Citations

Abstract Background: Chimeric Antigen Receptor T-cell therapy (CAR-T) has revolutionized the treatment landscape of hematological cancers, including B-cell non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL), multiple myeloma (MM), and acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL). However, the cardiac toxicity profile of this therapy is not well described in the literature. The majority of patients receiving CAR-T are older adults who may have pre-existing cardiovascular risk factors, received prior cardiotoxic therapy including anthracycline, alkylators, corticosteroids, proteosome inhibitors, radiation, autologous and allogeneic stem cell transplants. Due to a stricter patient selection for CAR-T clinical trials, cardiac adverse events (AEs) are infrequent. As the survival of patients with hematological malignancies continues to improve with advancements in therapy, it becomes critical to consider the cumulative cardiotoxic effects of these therapies. Therefore, a post-marketing pharmacovigilance analysis of the cardiac AEs reported to the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) for each CAR-T product was conducted to address this knowledge gap. Methods: All individual case safety reports of cardiac AEs listing any of the approved CAR-T therapies [Tisagenlecleucel (Tisa-cel), Axicabtagene ciloleucel (Axi-cel), Lisocabtagene maraleucel (Liso-cel), Brexucabtagene autoleucel (Brexu-cel), Idecabtagene vicleucel (Ide-cel), Ciltacabtagene autoleucel (Cilta-cel) and Obecabtagene autoleucel (Obe-cel)] as the suspected drug were identified from the FAERS database. Patient characteristics, including primary malignancy, age, sex, CAR-T product and AEs were described. Disproportionality analysis was performed using Reported Odds Ratio (ROR) to determine significant associations between CAR-T products and cardiac AEs. Results: There were 1362 cardiac AEs after CAR-T therapy reported in the FAERS database(602 with Axi-cel, 444 with Tisa-cel, 77 with Cilta-cel, 81 with Ide-cel, 128 with Brexu-cel, 30 with Liso-cel and 0 with Obe-cel).Of these, 57% were males, 8.6% occurred in patients <18 yrs, 35.4% in 18–64 yrs, and 32% in >65 yrs. There were 778 reports of arrythmias, 158 heart failures, 184 cardiac arrests, 43 pericardial AEs, 16 valvular AEs, 59 ischemic AEs, 10 cardiogenic shock, 8 myocarditis, and 106 other cardiac disorders (cardiac thrombus, cardiomegaly, cardiac rupture, orthostatic hypotension, hypertensive emergency/crisis etc.). In the entire cohort, males were more likely to develop pericardial (ROR=3.55, p=0.004) and valvular disorders (ROR=9.13, p=0.03), with females developing heart failure (ROR=1.61, p=0.005). Patients <18 years had a higher incidence of pericardial (ROR=3.44, p=0.006) and valvular disease (ROR=12.79, p<0.0001), while adults aged >65 had higher propensity of developing atrial tachyarrhythmias (ROR=2.74, p<0.0001), ventricular arrhythmias (ROR=3.04, p=0.001) and cardiogenic shock (ROR=8.38, p=0.05), and a trend towards higher risk of developing acute coronary syndrome (ACS) (ROR=1.79, p=0.06). For ischemic cardiac AEs, Brexu-cel was associated with increased risk of myocardial infarction (ROR=2.34, p=0.04), and Ide-cel was associated with elevated troponin levels (ROR=6.23, p=0.002). For functional cardiac AEs, Tisa-cel was associated with cardiac arrest (ROR=1.68, p=0.001), pericardial disorders (effusion, tamponade and pericarditis) (ROR=3.56, p<0.001), valvular disorders (ROR=55.97, p<0.0001), myocarditis (ROR=6.2, p=0.012) and heart failure (ROR=2.24, p<0.001). B-ALL was associated with higher odds of cardiac arrest (ROR=1.63, p=0.018). For conduction-related cardiac AEs, Brexu-cel had higher rates of brady-arrythmias (ROR=1.86, p=0.04), Cilta-cel had increased incidence of atrioventricular block (ROR=7.87, p=0.02), and tachy-arrhythmias (ROR=1.71, p=0.0001). Tisa-cel was associated with increased risk of any arrhythmias (ROR=1.68, p<0.001). Axi-cel was associated with higher odds of developing orthostatic hypotension (ROR=2.57, p=0.019). Conclusion: This post-marketing pharmacovigilance analysis highlights patterns of cardiac AEs following CAR-T therapy. Trends in AEs based on CAR-T product, age, and sex support the ongoing need for vigilance for these unique toxicities. As this study is limited by FAERS reporting bias, prospective studies to validate these associations and elucidate the underlying mechanisms are needed, incorporating prior systemic therapies and baseline characteristics of patients undergoing CAR-T therapy.

