel agent era (2011 and beyond) for patients with cHL in the US. Methods: Patients diagnosed with cHL between 2004 and 2020 were identified in the NCDB. Those with missing survival data were excluded. Three treatment eras were defined based on the timing of FDA approval of novel agents: Chemo era (2004–2010), BV era (2011–2015), and ICI era (2016–2020). Patient and disease characteristics were compared using the Chi-square test. Survival analyses were conducted using the Kaplan-Meier method and Cox proportional hazards model. Results: A total of 85,488 patients with newly diagnosed cHL were identified: 36,150 in the Chemo era, 27,058 in the BV era, and 22,280 in the ICI era. Compared to the chemo era, the BV and/or ICI eras included slightly more patients aged ≥66 (17.3% vs 17.8% vs 19.5%), male (53.6% vs 54.6% vs 53.8%, p=0.042), Black (11.3% vs 12.9% vs 12.5%), Hispanic (9.0% vs 9.9% vs 10.9%), with Charlson-Deyo score ≥1 (14.2% vs 16.1% vs 17.2%), B symptoms (44.1% vs 46.9% vs 46.9%), treated at academic centers (32.4% vs 35.9% vs 36.4%), on Medicaid (9.5% vs 12.2% vs 13.7%) or Medicare (19.3% vs 20.3% vs 21.7%), and with higher income (≥4th quartile by 2008-2012 standard; 34.5% vs 34.3% vs 36.3%) (all p<0.001 except for sex, noted above). Ann Arbor stage data were not available in the ICI era. There were slightly more patients with advanced-stage disease in the BV era compared to the Chemo era (45.4% vs 40.3%, p<0.001). IPS scores were available for only 2,344 patients, with a similar distribution (0–2 vs 3–7) across the three eras (p=0.957). The median follow-up was 6.9 years (95% CI 6.9-7.0). Overall survival (OS) significantly improved in the novel agent eras: the 5-year OS rate was 79.8% (95% CI, 79.4%–81.2%) for patients diagnosed in the Chemo era, 81.9% (95% CI, 81.9%–82.4%) in the BV era, and 84.1% (95% CI, 83.5%–84.8%) in the ICI era (p<0.001). Statistically significant OS improvements were observed across all subgroups, including age (≤40: 92.8% vs 94.9% vs 96.5%, 41-65: 80.5% vs 81.8% vs 84.4%, ≥66: 41.4% vs 46.6% vs 52.7%), sex (male: 78.0% vs 80.0% vs 81.9%, female: 81.9% vs 84.1% vs 86.7%), race (White: 79.9% vs 81.6% vs 83.7%, Black: 77.2% vs 81.2% vs 84.6%, others: 84.5% vs 87.0% vs 89.3%), ethnicity (Hispanic 79.7% vs 82.3% vs 85.1%, Non-Hispanic 80.0% vs 81.9% vs 84.1%), Charlson-Deyo score (0: 83.5% vs 85.4% vs 87.9%, 1: 62.8% vs 68.2% vs 73.2%, 2: 42.5% vs 52.6% vs 58.3%, 3+: 49.0% vs 54.4% vs 51.7%), B symptoms (yes: 74.7% vs 78.9% vs 81.5%, no: 84.3% vs 85.1% vs 87.5%), treatment facility type (academic: 69.8% vs 74.0% vs 77.1%, non-academic: 66.4% vs 67.6% vs 70.2%, unknown: 92.9% vs 95.0% vs 96.5%), insurance type (private: 89.9% vs 91.2% vs 93.4%, Medicare: 46.5% vs 52.3% vs 57.2%, Medicaid: 79.1% vs 84.5% vs 87.7%) and income level (Q1: 74.1% vs 77.1% vs 81.1%, Q2 77.7% vs 80.1% vs 81.3%, Q3 79.8% vs 81.6% vs 85.2%, Q4: 82.8% vs 84.9% vs 87.0%) (all p<0.001). In multivariate Cox regression analysis adjusting for age, sex, race, ethnicity, Charlson-Deyo score, B symptoms, treatment facility type, insurance type, and income level, diagnosis in the BV era (HR = 0.856; 95% CI, 0.827–0.885; p<0.001) and ICI era (HR = 0.666; 95% CI, 0.636–0.698; p<0.001) was independently associated with improved OS compared to the Chemo era. Conclusions: In this large NCDB-based analysis, survival outcomes for patients with cHL significantly improved in the BV and ICI eras compared to the Chemo era. OS improvement was consistent across all subgroups and remained independent of age, sex, race, ethnicity, Charlson-Deyo score, B symptoms, treatment facility type, insurance type, and income level in multivariate analysis. These findings may reflect the positive impact of BV and ICIs on survival in patients with cHL.

