Search

Multiple myeloma (MM), a treatable but incurable malignancy, is characterized by the growth of clonal plasma cells in protective niches in the bone marrow. MM cells depend on expression of BCL-2 family proteins, in particular MCL-1, for survival. The regulation of MCL-1 is complex and cell type-dependent. Unraveling the exact mechanism by which MCL-1 is overexpressed in MM may provide new therapeutic strategies for inhibition in malignant cells, preferably limiting side effects in healthy cells. In this study, we reveal that one cause of overexpression could be stabilization of the MCL-1 protein. We demonstrate this in a subset of MM and diffuse large B cell lymphoma (DLBCL) cell lines and MM patient samples. We applied a phosphatase siRNA screen to identify phosphatases responsible for MCL-1 stabilization in MM, and revealed PP2A as the MCL-1 stabilizing phosphatase. Using the PP2A inhibitor okadaic acid, we validated that PP2A dephosphorylates MCL-1 at Ser159 and/or Thr163, and thereby stabilizes MCL-1 in MM cells with long MCL-1 half-life, but not in DLBCL cells. Combined kinase and phosphatase inhibition experiments suggest that the MCL-1 half-life in MM is regulated by the counteracting functions of JNK and PP2A. These findings increase the understanding of the mechanisms by which MCL-1 is post-translationally regulated, which may provide novel strategies to inhibit MCL-1 in MM cells.

Population-based studies of classical Hodgkin lymphoma (cHL) in contemporary clinical practice are scarce. The aim of this nationwide population-based study is to assess trends in primary therapy and relative survival (RS) during 1989–2017. We included 9,985 patients with cHL. Radiotherapy alone was virtually not applied as from 2000 among patients aged 18–69 years with stage I/II disease, following the broader application of chemotherapy combined with radiotherapy. Chemotherapy only was the preferred treatment for patients with stage III/IV disease. Throughout the entire study period, around 20% of patients aged ≥70 years across all disease stages received no anti-neoplastic therapy. The most considerable improvements in 5-year RS were confined to patients aged 18–59 years. Five-year RS for patients with stage I/II disease diagnosed during 2010–2017 was 99%, 98%, 100%, 93%, 84%, and 61% for patients aged 18–29, 30–39, 40–49, 50–59, 60–69, and ≥70 years, respectively. The corresponding estimates for stage III/IV disease were 96%, 92%, 90%, 80%, 58%, and 46%. Collectively, the improvements in survival likely relate to advances in cHL management. These achievements, however, do not seem to translate into significant benefits for patients ≥60 years. Therefore, novel therapies are urgently needed to reduce excess mortality in elderly cHL patients.

Background The survival and proliferation of multiple myeloma (MM) cells in the bone marrow (BM) critically depend on interaction with stromal cells expressing the chemokine CXCL12. CXCL12 regulates the homing to the BM niche by mediating the transendothelial migration and adhesion/retention of the MM cells. The gamma isoform of CXCL12 (CXCL12γ) has been reported to be highly expressed in mouse BM and to show enhanced biological activity compared to the ‘common’ CXCL12α isoform, mediated by its unique extended C-terminal domain, which binds heparan sulfate proteoglycans (HSPGs) with an extraordinary high affinity. Here, we investigated the expression of CXCL12γ in human BM and studied its functional role in the interaction of MM cells with BM stromal cells (BMSCs). Methods We assessed CXCL12γ mRNA and protein expression by human BMSCs using qPCR, flow cytometry, and immunohistochemistry. CRISPR-Cas9 was employed to delete CXCL12γ and the heparan sulfate (HS) co-polymerase EXT1 in BMSCs. To study the functional roles of BMSC-derived CXCL12γ and HSPGs in the interaction of MM cells with BMSCs cells, MM cell lines and primary MM cells were co-cultured with BMSCs. Results We observed that CXCL12γ is expressed in situ by reticular stromal cells in both normal and MM BM, as well as by primary BMSC isolates and BMSC lines. Importantly, upon secretion, CXCL12γ, unlike the CXCL12α isoform, was retained on the surface of BMSCs. This membrane retention of CXCL12γ is HSPG mediated, since it was completely annulated by CRISPR-Cas9-mediated deletion of the HS co-polymerase EXT1. CXCL12γ expressed by BMSCs and membrane-retained by HSPGs supported robust adhesion of MM cells to the BMSCs. Specific genetic deletion of either CXCL12γ or EXT1 significantly attenuated the ability of BMSCs to support MM cell adhesion and, in addition, impaired their capacity to protect MM cells from bortezomib-induced cell death. Conclusions We show that CXCL12γ is expressed by human BMSCs and upon secretion is retained on their cell surface by HSPGs. The membrane-bound CXCL12γ controls adhesion of MM cells to the stromal niche and mediates drug resistance. These findings designate CXCL12γ and associated HSPGs as partners in mediating MM–niche interaction and as potential therapeutic targets in MM.