Abstract Background Chimeric antigen receptor T-cell (CAR-T) and bispecific antibody (BsAb) therapies are both effective for patients with relapsed/refractory (R/R) follicular lymphoma (FL), but differ in treatment schedules and associated “time toxicity,” or contact days spent physically interacting with the healthcare system. While contact days can be estimated from clinical trials, real-world data provides a more nuanced depiction of treatment-related time burden, which may guide treatment decision-making. The comparative time toxicity of CAR-T vs BsAb in R/R FL is not defined. Methods We conducted a multicenter retrospective study of adults with R/R grade 1-3A FL who received standard-of-care CAR-T (axi-cel, tisa-cel, liso-cel) or BsAb (mosunetuzumab, epcoritamab) in the third-line or later setting before Jan 1, 2025. Time toxicity was defined as outpatient or inpatient days with physical health care system contact, counting multiple visits on the same day as only one day. All days after treatment initiation were counted, regardless of disease progression, therapy completion, or relation to FL therapy. Median contact days over 1-year time horizon were compared, stratified by CAR-T vs BsAb, prior lines of therapy (LOT, 2 vs 3+), and time intervals (0-1, 1-3, 3-6, 6-9, and 9-12 months). Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were calculated from day of CAR-T infusion or day 1, cycle 1 for BsAb. Cox regression and propensity matching (by age, ECOG, refractory to prior LOT, POD24) were used to assess predictors and survival associations with contact days. Results Among 209 patients from 15 U.S. academic centers, median age was 64, 37% were female, 61% received CAR-T (80% axi-cel, 7% liso-cel, 13% tisa-cel) and 39% BsAb (93% mosun, 7% epcor). Most had Grade 1-2 FL (72%), advanced stage (84%), and extranodal disease (51%). Median prior LOT was 3 (range 2-15), 41% were refractory to prior LOT, and 52% had POD24. Median number of BsAb doses was 10 (range 1-36). Patients receiving BsAb were significantly older (p<.01) and had higher CIRS comorbidity scores (p<.02) in both 2 and 3+ prior LOT cohorts, and had higher ECOG scores (p=.01) and were less likely to be refractory to prior LOT (p=.029) in 3+ LOT cohort. There were no differences in POD24 rates between CAR-T and BsAb. Median PFS for the entire cohort was 3.6 yrs; median OS was not reached. In the 2 prior LOT cohort (N=75), 60% received CAR-T and 40% BsAb. With median follow-up of 1.5 years, median PFS was not reached for CAR-T and 1.6 yrs for BsAb (p<.0001). In the 3+ prior LOT cohort (N=134), 62% received CAR-T and 38% BsAb. With median follow-up of 2 yrs, median PFS was 3.6 yrs for CAR-T and 1.6 yrs for BsAb (p=.0044). In propensity matched analysis, PFS was shorter for BsAb in both 2 LOT (HR 9.0, 95% CI 1.14-71.04, p=.037) and 3+ LOT (HR 3.25, 95% CI 1.06-9.97, p=.039) cohorts as compared to CAR-T. There were no significant differences in OS between CAR-T and BsAb. Median contact days were significantly higher for CAR-T vs BsAb in the 0-1 month interval: 19 vs 8 days in 2 LOT (p<.0001) and 18 vs 7 days in 3+ LOT (p<.0001) cohorts. There were no differences in contact days between CAR-T vs BsAb in subsequent time intervals. Over 1 year, CAR-T had significantly more time toxicity than BsAb: median 51 vs 36 contact days in 2 LOT (p<.0001) and 64 vs 38 days in 3L+ LOT (p<.0001) cohorts; these remained significant in the matched analysis. B symptoms (p=.04) and Grade ≥3 cytopenias (p=.007) were associated with higher contact days in 3+ LOT cohort in univariable analysis. Higher contact days were associated with inferior PFS (HR 1.01, 95% CI 1.00-1.02, p=.032) and OS (HR 1.01, 95% CI 1.00-1.02, p=.038) in 3+ LOT cohort regardless of treatment type. Discussion In this large real-world cohort of patients with R/R FL, CAR-T therapy resulted in better PFS but more time toxicity over the first year as compared to BsAb therapy. Excess time toxicity from CAR-T was driven by more contact days in the first month of treatment. This study provides benchmark data for counseling patients about expected time burden of CAR-T (51-64 days) and BsAb (36-38 days) over the first year of these therapies. Further, with superior PFS of CAR-T in this study and minimal impact of time toxicity on survival outcomes, these data can be used to better support shared decision-making in R/R FL by addressing patient preferences regarding both contact days as well as duration of disease control.

