Citations

Background: Relapsed DLBCL occurs in up to 40% of patients and has a poor prognosis. Current prognostic tools such as the international prognostic index (IPI) and newer forms (NCCN-IPI) only include baseline clinical features. PET/CT features have not yet been incorporated into prognostic risk models despite being essential for staging and response assessment. Deep learning computer algorithms have consistently demonstrated the ability to analyze imaging data and identify features that are not readily apparent to the human eye. Using a deep learning computer vision model that automatically extracted radiomic features from PET/CTs, we examined the association of changes between baseline PET and interim PET (PET2) radiomic features on survival outcomes and compared the prognostic performance with NCCN-IPI. Methods: Adult patients with newly diagnosed diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) between 2005 and 2015 and enrolled in the prospective MER cohort were included. Native DICOM images from FDG PET/CT scans at baseline and interim PET (PET2, after 2-3 cycles of chemotherapy) were preprocessed for regularity and then segmented using the nnU-Net architecture with an external lymphoma-specific model. Feature extraction and standard uptake value (SUV) characterization were accomplished with PyRadiomics and NiBabel. Our computational method included no manual segmentation correction. Individual radiomics features (n=115) and the % change above (Δ High) and below (Δ low) 50 th quartile from baseline to PET2 were evaluated for association with event free survival (EFS) and overall survival (OS) using a univariate Cox regression model and by Kaplan Meier analysis. EFS was defined as time from PET2 to first systemic relapse or death from any cause. OS was defined as time from PET2 to death from any cause. Additionally, Spearman and Pearson correlation matrices were used to guide feature selection while minimizing collinearity. We then assessed the association of the highest scoring radiomics features with EFS in a multivariate cox regression model. Results: A total of 506 patients had baseline and PET2 scans available for radiomic feature extraction. Median age at diagnosis was 61 years (range 18-90), 43% were females. NCCN-IPI composition and outcomes of our cohort was comparable to the previously published NCCN cohort, with patient distribution and 5-year OS as follows: Low (9%, 5-y OS 83%), Low-intermediate (38%, 5-y OS 49%), High-intermediate (41%, 5-y OS 31%), High (11%, 5-y OS 12%). At a median follow up of 81 months,there were 308 events, and272 patients had died.Several radiomics features were associated with EFS including change in tumor surface area (SA Δ) (HR: 1.75, 95% CI 1.36-2.24, p<0.005, median of 26,927 mm 2, Figure 1A) and change in total metabolic tumor volume (TMTV Δ) (HR: 1.64, 95% CI 1.27-2.10, p<0.005, median of 120,473 mm 3, Figure 1B). As a reference, NCCN-IPI univariate Cox regression analysis of EFS produced a Harrell's C-statistic (c) of 0.624. Single radiomics features of SA Δ and TMTV Δ individually produced unadjusted c-statistics of 0.616 and 0.614 respectively. Combinations of radiomics features (SA Δ, TMTV Δ and NCCN-IPI classification) demonstrated cumulative benefit (c=0.652). Conclusion: Automatic PET-CT radiomic feature extraction using deep learning models is feasible among patients with newly diagnosed DLBCL. The change in tumor SA and TMTV appear to be promising radiomic biomarkers. A low decline in either tumor SA or TMTV by PET2 is associated with higher risk of relapse and poor survival outcomes. As individual characteristics, these features are similar prognostic indicators of EFS as the NCCN-IPI. Further investigation into risk stratification when combining radiomics with clinical and genomic variables is warranted. Figure 1. Event free survival for DLBCL patients with A) a change in tumor surface area by PET2 less than 50% percentile (SA_Δ Low) and greater than 50 th percentile (SA_Δ High) and B) a change in TMTV by PET2 less than 50% percentile (TMTV_Δ Low) and greater than 50 th percentile (TMTV_Δ High).

