Citations 4

Machine learning–driven prognostication of overall survival at 6 months after CAR-T cell therapy

Blood | December 4, 2025 | Volume: 146 | Issue: Supplement 1 | Pages: 2563-2563

10.1182/blood-2025-2563

Abstract Background Chimeric-antigen-receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy has transformed outcomes for relapsed or refractory hematologic malignancies, yet early identification of patients at highest risk for death remains elusive. A prognostic model that leverages only the information routinely available at the time of CAR-T evaluationcould guide pre-infusion counseling, intensity of follow-up, and resource allocation. Methods We analyzed a prospectively maintained cohort of CAR-T recipients treated at Mayo Clinic to develop and test our model. For each patient, data (vital signs, lab results, cardiac assessments [ECG and echocardiography], and PET/CT images) from initial CAR-T evaluation (up to 60 days prior to CAR-T infusion) was considered. Vital signs and labs were left un-imputed, while ECG, echocardiographic parameters, and PET/CT features were forward-filled from the preceding 60 days. Each patient-day was labeled as “outcome present” or “no outcome,” enabling supervised training of gradient-boosting models to predict overall survival (OS) at 6 months post CAR-T infusion. Model performance was evaluated using the area under the ROC curve (AUC) with 10,000-fold bootstrapping with data shuffling between each iteration to derive confidence intervals for stability. To enhance interpretability, we also developed a simplified model using the top 19 features (determined by Shapley value-based importance), aiming to preserve predictive accuracy with a smaller feature set. Results A total of 570 CAR-T cell treated patients were included in this study (476 patients in the training cohort and 94 patients in the validation cohort). The median age was 64 years and 61% males. The primary diagnoses were B-cell lymphoma (324 patients) and multiple myeloma (246 patients). A total of 4,851 individual vital-sign readings, 11,781 laboratory measurements were included. PET/CT images were available in 318 patients. The ML model demonstrated high discriminative ability for predicting OS at 6 months post CAR-T infusion. Vital signs alone produced a mean AUC of 0.63; radiomics features alone produced a mean AUC of 0.71, while laboratory tests alone produced a mean AUC of 0.84. The features most contributory to each single-modality model were then combined into a simplified multimodal model with a total of 19 features, which produced a mean AUC of 0.87, with a 95% CI of 0.73 - 0.97. The 19 features included in the simplified model were: LDH, ferritin, uric acid, eosinophils, fibrinogen, D-dimer, heart rate, mean arterial blood pressure, QTc, QT interval, and the radiomics features of sphericity, first-order Kurtosis, first-order mean, first-order energy, first-order total energy, shape maximum2D diameter (sagittal plane), SUV CoV, SUVp90, shape flatness. This multimodal predictive model was then applied to the validation cohort (uninvolved with model training or testing), which produced an AUC of 0.93, with a 95% CI of 0.84 - 0.98. Conclusions Our ML-driven approach successfully predicts overall survival 6 months post CAR-T infusion, highlighting those individuals at most risk of poor outcomes at the time of CAR-T evaluation. The strong performance of the multimodal version of the model suggests that each data domain contributes complementary resolving power, and by including novel data types, such as PET CT radiomics features, the most accurate predictions could be realized. By providing accurate, near-real-time risk stratification for poor outcomes within 6 months of CAR-T infusion, the model could facilitate proactive patient management. Prospective studies of the integration of this ML model into CAR-T treatment workflows will be crucial to confirm its clinical benefits and to facilitate its adoption in practice.
Real World Outcomes with Evolving Management of Cytokine Release Syndrome in CAR-T Therapy