207 Background: CAR-T & bispecific antibodies (BsAb) for large B-cell lymphoma offer deep responses, but have unique toxicities requiring close monitoring. Different practice settings have varied strategies for managing these toxicities, leading to increased costs, healthcare resource use, & reduced quality of life. With no direct comparison, rationale for therapy selection may vary. This study explores provider choices, sequencing strategies & access barriers. Methods: A survey of US-based Hematologists was conducted on practice demographics, therapy availability, preferences, & barriers in LBCL. Responses were analyzed across clinical scenarios. Results: Responses were received from 45 physicians. Availability of CAR-T & BsAb varied with 75% prescribing both, & only BsAb being available at 9% of providers’ centers. There was a strong preference for CAR-T over BsAb—higher among academic vs. nonacademic providers (96% vs. 78%; p = 0.03) & at CAR-T vs. non-CAR-T centers (100% vs. 72%; p = 0.001). Even at BsAb-only centers, preference leaned toward CAR-T, though notably lower compared to CAR-T centers. Among centers without either, 86% preferred CAR-T. Practice volume had no impact. Reasons for favoring CAR-T included perceived better outcomes (55%), shorter treatment (26%), center choice (19%), more experience (48%), & curative potential (21%). BsAb selection was driven by CAR-T unavailability & logistical barriers (distance to specialized center, insurance delays, referral complexity, manufacturing time, & hospitalization needs). Axi-cel was preferred by 69% ( p = 0.0001) vs. other CAR-T for third-line or later due to experience with use, response rates, center choice, & logistical ease. Liso-cel (26%) & Tisa-cel (2%) were chosen for perceived favorable toxicity over Axi-cel. Axi-cel was also preferred second-line vs. Liso-cel (73% vs. 24%; p < 0.0001) for similar reasons. Among BsAb, Epcoritamab was favored by 56% for administration ease (subcutaneous), experience, & center preference; Glofitamab by 42% for shorter duration, experience, & center preference. There was no difference by academic vs nonacademic practice & volume for both CAR-T & BsAb. In patients with prior non-CAR-T anti-CD19 therapy, providers chose CD19 CAR-T over CD20 BsAb (80% vs. 18%; p < 0.0001). For relapse after second-line CAR-T, 78% providers preferred BsAb as the next line over other options ( p < 0.0001) due to more favorable response rates, toxicity profile, & experience with use. Providers prioritized response rates, survival, & toxicity profile in their treatment decisions. Logistics, duration, frequency, & cost were less important. There were no differences based on practice setting & CAR-T experience. Conclusions: Despite higher preference for CAR-T due to perceived superior outcomes, access barriers exist. Efforts to streamline referral pathways, logistics, & expand availability are crucial to improve outcomes.