Background Chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapies have recently been established as an important option for the management of relapsed/refractory (R/R) DLBCL. However, real-world studies suggest that approximately half of all patients (pts) receiving commercial CAR-T therapies will relapse within 6 months. These pts have a poor prognosis, with estimated overall survival (OS) of only 5 months, indicating a significant unmet need. Odronextamab is a novel, off-the-shelf, CD20×CD3 bispecific antibody that has demonstrated activity in both R/R follicular lymphoma and R/R DLBCL. We have previously reported encouraging results with odronextamab from the Phase 1 ELM-1 study (NCT02290951) in pts with R/R DLBCL post CAR-T therapy (Bannerji R, et al. Lancet Haematol. 2022). These results were consistent with the antitumor activity seen in pts with R/R DLBCL from the Phase 2 ELM-2 study (Kim WS, et al. ASH 2022). Here, we present an updated analysis of outcomes in a prespecified cohort of post CAR-T patients from ELM-1. Methods Intravenous odronextamab was administered weekly in 21-day cycles during Cycles (C) 1-4. Revisions to the step-up regimen were reported previously (Bannerji R, et al. Lancet Haematol. 2022). Odronextamab was administered with steroid prophylaxis and step-up doses of 0.7/4/20 mg during C1 to mitigate the risk of cytokine release syndrome (CRS), followed by 160 mg on Days (D) 1, 8, and 15 of C2-4. After C4, odronextamab maintenance treatment continued at 320 mg every 2 weeks until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Those pts who achieved a complete response (CR) that was durable for ≥9 months transitioned to dosing with 320 mg every 4 weeks. The primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR), assessed by independent central review (ICR) according to the Lugano classification. Key secondary endpoints included duration of response (DoR), progression-free survival (PFS), and OS. Immune biomarker assessment was an exploratory endpoint. Results As of Dec 20, 2022, 46 pts were treated (safety-evaluable), with 44 pts evaluable for efficacy. For safety-evaluable pts, median age was 63 years (range 27-82), 67% male, 74% Ann Arbor stage III-IV, and 72% were refractory to CAR-T therapy administered in any prior line. 44 pts were evaluable for efficacy after 4.9 months median duration of follow-up. The ORR and CR rate by ICR were 48% (21/44) and 30% (13/44), respectively. Responses were durable, and both median DoR and median duration of CR were not reached. The probability of maintaining a response for 12 months was 62% and the probability of maintaining a CR for 9 months was 86%.A responder analysis of the subgroup of pts who achieved a CR will be presented. The CAR-T treated pts with DLBCL who were evaluable for biomarker analysis (n=10) had lower T-cell counts at baseline compared with CAR-T naive DLBCL pts (n=41 comparable pts who received odronextamab in ELM-2), yet the fold-change of T-cell expansion at C4D15 was greater in CAR-T treated pts versus CAR-T naive pts. T-cell dynamics, such as changes in activation, exhaustion, and memory subsets, will be presented. Safety was generally consistent with that previously reported. Six (13%) pts permanently discontinued odronextamab due to a treatment-emergent AE (device-related infection, pneumonia, dysphagia, gait disturbance, leukemia, and encephalopathy [n=1 each]). The most common treatment-emergent AE was CRS (any grade, 52%). The highest grade of CRS reported was Grade 2, and low-grade CRS events occurred in 46% of pts with the 0.7/4/20 mg step-up regimen. No cases of ICANS were reported in pts with the 0.7/4/20 mg regimen. Grade ≥3 infections occurred in 10 (22%) pts, with no Grade 5 events. No cases of tumor flare were reported. Conclusions Odronextamab monotherapy demonstrates encouraging antitumor activity in heavily pretreated pts who have progressed after CAR-T therapy, with a generally manageable safety profile. Durable CRs were achieved in this difficult-to-treat setting. These data support the potential role of odronextamab in the treatment paradigm for R/R DLBCL. Further studies to evaluate the optimal sequencing and combinations of odronextamab with CAR-T therapy are warranted.

Hepcidin, a central regulator of iron homeostasis, is pathologically elevated in patients with myelofibrosis (MF) and anemia. Chronic elevations in hepcidin contribute to the onset and severity of anemia. DISC-0974 is an investigational, first-in-class, monoclonal antibody that blocks hemojuvelin, a co-receptor in the bone morphogenetic protein-signaling pathway driving hepcidin expression. Preclinical studies have shown that DISC-0974 suppresses hepcidin and increases serum iron. A healthy volunteer study has demonstrated dose-dependent reductions in serum hepcidin, increases in serum iron with doses up to 56 mg administered subcutaneously, and increasing trends in reticulocyte count, reticulocyte hemoglobin, mean corpuscular hemoglobin, total hemoglobin (Hgb), and red blood cell count. In this Phase 1b/2a, open-label, multiple-ascending dose study (NCT05320198), we are assessing the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics (PK), and pharmacodynamics (PD) of DISC-0974 in patients with MF and anemia. Eligible participants include patients over 18 years of age with intermediate-2 or higher-risk MF and anemia. MF is required to be confirmed using the World Health Organization 2016 criteria. Anemia is defined per protocol as Hgb < 10 g/dL or transfusion dependence, as defined by the International Working Group for Myelofibrosis Research and Treatment (IWG-MRT). A stable dose of hydroxyurea and/or Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitor is allowed on trial. Major exclusion criteria include: liver iron concentration ≥ 7 mg/g dry weight; splenectomy; nutritional, genetic, infectious, or autoimmune causes of anemia. Dose escalation is based on a Bayesian optimal interval design with accelerated titration. Safety Review Committee assessments gate escalation decisions. Dosing occurs monthly for a total of 6 doses. Primary endpoints include safety and tolerability assessments of adverse events (AEs), clinical laboratory assessments, vital signs, physical examinations, and electrocardiograms. Secondary endpoints include anemia response as defined by the IWG-MRT, transfusion response as defined by a decrease of 50% in transfusion requirement over any 8-week period, standard PK parameters and PD metrics including serum hepcidin-25, iron, transferrin saturation, ferritin, and hematology biomarkers. All data are summarized using descriptive statistics. Initial data show a dose-related increase in pharmacokinetic parameters. DISC-0974 treatment led to dose-dependent reductions in serum hepcidin-25 and increases in serum iron levels. There have been no serious AEs or AEs leading to study withdrawal. Most AEs were mild, transient, and unrelated to DISC-0974. As of August 1, 2023, enrollment and dose escalation are ongoing. Safety, PK, and PD data from at least the first two cohorts will be presented.