Blood | December 6, 2024 | Volume: 144 | Issue: Supplement 1 | Pages: 2274-2274

10.1182/blood-2024-203370

Background: Management of cytokine release syndrome (CRS) with chimeric antigen receptor T cell therapy (CAR-T) has evolved in the last decade. First line treatment tocilizumab (toci) was initially given for grade 2 or higher CRS in clinical trials (Toci/CRS≥2). Earlier use of toci in grade 1 CRS was found to be safe without negative impact on clinical response in cohort 4 of ZUMA-1 study for axicabtagene ciloleucel (axi-cel) for B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL; Toci/CRS1). This practice was also adopted for other CAR-T therapies for other disease indications. Subsequently, FDA also updated the package insert for axi-cel in 2021 to include the use of prophylactic dexamethasone (ppx dex) to be given on days 0, 1, 2 of CAR-T infusion based on the results from cohort 6 of ZUMA-1. We examined CRS and ICANS (immune effector cell associated neurologic syndrome) outcome of patients who received FDA approved axi-cel in standard-of-care (SOC) practice with these evolving practices. Of note, adoption of ppx dex has been variable across CAR-T treatment centers in the US (Khurana et al, Blood 2022). At Mayo Clinic Rochester, patients considered high-risk for severe CRS/ICANS (those who received bridging therapy and had LDH above upper limit of normal and/or with secondary CNS involvement or other CNS pathologies) would be considered for ppx dex. Methods: Medical records of patients who received axi-cel in SOC between 2018 and 2023 at Mayo Clinic Rochester were reviewed. ASTCT guideline was used for CRS and ICANS grading. Categorical variables were compared using Chi-squared test and continuous variables were compared using Kruskal-Wallis test. Results: Among 187 pts receiving SOC axi-cel, the median age was 60 years and 121 (65%) were males, 152 (81%) had CRS, of which 73 (39%) were grade ≥2; 97 (52%) had ICANS, of which 65 (35%) were grade ≥2. Of the 152 CRS pts, 54/152 (36%) pts never received toci or ppx/dex. Of the pts who received Toci, 35/152 (23%) received Toci when CRS is at least grade 2 (Toci/CRS≥2), 49/152 (32%) received Toci/CRS1 without ppx dex (Toci/CRS1), and 14 (9%) received ppx dex with Toci given in CRS1 when pts developed CRS (PPX DEX). Baseline demographics were comparable except age (Toci/CRS≥2: 58y; Toci/ CRS1: 63y; ppx dex: 50y; p=0.001) and pre-LD CRP (Toci/CRS≥2: 34mg/L; Toci/ CRS1: 6mg/L; ppx dex: 16mg/L; p=0.002). Pre-LD LDH and ferritin were also comparable. PPX DEX or Toci/CRS1 had significantly lower rate of maximum grade CRS≥2 (PPX DEX: 4 (29%); Toci/ CRS1: 20 (41%); 35 (100%); p<0.001) and duration of CRS (PPX DEX: 2.5d; Toci/ CRS1: 3d; Toci/CRS≥2: 5d; p<0.001). Time to onset of CRS was not statistically different between the 3 groups. Not surprisingly, Toci/CRS1 group had higher overall rate of toci use, compared to . Interestingly, use rate of ≥2 doses of Toci or siltuximab was significantly higher in Toci/CRS1 or PPX DEX (PPX DEX: 8 (57%); Toci/ CRS1: 26 (53%); 9 (26%); p=0.02). Pt who received PPX DEX or Toci/CRS1 had a significantly lower rate of ICANS (PPX DEX: 6 (43%); Toci/ CRS1: 33 (67%); 32 (91%); p=0.001) and rate of max grade ICANS ≥2 (PPX DEX: 3 (21%); Toci/ CRS1: 23 (47%); 27 (77%); p<0.001). The time to onset and duration of ICANS was not different among the 3 groups. Conclusion: Our real-world study shows that earlier use of Toci in grade 1, compared to its first use in grade 2, can result in lower overall incidence of more severe CRS, duration of CRS, incidence of ICANS and more severe ICANS. While we selected patients at higher risk for having more severe CRS in our PPX DEX cohort, experience to date suggests that these patients, compared to toci/CRS>=2 cohort, could also have reduced severity of CRS and ICANS with this updated management.
Metformin and cytokine release syndrome after immune effector cell therapy.

Journal of Clinical Oncology | June 4, 2024 | Volume: 42 | Issue: 16_suppl | Pages: e14535-e14535

10.1200/jco.2024.42.16_suppl.e14535

e14535 Background: Cytokine release syndrome (CRS) is the most common complication of chimeric antigen receptor T cells (CAR-T) for hematologic malignancies. We hypothesized that patients undergoing CAR-T therapy who are on metformin will experience a lower incidence or severity of CRS than patients not on this medication. Methods: We evaluated all patients treated with CAR-T at Mayo Clinic Rochester between 1/1/2018 and 1/31/2023, and abstracted relevant clinical and laboratory characteristics to determine the incidence and severity of CRS, PFS as well as OS in patients who were, or were not, on metformin before and during CAR-T therapy for Type 2 diabetes mellitus. We used the Chi-Square test, Mann-Whitney test and the Kaplan-Meier method to analyze data. Results: In the 5-year interval under consideration 237 patients received CAR-T, 168 for non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL), and 69 for multiple myeloma (MM). 23 patients (15 NHL and 8 MM) were on metformin at the time of CAR-T. 15 patient developed CRS while on metformin and 175 patients not on metformin (p=0.05). Grade 3 or 4 CRS incidence was 4% in both groups (p=0.41). Of the 153 patients with NHL not on metformin, 121 developed any grade of CRS, while 10 of 15 patients on metformin developed CRS (p=0.268). 4 NHL patients developed CRS Grade ≥3 or higher, while 0 of 15 on metformin developed Grade ≥3 CRS (p=0.237). For the MM patients, the incidence of CRS was 49 patients not on metformin and 5 patients on metformin (p<0.001). 3 MM patients developed CRS Grade ≥3 or higher, while 0 of 8 on metformin developed Grade ≥3 CRS (p=0.346). 12 of 15 patients on metformin with NHL achieved CR compared to 92 of 153 patients not on metformin (p=0.1305). 3 of 8 patients with MM on metformin compared to 24 of 61 patients with MM not on metformin achieved CR or better post CAR-T (p=0.92). Tocilizumab was used in 40% of patients on metformin but in 66% of patients not on metformin (p=0.0016). In NHL patients, PFS from CAR-T infusion was not reached (range: 6.3 to NR) for patients on metformin versus 9.9 months (range: 6.3–19.5) in patients not on metformin (p = 0.3332). In the MM patients, progression-free survival (PFS) from CAR-T infusion was 8.4 months (95% CI: 7.9–not reached [NR]) for patients on metformin and 22.6 months (13.7–NR) for those not on metformin (p = 0.07). Median OS for NHL patients on metformin was not reached (9.766–NR) versus 32.6 months (18.6–NR) for patients not on metformin (p = 0.7022). Median OS was 17 months (95% CI: 8.3 to NR) for patients with MM on metformin vs NR (95% CI: 9.4 to NR) for patients not on metformin (p = 0.2559). Conclusions: In this retrospective study, the co-administration of metformin during CAR-T cell therapy for NHL and MM appears to be associated with a numerically reduced incidence of CRS. The effect appears to be particularly marked in patients with multiple myeloma. Metformin therapy did not seem to affect the response to CAR-T therapy in either NHL or MM.
Dendritic Cell Vaccine Treatment for B-Cell Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma: Clinical Trial in Progress