e19008 Background: Cytokine release syndrome (CRS) is typically reversible in CAR-T therapy, while hyperinflammatory syndromes like macrophage activation-like syndrome (MAS-L) and high-grade immune effector cell-associated hemophagocytic syndrome (IEC-HS) are associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Early interventions are critical for improving outcomes. We aim to analyze clinical cytokine assays and cellular phenotypes early in hyperinflammatory syndromes to identify profiles for severe cases to inform management decisions. Methods: This study included 113 CAR-T patients (pt) (September 2019-March 2024) with cytokine profiles (CP) performed at the second tocilizumab dose or with suspected hyperinflammatory states (CP1), followed by assessments at 24 hours (CP24) and 48 hours (CP48). 52 pts consented to blood (PB) and bone marrow (BM) cell immune phenotyping at pre-treatment (pre-LD) and day 1 for PB. Results: Among the 113 pts, CRS pts (N=74), when compared to MAS-L(N=19) & IEC-HS (N=20) at CP1, had lower levels of TNF (median in pg/mL; 31, 62.9, 47.7) , IL-18 (794, 1353, 2011), and MCP-1 (689, 2722, 2485.5). While MAS-L and IEC-HS had similar CP1 profiles, CP24 and CP48 differed between them: TNF & MCP-1 levels decreased in MAS-L but remained elevated or increased in IEC-HS. IL-18 was stable in MAS-L but increased steadily daily in IEC-HS. Infections were more frequent in IEC-HS (CRS: 43%; MAS-L: 58%; IEC-HS: 85%; p=0.002). Notably, patients who died with persistent E. faecium bacteremia had higher IL-18 in CP48. In the 52 pts with cell phenotypes available by flow, 33 had CRS, 18 MAS-L and 8 IEC-HS. The correlation between cell phenotypes and cytokine levels showed that elevated TNF at CP1 correlated with increased non-classical monocytes in pre-LD BM and higher NK and NK-T cells in pre-LD PB. Similarly, elevated IL-18 CP48 levels correlated with increased CD8 T-cells, NK-T cells, and intermediate monocytes in pre-LD PB, as well as increased NK cells at both pre-LD and day 1 (Table). Conclusions: We report distinct cytokine profiles in IEC-HS early in the inflammatory course post-CAR-T therapy. These elevated cytokines correlate with specific immune cell subsets, including BM-resident monocytes, intermediate monocytes with heightened cytokine trafficking and inflammatory capacity. This study demonstrates the feasibility for identifying potential biomarkers for early risk stratification and targeted interventions. Cytokine Sample source Immune cells R P value TNF CP1 BM pre-LD Non-classical monocytes (CD14loCD16+) 0.38 0.025 PB pre-LD Monocytes (All) 0.47 0.022 NK cells (CD56+CD16+) 0.34 0.024 NK-T cells (CD3+CD56+CD16-) 0.29 0.04 IL-18 CP48 PB pre-LD CD8+ T-cells 0.59 0.0093 NK-T cells (CD3+CD56+CD16-) 0.53 0.023 Intermediate monocytes (CD14+CD16+) 0.58 0.012 PB pre-LD NK cells (CD56+CD16+) 0.56 0.49 0.015 0.024

Background: Multiple Myeloma (MM) is predominantly a disease of older adults. However, older patients vary widely in physiological status and treatment tolerance. The simplified frailty index (Facon 2020) incorporates age, ECOG performance status, and comorbidities (Charleston Comorbidity Index [CCI]) to classify patients as frail or non-frail. While frailty is associated with increased toxicity with conventional systemic therapies, its impact on outcomes of older patients treated with bispecific antibodies (BsAbs) has not been established. Thus, we conducted a retrospective study to evaluate the efficacy and toxicity of BsAbs in older patients based on frailty. Methods: This is a single institution study. We included patients with MM ≥65 years who initiated treatment with a BsAb at Mayo Clinic in Rochester, MN