Waldenström macroglobulinaemia is an indolent B-cell lymphoma with clearly defined criteria for diagnosis, initiation of therapy, and response, which was established by consensus panels at previous International Workshops for Waldenström Macroglobulinaemia (IWWM). The treatment options for Waldenström macroglobulinaemia continued to be researched after the publication of the eighth IWWM consensus recommendations in 2016, and at the tenth IWWM in New York, USA (October, 2018) an international consensus panel was formed to update treatment recommendations. Participants were selected as members of the consensus panel based on their expertise on Waldenström macroglobulinaemia. The initial live discussion took place during the tenth IWWM meeting and two separate teleconferences were held in June, 2019, and January, 2020, to refine recommendations. No external or financial support was received for the elaboration of these recommendations. According to these updated consensus recommendations, alkylating drugs (bendamustine, cyclophosphamide) and proteasome inhibitors (bortezomib, carfilzomib, ixazomib), both in combination with rituximab, as well as BTK inhibitors (ibrutinib), alone or in combination with rituximab, are preferred first-line therapy options for symptomatic patients with Waldenström macroglobulinaemia. In previously treated patients with Waldenström macroglobulinaemia who had an initial durable response, reuse of a previous regimen or another primary therapy regimen are acceptable options. Novel BTK inhibitors (acalabrutinib, zanubrutinib, tirabrutinib) and the BCL2 antagonist venetoclax appear safe and active, and represent emerging options for the treatment of Waldenström macroglobulinaemia. The choice of therapy should be guided by the patient's clinical profile, genomic features, and drug availability.

PURPOSE Immunochemotherapy with rituximab plus cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (R-CHOP) has become standard of care for patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL). This randomized trial assessed whether rituximab intensification during the first 4 cycles of R-CHOP could improve the outcome of these patients compared with standard R-CHOP. PATIENTS AND METHODS A total of 574 patients with DLBCL age 18 to 80 years were randomly assigned to induction therapy with 6 or 8 cycles of R-CHOP-14 with (RR-CHOP-14) or without (R-CHOP-14) intensification of rituximab in the first 4 cycles. The primary end point was complete remission (CR) on induction. Analyses were performed by intention to treat. RESULTS CR was achieved in 254 (89%) of 286 patients in the R-CHOP-14 arm and 249 (86%) of 288 patients in the RR-CHOP-14 arm (hazard ratio [HR], 0.82; 95% CI, 0.50 to 1.36; P = .44). After a median follow-up of 92 months (range, 1-131 months), 3-year failure-free survival was 74% (95% CI, 68% to 78%) in the R-CHOP-14 arm versus 69% (95% CI, 63% to 74%) in the RR-CHOP-14 arm (HR, 1.26; 95% CI, 0.98 to 1.61; P = .07). Progression-free survival at 3 years was 74% (95% CI, 69% to 79%) in the R-CHOP-14 arm versus 71% (95% CI, 66% to 76%) in the RR-CHOP-14 arm (HR, 1.20; 95% CI, 0.94 to 1.55; P = .15). Overall survival at 3 years was 81% (95% CI, 76% to 85%) in the R-CHOP-14 arm versus 76% (95% CI, 70% to 80%) in the RR-CHOP-14 arm (HR, 1.27; 95% CI, 0.97 to 1.67; P = .09). Patients between ages 66 and 80 years experienced significantly more toxicity during the first 4 cycles in the RR-CHOP-14 arm, especially neutropenia and infections. CONCLUSION Early rituximab intensification during R-CHOP-14 does not improve outcome in patients with untreated DLBCL.

Item does not contain fulltext

System science offers a unique set of tools, including causal loop diagrams (CLDs), for stakeholders to better grasp the complexity of factors surrounding quality of life. Because the health-related quality of life (HRQoL) of cancer immunotherapy patients exists within an intricate system affected by and affecting many factors across multiple dimensions, the development of a systems-level model can provide a powerful framework to aid the understanding of this complexity. We developed a CLD for HRQoL of cancer immunotherapy patients.We first applied a literature-based approach to construct a CLD for patients following immunotherapy. We then iteratively reviewed and enhanced the CLD through interviews with subject matter experts.Based on the reviewed literature and subject matter expert input, we produced a CLD representing the system surrounding cancer immunotherapy patients' HRQoL. Several feedback loops are identified that span clinical experiences, oncology teams' perceptions about immunotherapy, social support structures, and further research and development in cancer immunotherapy, in addition to other components. The CLD enables visualization of thought experiments regarding how a change anywhere in the system can ultimately worsen or improve patients' HRQoL.The CLD illustrates the valuable contribution of a systems perspective to quality-of-life research. This systems-based qualitative representation gives insight on strategies to inhibit harmful effects, enhance beneficial effects, and inherent tradeoffs within the system. The CLD identifies gaps in the literature and offers a communication tool for diverse stakeholders. Our research method provides an example for studying the complexities of quality of life in other health domains.

