Citations

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.

ABSTRACT Anaplastic lymphoma kinase‐positive large B‐cell lymphoma (ALK+ LBCL) is a rare, aggressive subtype of diffuse large B‐cell lymphoma with poor outcomes using standard chemotherapy. In this multi‐institutional retrospective study, we analyzed 39 cases of ALK+ LBCL identified at six US academic centers from 2002 to 2024, with treatment including conventional cytotoxic regimens in frontline and biologically informed and nonchemotherapy‐based strategies in the relapsed setting. Ninety‐two percent of patients received frontline anthracycline‐based chemotherapy; 43% received intensified regimens, and 15% underwent upfront autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT). Despite these approaches, outcomes remained poor. At a median follow‐up of 5.4 years, median event‐free survival (EFS) was 0.6 years (95% CI, 0.4–0.9), and median overall survival (OS) was 1.5 years (95% CI, 1.3–NR). One‐ and five‐year EFS rates were 28% and 17%, while corresponding OS rates were 72% and 42%, respectively. Advanced stage and high IPI scores were associated with inferior outcomes. Twelve patients received ALK inhibitors, with alectinib showing more durable responses than crizotinib. Lenalidomide and immune checkpoint inhibitors also demonstrated activity, including durable complete responses. Five patients underwent allogeneic stem cell transplantation, with three achieving sustained remission. In conclusion, our findings highlight the limited benefit of chemotherapy, even when intensified or followed by ASCT, and support the integration of biologically targeted therapies, which may have contributed to improved OS in our cohort compared to historical outcomes. Prospective, collaborative studies are needed to better understand disease biology and define optimal use of modern therapies in this rare lymphoma.

Abstract The treatment patterns and clinical outcomes for patients experiencing progression of disease (POD) following CD19-directed chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy for relapsed or refractory (R/R) mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) are undefined. We identified all patients who received CD19-directed CAR T-cell therapy for R/R MCL therapy across 15 international centers, and studied those experiencing POD post–CAR T-cell therapy in detail. We extracted clinical/treatment/pathologic variables, and associated these features with survival outcomes. In total, 384 patients received CAR T-cell therapy, and 135 (35%) experienced POD. POD occurred at a median of 6 months following CAR T-cell therapy infusion, and most (64%) patients with POD had complete response as best response to CAR T-cell therapy. Tumor features at POD included blastoid/pleomorphic morphology in 29 of 78 (37%) patients, and TP53 mutation in 21 of 41 (51%) patients. Following POD, 17 patients received no further therapy, 13 underwent local therapy, and 105 received systemic therapy. The most common first-line systemic therapies were chemo(immuno)therapy (22 patients; overall response rate [ORR], 40%), pirtobrutinib (17 patients; ORR, 36%), and bispecific antibodies (13 patients; ORR, 67%). Among patients experiencing POD, the median progression-free survival and overall survival (OS) were 2.5 months and 5.4 months, respectively, from POD. Lack of response to CAR T-cell therapy and short time from CAR T-cell therapy infusion to POD (&lt;3 vs 3-6 vs &gt;6 months), among other factors, were associated with inferior OS after POD. In conclusion, we confirm the challenging prognosis for patients experiencing POD following CD19 CAR T-cell therapy for R/R MCL, and establish a benchmark for future investigations in this patient population.

SummaryIn individuals with high‐count monoclonal B‐cell lymphocytosis (MBL), we investigated if lymphadenopathy or splenomegaly found by imaging was associated with shorter time to first chronic lymphocytic leukaemia (CLL) therapy (TTFT) and overall survival (OS). Individuals with MBL seen at Mayo Clinic (2002–2019) were retrospectively divided into three cohorts based on imaging studies within 1 year of diagnosis: no imaging studies (Cohort A); imaging with no evidence of lymphadenopathy/splenomegaly (Cohort B); imaging with evidence of lymphadenopathy/splenomegaly (Cohort C). We compared baseline characteristics, TTFT and OS across the MBL cohorts to a cohort of individuals with small lymphocytic lymphoma (SLL). A total of 1078 patients were included: 640 with MBL and 438 with SLL. Compared to Cohort B, individuals in Cohort C were more likely to have unmutated immunoglobulin heavy chain variable region (IGHV) (43% vs. 25% p = 0.016), high‐risk fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) (del17p and del11q in 15% vs. 4%, p = 0.038) and higher expression of CD38 (31% vs. 16%; p = 0.011). After adjusting for sex and CLL‐International Prognostic Index (IPI), lymphadenopathy/splenomegaly was associated with a shorter TTFT (hazard ratio [HR] = 2.04, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.02–4.04, p = 0.042) but not OS (HR = 1.09, 95% CI: 0.62–1.92, p = 0.775). Lymphadenopathy/splenomegaly on imaging in individuals with high‐count MBL is associated with a more unfavourable risk profile and shorter time to first CLL‐directed therapy.

Abstract Epcoritamab and glofitamab are CD20-directed bispecific antibodies (BsAbs) approved in the United States for relapsed or refractory (R/R) diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL). Limited data exist for patients treated outside of trials. Patients with R/R DLBCL receiving commercial epcoritamab or glofitamab between 1 January 2023 and 15 October 2024 were collected from 21 United States institutions. Among 245 patients, 156 received epcoritamab and 89 received glofitamab, 113 were refractory to front-line therapy, 40 had MYC and BCL2 and/or BCL6 rearrangements, 147 received prior chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy, and 174 patients would have been ineligible for registrational trials. The overall response rate (ORR) for epcoritamab and glofitamab was 51% (23% complete response, [CR]) and 53% (30% CR), respectively. Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 2.6 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 2.0-3.8 months), and median overall survival (OS) was 7.8 months (95% CI, 6.2-11.0 months). The 6-month PFS was 36% (95% CI, 30-44) and the 6-month OS was 60% (95% CI, 54-67). Both trial ineligibility and undetectable CD20 pre-BsAbs portended shorter PFS and OS. Of 17 individuals with paired biopsies, 15 (88.2%) lost CD20 expression after BsAbs with a median time to progression of 3.7 months. This analysis including patients with R/R DLBCL shows the ORR to CD3/CD20 BsAbs was comparable to pivotal trials, although PFS and OS were lower. Baseline undetectable levels of CD20 were associated with poor outcomes. These results demonstrate the activity of BsAbs in R/R DLBCL, and underscore the importance of target antigen expression.