from August, 2018 to January, 2024. Patients who received a BsAb on trial or as standard of care were included. For patients who received 2 different BsAbs at different timepoints, we included the first treatment only. We grouped patients into frail and non-frail based on the simplified frailty index (score ≥2 = frail). We evaluated the overall response (ORR) and ≥very good partial response (VGPR) rates, progression-free (PFS) and overall (OS) survival, early mortality (within 90 days) including early non-relapse mortality (NRM), and toxicities including cytokine release syndrome (CRS), immune effector cell associated neurotoxicity syndrome (ICANS) and healthcare utilization. P values were insignificant (&gt;0.05) unless otherwise stated. PFS and OS were calculated from the day of BsAb start. Results: A total of 99 patients age 65-89 years were included. The products used were teclistamab (N=43), talquetamab (N=2), and investigational agents (N=54); 67% were ≥70 and 29% were ≥75 years; 39% were female, 95% were non-Hispanic White and 4% were Black/African American. Seventy patients (71%) were considered frail and 29 (29%) were non-frail. At the time of BsAb start, a higher proportion of frail patients had platelets &lt;75 x 10^9/L (30% vs 8%, P=0.04). Otherwise, there was no significant difference between frail and non-frail patients in age (median: 72 vs 70), hemoglobin &lt;8 g/dL (19% vs 12%), absolute neutrophil count &lt;1 x 10^9/L (6% vs 8%), presence of high-risk FISH (70% vs 60%), ISS stage 3 (32% vs 41%), high LDH (58% vs 61%), presence of extramedullary disease (39% vs 25%), serum creatinine ≥2 mg/dL (15% vs 8%), bone marrow plasma cell% (20% in both), triple- (83% vs 90%) and penta-class refractoriness (63% vs 48%), number of prior lines of therapy (median: 6 in both), prior exposure to BCMA-directed therapy (24% vs 21%, P=0.80) and prior autologous stem cell transplant (73% vs 86%). Step-up dosing was used in 81% vs 48% of patients (P=0.001), and treatment was initiated in the outpatient setting in 46% vs 28% (P=0.12) in frail and non-frail patients, respectively. The median follow-up was 1.9 (95%CI: 1.0-2.3) years. There was no significant difference between frail and non-frail patients in ORR (52% vs 62%), ≥VGPR (46% vs 48%), 1-year PFS (36% vs 48%, P=0.26), or 1-year OS (57% vs 61%, P=0.30), respectively. Age and CCI alone were not associated with PFS or OS, but ECOG &gt;1 was associated with decreased PFS (hazard ratio: 3.1, P=0.001) and OS (hazard ratio: 3.1, P&lt;0.001). There was no significant difference between frail vs non-frail patients in grade 3/4 thrombocytopenia (39% vs 17%, P=0.06), grade 3/4 neutropenia (27% vs 35%), total days of hospitalization (median: 8 vs 5, P=0.35), number of unplanned admissions in 6 months (median: 1 in both), or total hospital days for unplanned admissions (1 vs 2 days). There was no significant difference between frail and non-frail patients in early mortality (23% vs 10%, P=0.17), including early NRM (4% in both), CRS (59% vs 66%), grade 3-4 CRS (3% vs 7%), or CRS recurrence (21% vs 10%). ICANS occurred in 5 (9%) frail patients and 1 non-frail patient (grade 2); among frail patients, grades were: 1 in 3 patients, 3 in 1 patient, and 4 in 1 patient. Similarly, there was no significant difference in CRS/ICANS between the 2 groups when patients with and without step-up dosing were analyzed separately. Conclusion: Frailty, defined using the simplified frailty index, was not significantly associated with inferior efficacy or increased toxicity with BsAb therapy among older patients with MM. Poor performance status predicted inferior PFS and OS, while age and comorbidity scores did not.