In anti-myelin-associated glycoprotein IgM paraprotein-related peripheral neuropathy (anti-MAG PN), there is a lack of reliable biomarkers to select patients eligible for therapy and for evaluating treatment effects, both in routine practice and in clinical trials. Neurofilament light chain (NfL) and contactin-1 (CNTN1) can serve as markers of axonal and paranodal damage. Complement activation is involved in the pathogenesis in anti-MAG PN. We, therefore, hypothesized that serum NfL, CNTN1, C3b/c and C4b/c may function as biomarkers of disease activity in anti-MAG PN.In this prospective cohort study, we included 24 treatment-naïve patients with anti-MAG PN (mean age 69 years, 57% male) that had IgM paraproteinemia, a high IgM MAG-antibody, and clinical diagnosis of anti-MAG PN by a neurologist specialized in peripheral nerve disorders. We measured serum NfL, CNTN1, C3b/c and C4b/c, reference values were based on healthy controls. As controls, 10 treatment-naïve patients with IgM Monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance (MGUS) or Waldenström's Macroglobulinemia (mean age 69 years, 60% male) without signs of neuropathy were included (non-PN).NfL, CNTN1 levels in serum were mostly normal in anti-MAG PN patients and comparable to non-PN patients. C3b/c and C4b/c levels were normal in anti-MAG PN patients.Our results do not support serum NfL, CNTN1, and C3b/c and C4b/c as potential biomarkers in anti-MAG PN, although we cannot exclude that subgroups or subtle abnormalities could be found in a much larger cohort with longitudinal follow-up.

The outcome of patients with large B cell lymphoma (LBCL) who did not respond to a classical immunochemotherapy regimen at any time or relapsed within 1 year following chemoimmunotherapy is poor. The Scholar-One-Study showed long-term event-free survival for less than 20% of these patients (Crump et al. 2017). The introduction of chimeric antigen receptor T cell therapy (CAR-T) is a substantial advancement for these patients, offering long-term remission and a curative prospect for 30 to 40% of patients (summarized in Table 12.1), (Abramson et al. 2020; Neelapu et al. 2017; Schuster et al. 2019b). To date, in Europe, two products (axicabtagene ciloleucel and tisagenlecleucel) have been licenced by the European Medical Agency, and a third product (lisocabtagene maraleucel) will become available in 2021. All these products are licenced for patients who have failed at least two prior lines of systemic therapy. This initially defines, however broad, a range of possible situations in which the application of CART is indicated. The following considerations may help to further define the patient population that should be offered CAR-T cells as the next line of treatment. Studies addressing the potential benefit of CAR-T cells compared to high-dose chemotherapy and autologous stem cell transplantation for second-line treatment of LBCL have been fully recruited, but the results are still pending.

The diagnosis of Waldenström’s macroglobulinemia (WM), an IgM-associated lymphoplasmacytic lymphoma, can be challenging due to the different forms of disease presentation. Furthermore, in recent years, WM has witnessed remarkable progress on the diagnostic front, as well as a deeper understanding of the disease biology, which has affected clinical practice. This, together with the increasing variety of tools and techniques available, makes it necessary to have a practical guidance for clinicians to perform the initial evaluation of patients with WM. In this paper, we present the consensus recommendations and laboratory requirements for the diagnosis of WM developed by the European Consortium of Waldenström’s Macroglobulinemia (ECWM), for both clinical practice as well as the research/academical setting. We provide the procedures for multiparametric flow cytometry, fluorescence in situ hybridization and molecular tests and with this offer guidance for a standardized diagnostic work-up and methodological workflow of patients with IgM monoclonal gammopathy of uncertain significance, asymptomatic and symptomatic WM.

Purpose of review CD19-directed chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy is a valuable new treatment option for patients with relapsed/refractory (R/R) B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma. The aim of this review is to give an overview of the pivotal phase I/II trials, emerging real-world evidence and ongoing trials. Recent findings For decades, attempts at improvement of the poor prognosis of patients with R/R large B-cell lymphoma with new treatment regimens have been disappointing. Since the first report of CD19-directed CAR-T-cell therapy in 2010, three constructs have been tested in large phase I/II trials and resulted in 30-40% durable responses. This has led to Food and Drug Administration and European Medicines Agency approval for axicabtagene ciloleucel and tisagenlecleucel and filing of the biologics license application for lisocabtagene maraleucel. Emerging real-world evidence seems to confirm the promising results. However, considerable toxicity, mainly cytokine release syndrome and neurotoxicity limits their general applicability and not all patients intended to be treated can be bridged during the manufacturing period due to kinetics of the disease. Randomized phase III clinical trials are being conducted to test anti-CD19 CAR-T-cell therapy in the second-line and several phase II trials are aiming to improve efficacy and decrease toxicity. Summary CD19-directed CAR-T-cell therapy has become standard of care for aggressive R/R diffuse large B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma (DLBCL), but challenges still remain.