Introduction Relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) is a hematologic cancer associated with no current widely-accepted cure, cycles of relapse and remission, treatment resistance, and high morbidity and mortality, which necessitate new treatments and therapeutic targets. 1-3 Innovative therapies that target BCMA, CD38, GPRC5D, FcRH5, and others in the RRMM development pipeline are recently approved or under investigation, but real-world evidence on clinician perceptions of emerging trends and unmet needs remains limited. A Delphi panel was conducted with US clinicians to evaluate the level of unmet need and treatment decisions among patients with RRMM who are triple-class-exposed (TCE). Methods This double-blinded study consisted of two phases: a web survey (phase 1) and a Delphi panel (phase 2). A targeted literature review was conducted first to understand unmet needs and treatment decisions associated with management of RRMM in the US and inform the development of primary research materials. The web survey was completed by 21 US clinicians. Survey findings were then used to inform the phase 2 Delphi panel, a systematic, validated approach to gain consensus. This consisted of two iterative rounds of a question answered by nine experts selected from participants in the web survey. Consensus on a question was defined as at least 70% agreement. The double-blinded panel was conducted via the Microsoft Teams platform, and poll questions were administered through Vevox. Responses were blinded to preserve respondents' anonymity and participants were also blinded to the study sponsor. Results Overall, consensus was reached that despite recent improvement in treatment landscape, there is still a high level of unmet need for patients with RRMM who are TCE (89% of participants). More specifically, consensus was reached (89%) that the top three areas of unmet need were treatment resistance, guidance on treatment sequencing, and novel mechanisms of action (MoAs) and targets (Figure 1). Unmet need is also particularly pronounced for certain patient subgroups, with 89% and 78% of participants agreeing that patients who are functionally high-risk and penta-refractory, respectively, experience the greatest unmet need. When asked about which novel therapies would be most promising for addressing the unmet needs, participants agreed that the top 4 therapeutic targets are GPCR5D (95%), BCMA (81%), FcRH5 (81%), and BCL-2 (81%). Various factors impact treatment choice and sequencing, with most participants (78%) agreeing that treatment history is the most influential factor impacting sequencing. The panel also agreed that prior toxicity (grade 3-4 AEs, 89%) and convenience of dosing frequency (78%), respectively, most impact dosing decisions. All agreed there is a need for resources to manage some AEs, particularly newer AEs (like skin and nail effects) of emerging treatments. Of the AEs identified in the survey as top drivers of treatment choice, participants reached consensus on two: neurotoxicity (e.g., ICANS) (89%) and infection (100%). Conclusions In this Delphi study, consensus was reached that a high level of unmet need remains for patients with RRMM, who are TCE with unmet need varying dependent on patient subgroup and treatment history. There was consensus that additional treatment choices with novel targets/MoAs are needed. Participants agreed that AEs, toxicity, infection, and treatment history impact treatment choice and sequencing, and considerations and challenges vary by subgroup. Overall, findings from this study support that there is a need for additional treatment options with novel MoAs/therapeutic targets that address priority unmet needs for patients with RRMM, who are TCE. References 1. Gonsalves W et al. The next generation of novel therapies for the management of relapsed multiple myeloma. Future Oncol (London, England). 2017;13(1):63-75. https://doi.org/10.2217/fon-2016-0200 2. Braunstein M et al. A new decade: novel immunotherapies on the horizon for relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma. Expert Rev Hematol. 2022;14(4):377-389. doi:10.1080/17474086.2021.1909469 3. Bruno AS et al. Recent real-world treatment patterns and outcomes in US patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma. Expert Rev Hematol. 2020;13(9):1017-1025. doi:10.1080/17474086.2020.1800451

Background: Identification of minimal residual disease (MRD) in acute myeloid leukemia (AML) is essential for assessing risk of relapse and guiding therapeutic management. While molecular assays have streamlined AML MRD detection, flow cytometric immunophenotyping (FCI) remains the only available test modality for approximately 50% of patients lacking traceable molecular MRD targets. Unfortunately, due to the high level of expertise required, long manual analysis time and complexity of AML MRD FCI data, only a few reference laboratories offer this as an orderable test. Methods: To facilitate the analysis of AML MRD by FCI, we devised an unsupervised machine learning (ML) pipeline that intakes raw FCI data, eliminates acquisition errors (FlowCut), performs state-of-the-art clustering (PARC) and dimensionality reduction (UMAP), estimates how aberrant or different-from-normal each cluster is compared to a cohort of controls (15 donor and 15 reactive marrow aspirates), downsamples clusters with high event counts without significant loss of low-event clusters, and corrects for downsampling using an upsampling factor. This CCADDAS (Clinically-intended Clustering of All events, Dimensionality reduction, Downsampling and Aberrancy Scaling) pipeline was containerized, deployed in a cloud environment (Google Cloud Vertex AI), and used to process raw FCI files from 50 AML MRD FCI assays (3-tube/10-color panel) with 0.1% to <5% leukemic subsets, and 20 assays with no detectable leukemic subsets by prior conventional analysis. Machine learning-enhanced data files were analyzed using a commercially available FCI analysis software (Kaluza v 2.1, Beckman Coulter). Results: Cluster-informed downsampling reduced the total number of events needed to be analyzed from 1 million cells to 179,531 cells per tube on average (82% data reduction), while preserving low event subsets (clusters smaller than 5000 cells) and allowing for accurate quantitative estimates for any gated population [# events x mean (upsampling factor)]. MRD was detected in all positive cases, and absent on all negative cases when analyzed using the enhanced downsampled data (100% correlation with original data), with accurate quantitative estimates (Spearman r = 0.85). Analysis time was dramatically reduced from 73 minutes to 8 minutes per case on average (89% reduction of manual analysis time). Dimensionality reduction parameters simplified gating of lineage- and maturation-defined subsets. Cluster comparison against control samples facilitated the rapid identification of MRD subsets, based on a calculated aberrancy scale parameter that helped distinguish MRD blasts (mean ± 2SD: 0.85 ± 0.3) from benign blasts (mean ± 2SD: 0.26 ± 0.3) (p<0.0001). Conclusion: We introduce CCADDAS, an unsupervised containerized cloud ML pipeline that enhances raw AML-MRD FCI data with ML annotations, cluster-informed downsampling and comparison to normal controls to create markedly smaller and software-agnostic FCI files. CCADDAS simplifies and accelerates detection of AML-MRD in clinical diagnostics, reducing number of cells analyzed by 82% and manual analysis time by 89%, without impacting test performance. Moreover, CCADDAS can be deployed on any laboratory-developed AML-MRD assay, and its small-sized export is compatible with any clinical FCI software, computing platform and analysis strategy. Adoption of CCADDAS is likely to facilitate the implementation of AML MRD FCI analysis by more clinical laboratories.

Background: Event-free survival at 24 months (EFS24) after frontline immunochemotherapy (IC) is an important endpoint in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma and follicular lymphoma, and patients who achieve EFS24 have similar survival compared to age- and sex-matched general population. The role of EFS24 in predicting subsequent survival has not been established in mantle cell lymphoma (MCL), possibly due to perceived poor survival historically. In the last decade, the outcomes of MCL are improving in the evolving treatment landscape. In this international multicenter study, we investigated conditional survival and cause of death in patients with MCL who achieved EFS24 after frontline IC in the older and more recent eras. Methods: Outcomes after frontline IC were evaluated in 5 independent cohorts that included over 3000 patients in total: Mayo/Iowa MER prospective cohort, BC Cancer retrospective population-based cohort, US 12-center retrospective cohort, Swedish Lymphoma Registry, and Danish National Lymphoma Registry. For each cohort, 2 treatment eras were defined based on cohort-specific shifts in treatment patterns (Table 1). Overall survival (OS) after diagnosis and after achieving EFS24 were compared to the background age- and sex-matched general population using a standardized mortality ratio (SMR). Cumulative incidences of cause-specific deaths were analyzed using a competing risk model. Results: In the MER cohort, patients treated in Era M1 (2002-2009; n=147) and Era M2 (2010-2015; n=153) both had inferior OS compared to the general US population. A lower SMR in Era M2 vs M1 (2.25 vs 3.46) suggests a narrower gap in OS compared to the general US population. Lymphoma was the leading cause of death in both eras. In Era M1, patients who achieved EFS24 still had inferior OS compared to the general US population (SMR=2.40, 95% CI 1.76-3.19), and lymphoma remained the leading cause of death. For patients in Era M2 who achieved EFS24, the difference in OS compared to the general US population was not statistically significant with current follow-up (SMR=1.43, 95% CI 0.93-2.09), and lymphoma was no longer the leading cause of death (Table 2). In the BC cohort, patients treated in Era B2 (6/2013-2019; n=188) vs Era B1 (2003-5/2013; n=250) had a narrower gap in OS compared to the general British Columbia population (SMR 4.53 vs 6.69). Lymphoma was the leading cause of death in both eras. For patients achieving EFS24, the gap in OS was narrower in Era B2 vs B1 (SMR 3.56 vs 4.99). After achieving