Background and Methods: IEC-HS is a hyperinflammatory state with high morbidity and mortality. Effective interventions to reverse the process early in the clinical course may be critical to improve outcomes. We previously examined cytokine differences between IEC-HS and other secondary hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis, and found significant differences in the patterns and outcomes.(1) This study examines cytokine profiles (CP) of patients treated with CAR-T from 9/2019 to 3/2024 who developed CRS, MAS-L and IEC-HS. Demographics and lab results were compared among the three groups and correlated with outcomes. Results: CP was tested in 113 of 366 CAR-T patients: 74 with CRS, 19 with MAS-L, and 20 with IEC-HS. The racial distribution was 93% White/Caucasian, 2% Black or African American, 1% Asian, 1% Native American and 3% other or unavailable. No differences were seen in demographics between groups except a higher percentage of patients with ECOG performance status ≥2 in IEC-HS (p=0.037). Incidence of IEC-HS by disease: 3.6% (7/193) in lymphoma, 5% (8/159) myeloma and 28.5% (4/14) B-acute lymphoblastic leukemia (p=0.0002). Incidence of IEC-HS by CAR-T product: 3% (4/150) in Axi-cel, 23% (6/26) in Brexu-cel, 8% (1/13) in Tisa-cel, 5% each (3/60) in Cilta-cel and Ide-cel, and 0/17 in Liso-cel (p=0.001). Prior to lymphodepletion, labs were already different among the CRS, MAS-L, and IEC-HS groups: hemoglobin (g/dL: 11.1, 9.6, 8.45); platelets (x109/L: 168, 116, 52.5); ferritin (µg/L: 115, 946, 1944). CP was started when patients needed a second dose of tocilizumab or concern for developing MAS-L/IEC-HS, and continued daily until clinical improvement or resolution of inflammatory state. Tocilizumab and dexamethasone use were similar across groups. Other therapies used were vasopressors (3%, 10.5%, 45%; p&lt;0.0001), Methylprednisolone (20%, 31.6%, 50%; p=0.027), Anakinra (12%, 63%, 85%; p&lt;0.0001), Siltuximab (9.5%, 16%, 30%; p=0.06), Basiliximab (30% of IEC-HS), and continuous veno-venous hemofiltration (30% of IEC-HS). Among the first CP, the CRS group had lower levels of cytokines (in pg/mL) compared to MAS-L and IEC-HS groups: TNF (31, 62.9, 47.7), IL-10 (29.3, 97.7, 169), IL-18 (794, 1353, 2011), IFN-gamma (74, 281, 250), MCP-1 (689, 2722, 2485.5), MIP-1 alpha (220, 234, 247.5), IL-6 (&gt;315: 45%, 79%, 70%), soluble IL-2R alpha (&gt;4000: 45%, 84%, 70%). The percentage of patients who received anakinra before CP1 were 4% (CRS), 21% (MAS-L) and 25% (IEC-HS) (p=0.007). IL-1 beta was below threshold among all patients who received anakinra in CRS and MAS-L and 75% in IEC-HS, suggesting rapid and effective IL-1 suppression by anakinra except in IEC-HS. Cytokines trends 24 hours and 48 hours after the first CP differed between MAS-L and IEC-HS. MAS-L had decreased TNF (62.9, 40.4, 18.5) and MCP-1 (2722, 355, 104) while these cytokines remained elevated or increased in IEC-HS (TNF: 47.7, 105.5, 62.6; MCP-1: 2486, 2276, 1585). IL-18 was minimally elevated in MAS-L (1353, 1955, 3068) and significantly increased in IEC-HS (2011, 2420, 4048). Notably, CP2 and CP3 levels of these cytokines in IEC-HS were statistically significantly higher than corresponding CPs among CRS and MAS-L. In addition, patients who died with persistent E. faecium bacteremia had higher IL-18 on CP3. Infections occurred in 43%, 58%, and 85% respectively (p=0.002), including E. faecium bacteremia (3%, 5%, 35%; p=0.0004), CMV viremia (30% of IEC-HS patients vs. 11% of non-IEC-HS; p=0.025), and invasive fungal infections (15% of IEC-HS patients; p=0.0001). Between the IEC-HS and non-IEC-HS groups, day 100 non-relapse mortality was 35% vs. 0 (p&lt;0.0001), day 100 all-cause mortality was 45% vs. 3% (p&lt;0.0001), and E. faecium bacteremia-related deaths were 50% vs. 1% (p&lt;0.0001). Conclusions: CRS, MAS-L andIEC-HS are known complications of CAR-T. Cytokine-directed therapy can modify the cytokine milieu and control the inflammatory process. However, excess immunosuppression may result in life-threatening infections. Further studies are needed to identify optimal biomarker-guided immunosuppressive strategies to control the inflammatory cascade, while avoiding excess immunosuppression. References: 1. Leung, Nelson, et al. “Outcomes of patients who received CAR T cell therapy and developed IEC-HS treated with cytokine directed therapy.” (2024): 7516-7516.