Background For patients with cancer, being well informed by their oncologist about treatment options and the implications thereof is highly relevant. Communication skills training (CST) programs have shown to be effective in improving clinicians’ communication skills, yet CSTs are time-consuming, inconvenient to schedule, and costly. Online education enables new ways of accessible learning in a safe and personalised environment. Aim and methods We describe the design of a digital CST-tool for information provision skills that meets oncologists’ learning needs. We used the CeHRes Roadmap for user-centred design as a guiding framework. Phase 1 (Contextual Inquiry) involved consultation of the literature and a focus group interview study to uncover the learning needs and training preferences of clinicians’ regarding a digital training for the skill of information-provision. In phase 2 (Value Specification), two multidisciplinary expert panels specified the learning content and format of a digital training. Phase 3 (Design) encompassed an iterative development process, including two user group assessment sessions and 5 individual user sessions in which prototypes were tested. All sessions were recorded and independently analyzed by two researchers. Results Based on literature and consultation of the users in the inquiry phase of the development process, and on expert opinion in the value specification phase, relevant (sub) skills and user requirements were defined to consider for the digital training format. It was decided to develop a conventional e-learning and a chatbot. Personalization and interactivity were integrated in the prototypes by including features that allow for e.g., choosing text, video or animation; to upload video-recorded consultations to receive peer-feedback; and to consult a communication expert. Results revealed that, overall, participants expressed a willingness to use a digital training tool to acquire information-provision skills. Individual user testing (including junior clinicians), indicated a preference for the chatbot over the e-learning. Conclusion We offer a description of extensive development work which was conducted in collaboration with multiple health care professionals to iteratively develop two innovative prototypes of digital tools that would appropriately engage oncologists in learning effective information giving skills. The resulting prototypes were well appreciated and thus provide a solid basis for further development and testing.

ObjectivesTailoring medical information to cancer patients’ needs is recommended, but there is little guidance on how to tailor, and limited research exists about its effects. Tailoring to the amount of preferred information may be easily implementable in clinic and is tested here.MethodsA video-vignette experiment was used to systematically vary video patients’ information preferences (limited/extensive) and amount of provided information (additional/no additional). N = 253 cancer patients/survivors evaluated these video-recorded consultations, serving as analogue patients (APs), and completed outcome measures.ResultsTailoring information to video patients’ preferences had no effect on APs’ evaluation of the consultation (satisfaction, trust). Yet, there was a main effect of APs’ own information preferences: Those preferring extensive information recalled (MΔ = 5.8%) and recognized (MΔ = 3.5%) more information than those preferring limited information. Moreover, information provision mattered among APs who preferred limited information: They recognized even less if provided with extensive information.ConclusionsTailoring to the amount of video patient’s information preferences did not affect APs’ evaluation of the consultation (satisfaction, trust), while APs’ personal information preferences determined their recall and recognition of medical information.Practice implicationsInformation preferences should be assessed and tailored to in clinical practice. Overwhelming patients/survivors, who prefer limited information, should be prevented.

The anti-CD19 chimeric antigen receptor (CAR)–T cell therapy tisagenlecleucel was evaluated in the global, phase 2 JULIET study in adult patients with relapsed/refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL). We correlated tisagenlecleucel cellular kinetics with clinical/product parameters in 111 patients treated in JULIET. Tisagenlecleucel persistence in responders and nonresponders, respectively, was demonstrated for 554 and 400 days maximum by flow cytometry and for 693 and 374 days maximum by quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR). No relationships were identified between cellular kinetics (qPCR) and product characteristics, intrinsic/extrinsic factors, dose, or immunogenicity. Most patients with 3-month response had detectable transgene at time of response and continued persistence for ≥6 months. Expansion (maximal expansion of transgene/CAR-positive T-cell levels in vivo postinfusion [Cmax]) was potentially associated with response duration but this did not reach statistical significance (hazard ratio for a twofold increase in Cmax, 0.79; 95% confidence interval, 0.61-1.01). Tisagenlecleucel expansion was associated with cytokine-release syndrome (CRS) severity and tocilizumab use; no relationships were observed with neurologic events. Transgene levels were associated with B-cell levels. Dose was associated with CRS severity, but this was not statistically significant after adjusting for baseline tumor burden. In contrast to the results from B-cell precursor acute lymphoblastic leukemia (B-ALL) and chronic lymphocytic leukemia, similar exposure was observed in DLBCL in this study regardless of response and expansion was lower in DLBCL than B-ALL, likely from differences in cancer location and/or T-cell intrinsic factors. Relationships between expansion and CRS severity, and lack of relationships between dose and exposure, were similar between DLBCL and B-ALL. Tisagenlecleucel cellular kinetics in adult relapsed/refractory DLBCL improve current understanding of in vivo expansion and its relationships with safety/efficacy endpoints. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT02445248.