Abstract Secondary central nervous system lymphoma (SCNSL) is defined as the diagnosis of CNS lymphoma diagnosed concurrently with systemic lymphoma or after prior treatment. Due to the poor prognosis associated with SCNSL, the lack of randomized trial data, and the need for international consensus guidelines, there is a high unmet need for effective therapy options for SCNSL. Here we present safety and efficacy data on 2 SCNSL patients treated with the combination of emavusertib and ibrutinib. Both patients had directly progressed on their prior BTKi treatment. One patient achieved an unconfirmed complete response (CRu) and remained on treatment for over 4 mos, while the other patient maintained stable disease (SD) with a 38% reduction in disease burden from baseline and was on treatment for more than 8 mos. The patient with a durable SD, who received 5 prior lines of therapy along with an ASCT, presented with 3 related AEs Grade ≥ 3 that were reversible and manageable. These included elevated ALT, AST, and bilirubin levels that resolved. The patient received emavusertib 300 mg BID and ibrutinib 560 mg QD. The CRu patient received 6 prior lines of therapy and experienced CK elevation, fatigue, hypoglycemia, sepsis, urinary retention, neutropenia, and constipation that resolved with either a dose reduction and/or supportive care. The initial dose for this patient was 150 mg emavusertib BID and ibrutinib 560 mg QD. Subsequently, the dose of emavusertib was decreased to 150 mg BID due to Grade 4 neutropenia, then increased to 200 mg AM and 150 mg PM once resolved. This patient achieved CRu within 60 days on treatment. The 2 patients presented here are supportive data for using the combination of emavusertib and ibrutinib in SCNSL.

Abstract There are no approved treatments for relapsed/refractory (R/R) PCNSL. We show promising efficacy in the salvage setting using emavusertib in combination with ibrutinib, which targets the BCR and TLR pathways. These 2 major pathways are associated with activation of NF-κB. Updated safety and efficacy data of this combination in R/R PCNSL from the ongoing Phase 1/2 TakeAim Lymphoma trial (NCT03328078) will be presented. As of 01 May 2025, 33 patients with R/R PCNSL were treated with emavusertib in combination with ibrutinib. Eligible patients receive emavusertib in combination with ibrutinib until tumor progression or unacceptable toxicity. Median age was 63 years (range 43-81); 16 patients were male. Median prior anti-cancer therapy was 2 (range 1-5); 26 (78.8%) patients had prior BTKi exposure. Median duration of emavusertib/ibrutinib treatment was 51 days (range 5-798). Grade ≥ 3 treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) were reported in 11 (33.3%) patients; neutropenia in 5 (15.2%) patients, amylase increased, lipase increased, and leukopenia in 2 (6.1%) patients each. The majority of Grade ≥ 3 TRAEs were reversible and manageable. Among the 19 BTKi-experienced patients treated for ≥ 28 days, there were 5 CRs and 2 PRs, with an ORR of 36.8%. Three patients with CR were on treatment for 10+ mos, with 1 CR patient ongoing with DOT of 26.2+ mos. Among the 5 BTKi-naïve patients treated for ≥ 28 days, 1 achieved CR and 3 had PR, with ORR of 80%; the CR patient is ongoing with DOT of 18.1+ mos. The ORR in the combined population was 45.8% (6 CRs; 5 PRs). The combination of emavusertib and ibrutinib demonstrates promising clinical activity and an acceptable safety profile in patients with R/R PCNSL. This regimen appears capable of overcoming resistance to prior BTKi therapy. Patient enrollment in this trial continues.