EFS24, lymphoma was the single leading cause of death for patients in Era B1 but not in Era B2 (Table 2). In the US 12-center cohort, patients treated in Era U1 (2002-2011; n=312) and Era U2 (2012-2016; n=417) both had inferior OS compared to the general US population (SMR 2.68 and 2.92, respectively). In patients who achieved EFS24, with current follow up, the difference in OS compared to the general US population was statistically significant in Era U1 (SMR=2.01, 95% CI 1.50-2.64) but not in Era U2 (SMR=1.44, 95% CI 0.82-2.34). Lymphoma was not the leading cause of death after achieving EFS24 (Table 2). In the Swedish cohort, the gap in OS compared to the general Swedish population was narrower in Era S2 (2013-2018; n=439) vs S1 (2006-2012; n=442), both after frontline IC (SMR 4.8 vs 5.4) and after achieving EFS24 (SMR 2.6 vs 3.4). After achieving EFS24, lymphoma was the leading cause of death for patients in Era S1 but not in Era S2 (Table 2). In the Danish cohort, patients treated in Era D2 (2014-2020; n=370) vs Era D1 (2004-2013; n=461) had a slightly narrower gap in OS compared to the general Danish population (SMR 1.90 vs 2.10). For patients who achieved EFS24, those in Era D1 still had inferior OS compared to the general Danish population (SMR=1.44, 95% CI 1.22-1.68), but the OS difference compared to the general Danish population in Era D2 was not statistically significant (SMR=1.27, 95% CI 0.92-1.72) with current follow-up (Table 2). Cause of death data were not available in this cohort. Conclusion: Survival in patients with MCL who achieved EFS24 after frontline IC improved in the more recent treatment era and moved closer to the background expected survival. After achieving EFS24, lymphoma-related mortality was no longer the leading cause of death in the more recent era. EFS24 following frontline treatment may become a critical endpoint for predicting subsequent outcomes in patients with MCL in the modern era.

Background: Axicabtagene ciloleucel (axi-cel), an autologous chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy, achieved an overall response rate (ORR) of 94% and a complete response (CR) rate of 79% in patients with relapsed or refractory (r/r) follicular lymphoma (FL) after two or more prior lines of therapy in the ZUMA-5 trial ( Jacobson et al. Lancet Oncol. 2022). Since its FDA approval in March 2021, there has been little evidence on comparative effectiveness (CE) studies of axi-cel vs standard-of-care (SoC), except ones using ZUMA-5 and historical SCHOLAR-5 data (eg, Ghione et al. Blood. 2022). This study was aimed to address this evidence gap in CE of axi-cel vs SoC used to treat r/r FL in real-world settings. Methods: The two data sources in this study were patients who received commercial axi-cel between March 2021 and May 2023 from the CIBMTR and patients who received historical SoC (eg, chemotherapy, anti-CD20 mAb + chemotherapy, immunomodulatory imide drugs) between July 2014 and December 2020 from SCHOLAR-5, which served as an external control of ZUMA-5 trial. The index date was defined as the initiation date of either the infusion for axi-cel patients or the last eligible systemic therapy for SoC patients. Patients were included if they were age ≥ 18, had documented r/r FL with histological grade 1, 2 or 3a, and received at least 2 prior lines of therapy at the index. Patients were excluded if they had transformed diffused large B-cell lymphoma, central nervous system involvement, prior receipt of CAR T or other non-CAR T cellular therapies or allogeneic stem cell transplant, or no post-index information on outcomes. Four effectiveness outcomes were ORR, CR rate, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). Imbalance in observed prognostic risk factors between the two was adjusted via a propensity score analysis using the standard mortality ratio weighting (SMRW). The primary analyses included weighted univariable analysis and multivariable logistic (ORR and CR rate) or Cox (PFS and OS) regressions that were adjusted for the covariates after the SMRW. A sub-analysis of patients age ≥ 65 was conducted using the same methods as the primary analyses. Results: The unweighted study cohort included 376 patients, in which 256 (68%) received axi-cel . Thepatients who received axi-cel were more likely to be younger (median age 61 for axi-cel vs 67 for SoC), have grade 3a FL (37% vs 12%), received 3 or more prior lines of therapy (83% vs 58%), or remained refractory to the last prior therapy (79% vs 73%) vs those who received SoC. The imbalance in the observed prognostic risk factors was mitigated via the SMRW. The weighted univariable analysis, in which the sample size by treatment reflected the SMRW, is shown in Table 1. In patients of all ages, ORR was 92% in axi-cel vs 67% in SoC, and CR rate was 84% vs 37%. Because of varying follow-up lengths by treatment (median 7 months for axi-cel and 37 months for SoC), survival outcomes were reported at month 6, at which time PFS rate was 88% in axi-cel vs 64% in SoC and OS rate was 97% vs 85%. The corresponding proportions for patients age ≥ 65 were similar to those reported for patients of all ages. In the weighted multivariable regressions, axi-cel