Summary In this nationwide, population‐based study, we assessed trends in primary treatment and survival among 687 patients with nodular lymphocyte‐predominant Hodgkin lymphoma (75% males; median age, 40 years; and 74% stage‐I/II disease) diagnosed in the Netherlands between 1993–2016. There were no noteworthy changes in the application of primary therapy over time among adult patients across the different disease stages and age groups. Survival among various subgroups of adult patients was largely comparable to the expected survival of the general population. A particularly encouraging finding was that young adult patients experienced virtually no excess mortality, as compared to the general population.

The efficacy of daratumumab depends partially on CD38 expression on multiple myeloma (MM) cells. We have previously shown that all-trans retinoic acid (ATRA) upregulates CD38 expression and reverts daratumumab-resistance ex vivo. We therefore evaluated the optimal dose, efficacy, and safety of daratumumab combined with ATRA in patients with daratumumab-refractory MM in a phase 1/2 study (NCT02751255). In part A of the study, 63 patients were treated with daratumumab monotherapy. Fifty patients with daratumumab-refractory MM were subsequently enrolled in part B and treated with daratumumab (reintensified schedule) combined with ATRA until disease progression. The recommended phase 2 dose of ATRA in combination with daratumumab was defined as 45 mg/m2. At this dose, the overall response rate (ORR) was 5%, indicating that the primary endpoint (ORR ≥15%) was not met. However, most patients (66%) achieved at least stable disease. After a median follow-up of 43 months, the median progression-free survival (PFS) for all patients was 2.8 months. Patients who previously achieved at least a partial response or minimal response/stable disease with prior daratumumab monotherapy had a significantly longer PFS compared with patients who immediately progressed during daratumumab as single agent (median PFS 3.4 and 2.8 vs 1.3 months). The median overall survival was 19.1 months. The addition of ATRA did not increase the incidence of adverse events. Flow cytometric analysis revealed that ATRA temporarily increased CD38 expression on immune cell subsets. In conclusion, the addition of ATRA and reintensification of daratumumab had limited activity in patients with daratumumab-refractory MM, which may be explained by the transient upregulation of CD38 expression. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT02751255.

Approximately 10% to 30% of patients with classical Hodgkin lymphoma (cHL) develop relapsed or refractory (R/R) disease. Of those patients, 50% to 60% show long-term progression-free survival after standard salvage chemotherapy followed by high-dose chemotherapy (HDCT) and autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT). In the past decade, novel therapies have been developed, such as the CD30-directed antibody–drug conjugate brentuximab vedotin and immune checkpoint inhibitors, which have greatly extended the treatment possibilities for patients with R/R cHL. Several phase 1/2 clinical trials have shown promising results of these new drugs as monotherapy or in combination with chemotherapy, but unfortunately, very few randomized phase 3 trials have been performed in this setting, making it difficult to give evidence-based recommendations for optimal treatment sequencing. Two important goals for the improvement in the treatment of R/R cHL can be identified: (1) increasing long-term progression-free and overall survival by optimizing risk-adapted treatment and (2) decreasing toxicity in patients with a low risk of relapse of disease by evaluating the need for HDCT/ASCT in these patients. In this review, we discuss treatment options for patients with R/R cHL in different settings: patients with a first relapse, primary refractory disease, and in patients who are ineligible or unfit for ASCT. Results of clinical trials investigating novel therapies or strategies published over the past 5 years are summarized.

It is unclear whether survival in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) continues to increase in an era where rituximab-containing chemotherapy reigns for almost two decades. Therefore, we evaluated trends in primary therapy and relative survival (RS) among Dutch DLBCL patients diagnosed between 1989 and 2018. Analyses were performed separately according to the stage I (N = 6952) and stage II-IV disease (N = 20,676), stratified by calendar period and age (18-64, 65-74, and ≥75 years). The use of chemotherapy ± radiotherapy increased over time across all age and stage groups. As of the mid-2000s,95% of chemotherapy-treated patients received chemoimmunotherapy, irrespective of age and stage. Overall, RS increased significantly over time across all age groups, especially after 2003 when rituximab-containing chemotherapy had become the standard of care. However, RS increased less pronounced between 2003-2010 and 2011-2018 than between 1989-2002 and 2003-2010. These findings were congruent across all studied stage groups. Five-year RS across the three age groups during 2011-2018 was 96%, 84%, and 67% for stage I DLBCL and 75%, 60%, and 46% for stage II-IV DLBCL. Collectively, survival in DLBCL increased modestly beyond the initial introduction of rituximab, with apparent survival differences across age and stage that warrant novel treatment approaches.