Abstract PCNSL is a rare and aggressive NHL with no approved treatments for R/R patients, representing a critical unmet need. MyD88 mutations in ~70% of PCNSL patients drive IRAK4 activation, promoting NF-κB signaling, inflammation, and tumor progression. Emavusertib, a potent oral IRAK4 inhibitor, crosses the blood-brain barrier and shows preclinical synergy with BTKis, and has the ability to re-sensitize BTKi-resistant cell lines. This study evaluates the molecular and PK data associated with responses to emavusertib + ibrutinib combination therapy in R/R PCNSL patients. The safety, clinical activity, and potential biomarkers of emavusertib in R/R PCNSL are being investigated in the ongoing TakeAim Lymphoma trial (NCT03328078). Pre-dose and 1.5-hour post-dose plasma samples were collected on Day 1 of Cycles 3, 5, and 7. CSF samples were obtained via a lumbar puncture within 1.5 hrs of collection of the post-dose plasma PK sample on Cycle 3 Day 1. As of 06 December 2024, CSF concentration was available for 7 patients. The mean emavusertib concentration in CSF was 81.3 ng/ml (54.7-104.0) in patients receiving 100 mg emavusertib BID (n=4). In patients receiving 200 mg emavusertib BID (n=3), the mean emavusertib concentration in CSF was higher at 175.7 ng/ml (114.8-209.4), which is 2.2 × the mean value in patients who received 100 mg emavusertib BID (p-value = 0.02). MyD88 mutation status was available for 7 patients of which all had prior BTKi exposure. Among these patients, 6 had MyD88 mutations of which 4 had responded (3 CRs and 1 PR) to the combination with DOR up to 18.9 mos with data collection ongoing. Preliminary CNS PK data demonstrate that emavusertib concentration in CSF increases with increasing emavusertib dose. Patients with MyD88 mutations showed expected promising preliminary efficacy to emavusertib + ibrutinib combination and may overcome BTKi resistance. Enrollment is ongoing.

Abstract Purpose: Polatuzumab vedotin (polatuzumab) was approved for up-front treatment of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma in combination with chemoimmunotherapy (Pola-R-CHP) based on the POLARIX trial. However, when stratified by cell of origin (COO), polatuzumab seems to have greater efficacy in activated B-cell than germinal center B-cell (GCB) subtype disease. Most studies of polatuzumab used RNA expression to assess COO, whereas in routine clinical practice, the immunohistochemistry-based Hans algorithm is used. Experimental Design: To assess the impact of COO by immunohistochemistry on polatuzumab efficacy, we conducted a multicenter real-world study of adults with large B-cell lymphoma (LBCL) receiving polatuzumab from 2015 to 2024, split by receipt of polatuzumab in first-line versus relapsed/refractory settings. The primary endpoint was overall response rate (ORR) to polatuzumab-based treatment in GCB versus non-GCB relapsed/refractory LBCL. Results: Of 740 patients, 305 received polatuzumab in the first-line setting and 435 in the relapsed/refractory setting. In the relapsed/refractory cohort, the ORR in non-GCB versus GCB LBCL was 59.7% versus 36.3% [OR, 2.6; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.77–3.84; P < 0.0001], with a complete response rate of 35.7% versus 17.7% (OR, 2.6; 95% CI, 1.66–4.02; P < 0.0001). Progression-free survival was longer for patients with non-GCB versus GCB COO (HR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.5–0.83; P = 0.0006). In the first-line cohort, ORR, complete response rate, and progression-free survival were similar in non-GCB versus GCB LBCL, as hypothesized based on outcomes in the Pola-R-CHP arm of POLARIX, suggesting that the addition of polatuzumab overcomes the adverse risk of non-GCB COO in patients receiving R-CHOP. Conclusions: Based on these data, COO classification by the Hans algorithm is a strong predictor of polatuzumab efficacy in LBCL, informing real-world treatment decisions.

Abstract Background In the current Canadian treatment landscape for relapsed or refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (R/R DLBCL), eligibility for autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) guides the choice of salvage treatment. CD19 chimeric antigen receptor T-cell (CAR-T) therapies have improved outcomes in patients with chemorefractory DLBCL, but access is limited to eligible patients. This subanalysis of the RE-MIND2 observational retrospective cohort study investigated treatment patterns for R/R DLBCL in Canada. Patients and methods Data from patients enrolled in RE-MIND2 treated between 2010 and 2020 at 2 Canadian centers were retrospectively collected from health records. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze baseline characteristics, treatment initiated, and duration of treatment by line of therapy. Results One hundred and nine patients were included; 74.2% of patients were eligible for ASCT as 2L therapy, and 45.4% received transplants. ASCT eligibility for third- (3L) and fourth-line (4L) therapy declined to 17.1% and 5.9%, respectively. Patients received a wide variety of treatments in 3 and 4L. CAR-T therapy became available in 3 and 4L by the end of 2019. Median durations of treatment were <2.6 months in all lines of therapy; median time to next treatment ranged from 3.4 months in 4L to 5.3 months in 2L. Conclusion Results of our study support that ASCT-ineligible patients have a poor prognosis with conventional salvage chemotherapy. Before the availability of novel immunotherapies, no apparent standard of care was observed for Canadian patients with R/R DLBCL who were ineligible for or did not receive ASCT, especially after 2L treatment.