was associated with statistically significantly better outcomes by all 4 effectiveness measures vs SoC (Table 1). Specifically, in patients of all ages, the odds ratios for axi-cel were 4.93 (95% CI, 2.35−10.34) for ORR and 16.72 (95% CI, 7.03−39.73) for CR rate, and the hazard ratios for axi-cel were 0.41 (95% CI, 0.22−0.77) for PFS and 0.15 (95% CI, 0.06−0.34) for OS. Similar to the patients of all ages in the primary analyses, patients age ≥ 65 in the sub-analysis also demonstrated improved outcomes associated with axi-cel (Figure 1). Conclusions: This study showed that patients with r/r FL after two or more prior lines of therapy treated with axi-cel experienced better outcomes compared with patients treated with SoC, and that older patients also benefited significantly from axi-cel. These findings suggest that axi-cel addresses an important unmet medical need in patients with r/r FL. Future research should include longer follow-up data on outcomes of axi-cel and CE of axi-cel vs other contemporary SoC therapies.

Introduction: ECOG ACRIN E1910 is a randomized phase III trial that showed that adults with newly diagnosed BCR::ABL1 negative acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) who become MRD negative (<0.01%) after induction chemo who receive blinatumomab with conventional chemotherapy (chemo) have improved survival compared with those who received chemo only (Litzow et al, Blood (2022) 140: Supplement 2, LBA-1). However, not all pts were able to receive all four planned cycles of blinatumomab in consolidation. In this report we assessed outcomes of pts in the blinatumomab arm of the trial who received all 4 cycles of blinatumomab compared to those who received 1-2 cycles. Methods: Patient between the ages of 30 and 70 with newly diagnosed BCR::ABL1 negative B-lineage ALL were enrolled and initially received 2.5 months of combination induction chemo utilizing a BFM-like regimen adapted from the E2993/UKALLXII clinical trial, with pegaspargase (after induction only for patients >=55 years of age) and addition of rituximab for CD20 positive patients. After remission induction (step 1) pts in morphologic complete remission (CR/CRi) received an intensification course of high dose methotrexate with pegaspargase for CNS prophylaxis (step 2). At the conclusion of step 2, remission and MRD status were determined centrally by 6-color flow cytometry with MRD negativity defined as <0.01%. In the primary analysis subset, MRD negative patients were randomized to receive an additional 4cycles of consolidation chemo or 2 cycles of blinatumomab at 28 mcg/day (flat dose) for 28 days each cycle followed by 3 cycles of consolidation chemo, another 4-week cycle of blinatumomab (3rd cycle of blinatumomab) followed by an additional cycle of chemo and then a 4th cycle of blinatumomab (step 3). Following completion of consolidation chemo +/- blinatumomab, pts were given 2.5 years of POMP maintenance therapy timed from the start of the intensification cycle (step 4). Estimates of OS were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Comparison of OS between treatment arms were conducted using the stratified log-rank test and Cox proportional-hazards model with age, CD20 status, rituximab use, and whether pts intend to receive HSCT or not as stratification factors. As the number of cycles needed to optimize outcome has not been studied, an unplanned landmark analysis was used to compare OS of pts in the blinatumomab arm who received all 4 cycles o those who received 1-2 cycles. Time 0 was chosen as 9 months post step 3 randomization (the time that patients were supposed to complete 4 cycles of blina). Four pts who received blinatumomab but died within 9 months post step 3 randomization were therefore excluded from this analysis. Results: The study was activated on December 17, 2013 and closed to enrollment on October 15, 2019. 772 pts were screened for the trial and 488 were enrolled on step 1 induction therapy. The median age of the pts was 51 years (range 30-70). 224 MRD negative pts were randomized, 112 pts to each arm. In the blinatumomab arm 12 pts received 1 cycle (11%), 32 pts received 2 cycles (29%), 4 pts received 3 cycles (4%) and 63 pts received 4 cycles (57%). The OS of pts who received 1-2 cycles of blinatumomab was compared to control (Figure 1) The difference was not significant (hazard ratio 0.62, 95% CI 0.28 to 1.34, p=0.22). Fig 2 compares the survival of those who received 1-2 cycles to those who received 4 cycles ( (HR: 0.39, 95% CI 0.12 to 1.16, p=0.076). Conclusion: The addition of blinatumomab to consolidation chemotherapy resulted in a significantly better overall survival compared to chemotherapy alone in pts with newly diagnosed B-lineage ALL who were MRD negative after intensification. This represents a new standard of care for pts aged 30-70 years with BCR::ABL1 negative ALL. The optimal dose and number of cycles is however unknown. In this unplanned subgroup analysis we demonstrate that a survival benefit can only be confirmed in patients who receive the intended 4 cycles of blinatumomab during consolidation. Further studies will be needed to determine if fewer cycles can provide a similar benefit.