Contains fulltext : 244081.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access)

Simple SummaryCancer-related fatigue (CRF) is one of the most frequently reported symptoms with prevalence rates of 25 to 60 percent in (non-)Hodgkin lymphoma survivors. Several (pilot) studies showed promising effects of light therapy to reduce CRF. The aim of the current study is to evaluate the short- and long-term efficacy of light therapy on CRF and associated symptoms in chronically fatigued (non-)Hodgkin lymphoma survivors. Eighty-three survivors were exposed to bright white light (intervention) and another 83 survivors were exposed to dim white light (comparison). Results showed that all participants, irrespective of light condition, reported reduced levels of fatigue after the completion of light therapy. Similar results were found for depression, sleep quality, and some aspects of quality of life. No effect was found on circadian rhythms or objectively assessed sleep. Therefore, it is important to further investigate which aspects of intervention are associated with the improvements observed after light therapy.Purpose: To evaluate the short- and long-term effects of light therapy on fatigue (primary outcome) and sleep quality, depression, anxiety, quality of life, and circadian rhythms (secondary outcomes) in survivors of (non-)Hodgkin lymphoma presenting with chronic cancer-related fatigue. Methods: We randomly assigned 166 survivors (mean survival 13 years) to a bright white light intervention (BWL) or dim white light comparison (DWL) group. Measurements were completed at baseline (T0), post-intervention (T1), at three (T2), and nine (T3) months follow-up. A mixed-effect modeling approach was used to compare linear and non-linear effects of time between groups. Results: There were no significant differences between BWL and DWL in the reduction in fatigue over time. Both BWL and DWL significantly (p < 0.001) improved fatigue levels during the intervention followed by a slight reduction in this effect during follow-up (EST0-T1 = -0.71; EST1-T3 = 0.15). Similar results were found for depression, sleep quality, and some aspects of quality of life. Light therapy had no effect on circadian rhythms. Conclusions: BWL was not superior in reducing fatigue compared to DWL in HL and DLBCL survivors. Remarkably, the total sample showed clinically relevant and persistent improvements on fatigue not commonly seen in longitudinal observational studies in these survivors.

Consensus about a standard segmentation method to derive metabolic tumor volume (MTV) in classical Hodgkin lymphoma (cHL) is lacking, and it is unknown how different segmentation methods influence quantitative PET features. Therefore, we aimed to evaluate the delineation and completeness of lesion selection and the need for manual adaptation with different segmentation methods, and to assess the influence of segmentation methods on the prognostic value of MTV, intensity, and dissemination radiomics features in cHL patients. Methods: We analyzed a total of 105 (18)F-FDG PET/CT scans from patients with newly diagnosed (n = 35) and relapsed/refractory (n = 70) cHL with 6 segmentation methods: 2 fixed thresholds on SUV4.0 and SUV2.5, 2 relative methods of 41% of SUV(max) (41max) and a contrast-corrected 50% of SUV(peak) (A50P), and 2 combination majority vote (MV) methods (MV2, MV3). Segmentation quality was assessed by 2 reviewers on the basis of predefined quality criteria: completeness of selection, the need for manual adaptation, and delineation of lesion borders. Correlations and prognostic performance of resulting radiomics features were compared among the methods. Results: SUV4.0 required the least manual adaptation but tended to underestimate MTV and often missed small lesions with low (18)F-FDG uptake. SUV2.5 most frequently included all lesions but required minor manual adaptations and generally overestimated MTV. In contrast, few lesions were missed when using 41max, A50P, MV2, and MV3, but these segmentation methods required extensive manual adaptation and overestimated MTV in most cases. MTV and dissemination features significantly differed among the methods. However, correlations among methods were high for MTV and most intensity and dissemination features. There were no significant differences in prognostic performance for all features among the methods. Conclusion: A high correlation existed between MTV, intensity, and most dissemination features derived with the different segmentation methods, and the prognostic performance is similar. Despite frequently missing small lesions with low (18)F-FDG avidity, segmentation with a fixed threshold of SUV4.0 required the least manual adaptation, which is critical for future research and implementation in clinical practice. However, the importance of small, low (18)F-FDG–avidity lesions should be addressed in a larger cohort of cHL patients.

In 2017, the European Medicines Agency approved rituximab biosimilars (R-biosimilars) for treatment of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL). Thereafter, the Netherlands was one of the first countries to implement R-biosimilars, given lower costs compared with rituximab originator (R-originator). This study’s objective was to investigate whether overall survival (OS) of patients with DLBCL receiving R-biosimilars is similar to patients treated with R-originator. DLBCL patients ≥18 years, diagnosed between 2014 and 2018, who received at least 1 cycle of rituximab combined with cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisolone (R-CHOP) were identified in the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Patients were categorized into R-originator or R-biosimilars groups based on data from a central repository of the Dutch medicinal drug market. The primary end point was 3-year OS, defined as the time between diagnosis and all-cause death. By the end of 2018, 91% of purchased rituximab were biosimilars. In total, 4429 patients were identified with 876 in the R-biosimilars group and 3553 in the R-originator group. Patients in the R-biosimilars group less frequently received >6 cycles of R-CHOP compared with patients treated with R-originator (24% vs 30%, P = .003). The 3-year OS did not differ between patients treated with R-originator or R-biosimilars (73% vs 73%, P = .855). This was confirmed with a multivariable Cox regression analysis accounting for sex, age, International Prognostic Index score, and number of R-CHOP cycles. In conclusion, the 3-year OS is similar for patients treated with CHOP in combination with R-originator or R-biosimilars and, therefore, favors the use of R-biosimilars in DLBCL treatment management.