Blood | October 10, 2019 | Volume: 124 | Issue: 21 | Pages: 4474-4474

10.1182/blood.v124.21.4474.4474

Abstract Introduction: Immune suppression is a major component of lymphoma pathogenesis. Recent advances in lymphoma treatment have been immunotherapy. We present the preliminary results of our clinical trial testing 2 vaccine strategies in patients with indolent B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL). The primary objective is to determine the safety and feasibility of the vaccine approaches and secondary objectives are to describe clinical responses and identify corresponding immune changes. Methods: Autologous mature dendritic cells (mDC) were manufactured from leukapheresed cells of NHL pts. For patients with tumor lymph nodes deemed amenable to cryoablation by interventional radiologist (arm A), they received cryoablation of a node and injection of mDC into the cryoablated node followed by another 1 to 7 intratumoral mDC injections. Remaining patients had a tumor excised to generate tumor lysate ex vivo. mDC were pulsed with tumor lysate during DC maturation (arm B; DC-TL). The DC-TL vaccines were injected intradermally for 4 to 8 doses. Patients are monitored for one year after vaccines for adverse events and systemic tumor response. Correlative studies include cellular immune phenotype of peripheral blood and T cell intracellular cytokine productions. Planned accrual is 10 patients per arm (total = 20). Results: To date, 10 patients have accrued to arm A and 5 patients to arm B (Table 1). All pts tolerated vaccine treatments without major adverse events. Of the 10 evaluable patients, there were 1 CR (arm B: 1 / 4; total: 1/6) and 4 PR (arm A: 3/6; arm B: 1 / 4; total: 4/10) for an ORR of 50% for both arms (Figure 1). Time to next treatment ranged from 6.5 to 25 months (Figure 2). Correlative studies suggest that immune changes can be used as prognostic biomarkers to predict response. These include changes in vaccine induced cytokine secretion, and in the number and composition of the immune system. In addition, preliminary analysis of >40 immune phenotypes using flow cytometry and hierarchical clustering suggest there are characteristic immune system responses in patients responding to vaccine. Conclusions: Both cryoablation and intratumoral mDC vaccination are feasible and safe in NHL. Treatment responses may correlate with immune system changes. Biosystems analysis method can be used to develop novel assays as predictive biomarkers of treatment response and used to develop novel protocols that allow treating to response. Table 1. Patient Demographics Arm A (n = 10) Arm B (n = 5) Total (n = 15) Age (median, rage) 64 (55 – 80) 60 (31 – 86) 63 (31 – 86) Gender (M/F) 6/4 2/3 8/7 Histology (n, %) Follicular Marginal zone DLBCL 10 (100%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (60%) 1 (20%) 1(20%) 13 (86.6%) 1 (6.7%) 1 (6.7%) Stage (N, %) II III IV 1 (10%) 1 (10%) 8 (80%) 2 (40%) 1 (20%) 2 (40%) 3 (20%) 2 (13.3%) 10 (66.7%) No of prior Tx (mean, range) 2.4 (0-8) 3.2 (0-7) 2.7 (0-8) FLIPI (n, %) 0-1 2 ≥ 3 1 (10%) 2 (20%) 7 (70%) 1 (20%) 2 (40%) 2 (45%) 2 (13.3%) 4 (26.7%) 9 (60%) Positive GELF criteria (n, %) 4 (40%) 1 (20%) 5 (30%) Figure 1. Waterfall plot. Figure 1. Waterfall plot. Figure 2. Time to next treatment. Figure 2. Time to next treatment. Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.