Background: Axi-cel is an autologous anti-CD19 chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy approved for the treatment of relapsed/refractory (R/R) LBCL. ZUMA-12 (NCT03761056) is a Phase 2, multicenter, single-arm study of axi-cel as part of first-line treatment in patients with high-risk LBCL. In the primary efficacy analysis (n=37; median follow-up of 15.9 months), axi-cel demonstrated a high rate of investigator-assessed complete response (CR; 78%; 95% CI, 62-90) and an 89% objective response rate (ORR; 95% CI, 75-97). Axi-cel also had a manageable safety profile, with no new safety signals observed in the first-line setting (Neelapu et al. Nat Med. 2022). Here, we report updated efficacy and safety outcomes from ZUMA-12 in all patients treated with axi-cel after a median follow-up of ≥40 months. Methods: Eligible adults had high-risk LBCL, with MYC and BCL2 and/or BCL6 rearrangements (double- or triple-hit histology) per investigator or an International Prognostic Index (IPI) score ≥3, plus a positive interim PET per Lugano classification (Deauville score 4/5) after 2 cycles of an anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody and anthracycline-containing regimen. Patients underwent leukapheresis, followed by lymphodepleting chemotherapy (cyclophosphamide and fludarabine) on Days -5, -4, and -3, and a single axi-cel infusion of 2×10 6 CAR T cells/kg on Day 0. Per investigator discretion, non-chemotherapy bridging could be administered. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed CR rate per Lugano classification (Cheson et al. J Clin Oncol. 2014). Secondary endpoints included ORR, duration of response (DOR), event-free survival (EFS), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), safety, and levels of CAR T cells in blood and cytokines in serum. Results: As of May 3, 2023, 42 patients were enrolled and 40 were treated with axi-cel, with a median follow-up of 40.9 months (range, 29.5-50.2). In total, 37 patients were evaluable for response (centrally confirmed double- or triple-hit histology or IPI score ≥3). The CR rate was 86% (95% CI, 71-95), and 92% (95% CI, 78-98) of patients had an objective response. Patients with centrally confirmed double- or triple-hit histology (n=10) had a CR rate of 90%. Responses were ongoing in 73% of response-evaluable patients at data cutoff. Medians for DOR, EFS, PFS, and OS were not reached. The 36-month estimates for DOR, EFS (Figure 1), PFS, and OS (Figure 2) were 82%, 73%, 75%, and 81%, respectively. All treated patients (n=40) experienced adverse events (AEs) of any grade and 88% of patients had grade ≥3 AEs. Similar to the primary analysis, the most common any-grade AEs were pyrexia (100%), headache (70%), and neutrophil count decreased (55%). No new cases of cytokine release syndrome (CRS) or neurologic events of any grade occurred since the prior data cut and all cases of CRS and neurologic events reported were resolved by data cutoff. Prolonged cytopenias of any grade (present Day ≥30 post-infusion) occurred in 9 patients (n=7 neutrophil count decreased) and were resolved by data cutoff. There were 8 deaths due to progressive disease (n=5) and other causes not related to axi-cel (1 COVID-19, 1 esophageal adenocarcinoma, 1 septic shock on Days 350, 535, and 287 post axi-cel infusion, respectively). Two of the 8 deaths (1 progressive disease and 1 esophageal adenocarcinoma) occurred after the primary analysis. Among treated patients, post-infusion CAR T-cell expansion by peak and area under the curve was 36.9 cells/µL and 368.0 cells/µL×days, respectively, in those with ongoing responses at data cutoff (n=17), 45.1 cells/µL and 413.4 cells/µL×days in those who relapsed (n=6), and 34.7 cells/µL and 566.8 cells/µL×days in non-responders (n=3). Conclusion: In this updated analysis of ZUMA-12 with a median follow-up of ≥40 months, axi-cel demonstrated a high rate of durable responses and no new safety signals. Axi-cel may benefit patients exposed to fewer prior therapies and those with high-risk LBCL, a population with high unmet need and poor outcomes after standard first-line chemoimmunotherapy.