ZUMA-1 (NCT02348216) examined the safety and efficacy of axicabtagene ciloleucel (axi-cel), an autologous CD19-directed chimaeric antigen receptor (CAR)-T cell therapy, in refractory large B-cell lymphoma. To reduce treatment-related toxicity, several exploratory safety management cohorts were added to ZUMA-1. Specifically, cohort 6 investigated management of cytokine release syndrome (CRS) and neurologic events (NEs) with prophylactic corticosteroids and earlier corticosteroid and tocilizumab intervention. CRS and NE incidence and severity were primary end-points. Following leukapheresis, patients could receive optional bridging therapy per investigator discretion. All patients received conditioning chemotherapy (days -5 through -3), 2×106 CAR-T cells/kg (day 0) and once-daily oral dexamethasone [10mg, day 0 (before axi-cel) through day 2]. Forty patients received axi-cel. CRS occurred in 80% of patients (all grade ≤2). Any grade and grade 3 or higher NEs occurred in 58% and 13% of patients respectively. Sixty-eight per cent of patients did not experience CRS or NEs within 72h of axi-cel. With a median follow-up of 8·9months, objective and complete response rates were 95% and 80% respectively. Overall, prophylactic corticosteroids and earlier corticosteroid and/or tocilizumab intervention resulted in no grade 3 or higher CRS, a low rate of grade 3 or higher NEs and high response rates in this study population.