Background: Despite effective front-line therapies, DLBCL & MM have high relapse rates. Novel therapies like CAR-T & bispecific antibodies (BsAb) offer deep & durable remission compared to salvage therapies, but have a unique toxicity profile (TP) that requires monitoring. With no head-to-head trials, the rationale for therapy selection may vary. This study explores provider choices, sequencing preferences, & access barriers. Methods: Two anonymous surveys (MM and DLBCL) of US-based Hematologists were conducted from 2/2024 to 6/2024, on practice settings, CAR-T & BsAb availability, treatment preferences & barriers. Responses were analyzed to assess preferences across clinical scenarios. Results: Surveys were completed by 37 MM & 45 DLBCL providers. Most were at centers offering both CAR-T & BsAb. Most gave CAR-T inpatient, & BsAb outpatient. CAR-T was given by 73% MM providers & 66% DLBCL (92% used Cilta-cel, 96% used Ide-cel; 100% used Axi-cel, 90% used Liso-cel & 73% Tisa-cel). In MM, 78% used Teclistamab, 60% Talquetamab & 24% Elranatamab. In DLBCL, 62% used Epcoritamab & 40% Glofitamab. Providers preferred CAR-T over BsAb in MM after 4+ prior lines of therapy (LOT) (89%), & in DLBCL after 2+ prior LOT (93%). CAR-T was favored more among academic providers & those at CAR-T centers. Practice volume did not impact selection. Among providers at centers with BsAb-only, CAR-T was preferred by 60% (MM) and 50% (DLBCL). Providers at centers without both favored CAR-T (MM: 75%, DLBCL: 86%). CAR-T was chosen for better outcomes, short treatment, center choice, & prior experience. Other factors that influenced decisions were lower incidence of cytopenia/infection & “BsAb effective post-CAR-T, less so vice versa” (MM), & “curative potential of CAR-T” (DLBCL). Logistical barriers & institutional constraints influenced BsAb selection: CAR-T unavailability, access to specialized centers, referral complexity, insurance delay, manufacturing delay & hospitalization needs. In MM, 78% providers preferred Cilta-cel over Ide-cel, especially academic providers & those with CAR-T experience. CAR-T volume did not impact selection. Cilta-cel was preferred due to perceived better response rate (RR), more experience, “progression-free survival (PFS) benefit”, center choice, & logistical issues with Ide-cel. Ide-cel was selected due to center choice, favorable TP & insurance preference. Teclistamab was preferred by 78% due to more experience, better RR, TP & center choice, Elranatamab by 11% (better TP, RR, & “PFS”), & Talquetamab by 11% due to having a non-BCMA target. Academic providers preferred Teclistamab (89% vs 50%), & nonacademic providers preferred Talquetamab (38% vs 4%) and Elranatamab (13% vs 8%). In DLBCL after 2+ LOT, 69% favored Axi-cel due to prior experience, RR, center choice, & logistical issues with other products. Liso-cel & Tisa-cel were chosen by 27% & 2%, respectively, due to favorable TP. Axi-cel was also preferred 2nd line by 73% for similar reasons, while 24% favored Liso-cel for its favorable TP. Epcoritamab was preferred by 56% (subcutaneous injection, more experience & center choice) & Glofitamab by 42% (shorter treatment duration, easy administration, more experience, & center choice). Practice setting & volume did not impact selection between products in DLBCL. InBCMA-naïve MM pts, majority (97%) chose an anti-BCMA agent over GPRC5D due to better RR, TP, prior experience, & center choice. InBCMA-exposed pts, most (92%) favored an anti-GPRC5D agent. In contrast in DLBCL, 80% chose CD19 CAR-T after prior CD19-directed therapy, & 18% chose CD20 BsAb. Therefore, antigen escape was less of a concern in DLBCL vs MM. For relapse after 2nd line CAR-T in DLBCL, 78% preferred BsAb over other salvage options due to better RR, TP, & more experience. Providers prioritized RR, survival, & TP in decision making. Treatment logistics, duration, frequency, & cost were less crucial. MM providers also prioritized quality of life, which was less so in DLBCL. There were no differences in priority based on practice setting & experience with CAR-T. Conclusion: The study highlights factors influencing therapy choices in MM & DLBCL. Despite CAR-T's potential for better outcomes, significant access barriers exist. Efforts to streamline referral pathways, logistics, & expanding availability are crucial to improve outcomes. Understanding these preferences & barriers can guide future management strategies.