Purpose The predominant pattern of relapse for patients with B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) who undergo anti-CD19 Chimeric Antigen Receptor T-cell Therapy (CART) involves sites previously involved by NHL. Bridging radiotherapy (BRT) has shown to be an effective bridging treatment with excellent local control rates. Our previous work defined limited/oligometastatic lymphoma as disease involving <5 sites. This study is the first to report on the role of BRT for patients with limited (<5 involved sites) disease prior to CART. Methods Following Institutional Review Board approval, a retrospective review from 2018 to 2023 across 3 Mayo Clinic sites (Arizona, Florida, and Minnesota) was performed and identified 139 patients with relapsed/refractory (r/r) B-cell NHL without bone marrow involvement who received CART and had <5 disease sites prior to leukapheresis. Ann Arbor staging was used to define the number of involved disease sites. An involved disease site included the Ann Arbor anatomical lymph node region(s) harboring the pathological lymph node(s) or any extranodal lesion. Bridging treatment (radiation and/or systemic therapy) was defined as treatment administered between leukapheresis and CART infusion. The primary endpoint was event-free survival (EFS),defined from CART infusion to any disease progression or initiation of post-CART consolidative/salvage therapy. Secondary endpoints included progression -free survival (PFS),defined from CART infusion to any disease progression, and overall survival (OS), defined from CART infusion to death. Results Prior to CART infusion, 44 (32%) patients received BRT and 95 (68%) did not. Bridging systemic therapy was given to 5 (11%) and 34 (36%) patients in the BRT and no BRT groups, respectively (p=0.003). The median number of involved disease sites prior to leukapheresis was 2 (range: 1-4). There was no significant difference in the baseline characteristics prior to CART infusion between the BRT and no BRT groups, except for extranodal involvement that was more common in the BRT group (Table 1). The median equivalent 2 Gy dose was 27 Gy (Interquartile range 23-34), and the most common BRT regimen was 20 Gy in 5 fractions. Among the 44 BRT patients, 34 received radiation to all visible PET-avid disease sites, and 10 received radiation to some but not all disease sites. The median follow-up was 20 months. The rate of grade ≥2 cytokine release syndrome was 41% in both groups (p=0.99). The rate of grade ≥2 immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome was 21% and 37% in the BRT and no BRT groups, respectively (p=0.059). There were no observed grade ≥3 BRT-related toxicities. Objective response rate by PET 5 point scale was higher in the BRT group (93% versus 79%; p=0.036). Crude rates of progression were 30% in BRT and 55% in no BRT patients, with 9/13 (69%) and 43/52 (83%) patients relapsing in pre-existing sites of disease present prior to CART infusion in the BRT and no BRT group, respectively. Seven (16%) BRT patients relapsed in the radiation field. The 2-year EFS was 50% in the BRT group and 39% in the no BRT group (p=0.01). The 2-year PFS was 55% in the BRT group and 45% in the no BRT group (p=0.017). The 2-year OS was 55% in the BRT group and 62% in the no BRT group (p=0.7). Intriguingly, patients who received BRT to all visible PET-avid disease sites (n=34) had further improvement in 2-year EFS (67% vs 39%, p=0.003) and 2-year PFS (71% vs 46%, p=0.008) compared to no BRT or patients who received BRT to some but not all visible disease sites (n=105). Nine patients (2 in BRT and 7 in no BRT groups) received consolidative radiotherapy for day 30 residual disease with only one patient subsequently experiencing progression. Twenty-five patients (6 in BRT and 19 in no BRT groups) received salvage/palliative RT for post-CART relapsed disease. Thirty-seven (39%) patients in the no BRT group remained without disease progression and did not receive radiation in the bridging, consolidative or salvage/palliative setting. Conclusion Bridging radiotherapy prior to CART infusion for patients with limited (<5 involved disease sites) r/r NHL appears to improve response rate, EFS, and PFS without causing significant toxicities. Approximately one third of patients who do not receive BRT will require subsequent post-CART radiation, and another third will remain free of radiation and disease progression.