7516 Background: Immune effector cell hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis IEC-HS is a complication of CAR T cell therapy (CART). This study aims to look at the outcomes of CART patients who develop IEC-HS. Methods: Patients who developed IEC-HS after receiving CART and patients who developed IEC-HS without (nonCART) between December 2020 and March 2022 were included. Results: The 20 CART patients were older than the 25 nonCART patients. Peak ferritin, fibrinogen, CRP, serum creatinine and transaminases were similar between the 2 group. CART patients had lower white blood cell count and platelets and bilirubin than the nonCART patients. CART patients were more like to have markedly elevated IL-6 levels (> 315 mg/ml), higher IL-18, higher MCP-1, and suppressed IL-1β and GMCSF than nonCART patients (Table). Treatment of IEC-HS included tocilizumab (n = 19), anakinra (n = 18) siltuximab (n = 4) and basiliximab (n = 4), dexamethasone (n = 18) methylprednisolone (n = 6), etoposide (n = 1) and ruxolitinib (n = 1). A significant response defined by a 90% reduction or normalization of the cytokine was observed with IL-10 and IFN-ϒ in 92.3% and 84.6% of the CART patients respectively. An intermediate response was noted with TNF, IL-6, MCP-1 and MIP-1 in 38.4%, 30.8% and 61.6% and 38.5% of the patients respectively. No patient had a significant response in IL-2Rα or IL-1β and only 7.7% had a significant response in IL-18. Of the 5 patients who had a MIP-1 response, 4 were on basiliximab +/- high flow continuous venovenous hemofiltration and the only patient that had an IL-18 response was on both modalities. The 100-day mortality after IEC-HS in the CART patients was 40% and was associated with higher peak and lower best ferritin but not the percentage reduction (Table). Higher TNF (90.3 pg/ml vs 37.2 pg/ml, p = 0.05), markedly elevated levels of IL-6 (92% vs 50%, p = 0.03) and IL-10 (33% vs 0%) and an IL-6 response (44.4% vs 0%) were associated with survival at day 100. IL-6 responders had lower peak ferritin vs IL-6 nonresponders (14066 mcg/L vs 45051 mcg/L, p = 0.08). Enterococcus faecium bacteremia developed in 75% of the nonsurvivors vs 16.6% of the 100-day survivors (p = 0.009). Survivors cleared the enterococcus bacteremia within days while nonsurvivors had protracted bacteremia. Conclusions: IEC-HS is devastating complication of CART. Anti-cytokine therapy can reduce some cytokines and ferritin but overimmunosuppression may lead infectious complication, in particular with E. faecium. Better biomarkers are needed to finetune immunosuppressive therapy in order to avoid over-immunosuppression. [Table: see text]

AbstractRelapsed and refractory B‐cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia (B‐ALL) is an aggressive B‐cell neoplasm associated with poor outcomes. Conventional multiagent chemotherapy and bispecific antibody therapy may induce remission; however, relapse rates remain high and overall survival is poor. Chimeric antigen receptor T‐cell (CAR‐T) therapy provides durable, deep complete remission, and long‐term cures in relapsed and refractory B‐ALL. However, with this new treatment modality, 10%–30% of patients do not achieve remission, and over 50% experience relapse after therapy. Currently, there are two approved CD19‐specific CAR‐T cell constructs in B‐ALL, Tisagenlecleucel and Brexucabtagene Autoleucel by the United States Food and Drug Administration, and the European Medicines Agency (EMA). In this review, we discuss patients, disease, and CAR‐T predictors of outcomes in B‐ALL. We describe the two approved CD19‐directed CAR‐T cell products, review the current literature, and discuss factors associated with high risks of therapy failure and future direction in CAR‐T cell therapy for B‐ALL.