Background: KTE-X19, an autologous anti-CD19 chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cell therapy, is currently being evaluated in patients with relapsed/refractory (R/R) mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) who received 1 - 5 prior therapies (including a Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitor) in the Phase 2, registrational, multicenter ZUMA-2 study. With a median follow-up of 12.3 months, we previously reported an objective response rate (ORR) of 93% (67% complete response [CR] rate) with KTE-X19 treatment in the 60 efficacy-evaluable patients in ZUMA-2 (Wang et al. N Engl J Med. 2020;382:1331). Here, we present an updated analysis of efficacy, safety, and pharmacology for all patients with a minimum follow-up of 1 year. Methods: Eligible patients with R/R MCL underwent leukapheresis and conditioning chemotherapy followed by a single infusion of KTE-X19 (2 × 106 CAR T cells/kg; Wang et al. N Engl J Med. 2020;382:1331). The primary endpoint was ORR (CR + partial response) as assessed by an Independent Review Committee according to the Lugano Classification (Cheson et al. J Clin Oncol. 2014;32:3059). Efficacy data are reported for the 60 treated patients with ≥ 1 year of follow-up; safety data are presented for all 68 treated patients. Results: As of December 31, 2019, the median follow-up was 17.5 months (range, 12.3 - 37.6). The ORR was 92% (95% CI, 81.6 - 97.2), with a CR rate of 67% (95% CI, 53.3 - 78.3). Of all efficacy-evaluable patients, 48% had ongoing responses at the data cutoff. Medians were not reached for duration of response, progression-free survival (PFS), or overall survival; 15-month estimates were 58.6% (95% CI, 42.5 - 71.7), 59.2% (95% CI, 44.6 - 71.2), or 76.0% (95% CI, 62.8 - 85.1), respectively. In patients who achieved a CR, the median PFS was not reached (15-month rate, 75.1% [95% CI, 56.8 - 86.5]); in those who achieved a partial response, the median PFS was 3.1 months (95% CI, 2.3 - 5.2). Median PFS was 1.1 months (95% CI, 0.9 - 3.0) in nonresponding patients. The first 28 patients treated had a median follow-up of 32.3 months (range, 30.6 - 37.6); 39.3% of these patients remain in remission with no further therapy. Common grade ≥ 3 adverse events were neutropenia (85%), thrombocytopenia (53%), anemia (53%), and infections (34%). Grade ≥ 3 cytopenias were reported in 60% of patients ≥ 30 days post-infusion. Grade ≥ 3 cytokine release syndrome (CRS; per Lee et al. [Blood. 2014;124:188]) occurred in 15% of patients; 59% received tocilizumab for management of CRS. Grade ≥ 3 neurologic events (NEs) were reported in 31% of patients, and 38% received steroids for NE management. All CRS events and most NEs (37/43) resolved, as previously reported. There were no Grade 5 CRS events or NEs, and no new Grade 5 events occurred with additional follow-up. As previously reported, there were 2 cases of Grade 2 cytomegalovirus infection, 1 case each of Grade ≥ 3 hypogammaglobulinemia and Grade ≥ 3 tumor lysis syndrome, and no cases of Epstein-Barr virus-associated lymphoproliferation, replication-competent retrovirus, hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis, or KTE-X19-related secondary cancers. Median peak CAR T cell levels and median area under the curve (Days 0 - 28) were 98.9 cells/µL (range, 0.2 - 2565.8) and 1394.9 cells/µL (range, 3.8 - 27,700) in patients with ongoing responses at 12 months, 202.6 cells/µL (range, 1.6 - 2589.5) and 2312.3 cells/µL (range, 19.0 - 27,200) in patients who were relapsed at 12 months, and 0.4 cells/µL (range, 0.2 - 95.9) and 5.5 cells/µL (range, 1.8 - 1089.1) in nonresponders. Of the 57 efficacy-evaluable patients with data available, 84% had B cells detectable by flow cytometry at baseline. Of those in ongoing responses at 12 months, 10 of 26 patients (38%) with evaluable samples had B cells detectable at 3 months, and 10 of 18 (56%) had detectable B cells at 12 months; gene-marked CAR T cells were no longer detectable at 12 months in 5 of 28 evaluable patients (17%). Conclusions: The ZUMA-2 study continues to demonstrate substantial and durable clinical benefit of KTE-X19 therapy with manageable safety in patients with R/R MCL. Within this patient population, which lacks curative treatment options, most patients achieved durable CR, and no new safety signals were reported. Although early CAR T cell expansion was higher in patients who achieved an objective response, those who later relapsed showed elevated CAR T cell levels pointing to alternate mechanisms of secondary treatment failure in MCL. Disclosures Wang: Verastem: Research Funding; Molecular Templates: Research Funding; Kite Pharma: Consultancy, Other: Travel, accommodation, expenses, Research Funding; Dava Oncology: Honoraria; Targeted Oncology: Honoraria; VelosBio: Research Funding; BioInvent: Research Funding; Juno: Consultancy, Research Funding; OncLive: Honoraria; Pulse Biosciences: Consultancy; Loxo Oncology: Consultancy, Research Funding; Guidepoint Global: Consultancy; OMI: Honoraria, Other: Travel, accommodation, expenses; Nobel Insights: Consultancy; Acerta Pharma: Research Funding; Oncternal: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Other: Travel, accommodation, expenses, Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel, accommodation, expenses, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel, accommodation, expenses, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel, accommodation, expenses, Research Funding; MoreHealth: Consultancy; InnoCare: Consultancy; Beijing Medical Award Foundation: Honoraria; Lu Daopei Medical Group: Honoraria. Munoz:Merck: Research Funding; Portola: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Genentech/Roche: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; AstraZeneca: Speakers Bureau; Verastem: Speakers Bureau; Acrotech/Aurobindo: Speakers Bureau; Innovent: Consultancy; Fosunkite: Consultancy; Beigene: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Alexion: Consultancy; Juno/Celgene/BMS: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Consultancy; Kite, a Gilead Company: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Bayer: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Kyowa: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Millenium: Research Funding. Goy:MD Anderson: Research Funding; Regional Cancer Care Associates/OMI: Current Employment; Xcenda: Consultancy; AbbVie: Research Funding; Acerta: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: leadership role, Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: leadership role, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: leadership role, Research Funding; Kite, a Gilead Company: Consultancy, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Honoraria, Other: leadership role, Research Funding; COTA: Consultancy, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Other: leadership role; Hackensack UMC and University of Nebraska: Research Funding; Infinity Verastem: Research Funding; Morphosys: Research Funding; Karyopharm: Research Funding; Infinity: Research Funding; Constellation: Research Funding; Genentech/Roche: Research Funding; CALBG: Research Funding; Bayer: Research Funding; PracticeUpdate Oncology: Consultancy; RCCA/OMI: Current Employment. Locke:Wugen: Consultancy; GammaDelta Therapeutics: Consultancy; Celgene/Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Kite, a Gilead Company: Consultancy, Research Funding; Calibr: Consultancy; Allogene: Consultancy; Cellular Biomedicine Group: Other: Consultancy with grant options. Hill:Genentech: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Beigene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; AstraZenica: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Kite, a Gilead Company: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; Karyopharm: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Timmerman:Corvus: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; Marker Therapeutics: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; Bluebird Bio: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; Kite, a Gilead Company: Consultancy, Other: Travel support, Research Funding; Immune Design: Honoraria; Celldex Therapeutics: Consultancy; BMS: Other: Travel support, Research Funding; Spectrum Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Valor: Research Funding; Genmab: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Holmes:Texas Oncology PA: Current Employment; Gilead/Kite, Celgene/Juno, Rigel, Karyopharm, Janssen, Dova: Consultancy; Gilead/Kite, Novartis, Autolus, Celgene/Juno/bluebird, Genentech, Inc., Rigel, Janssen, Unum, ADC Therapeutics, Seattle Genetics, Incyte, Verastem: Research Funding; Kite, Karyopharm, Seattle Genetics, Rigel, Dova: Speakers Bureau. Jaglowski:CRISPR: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; Juno: Consultancy; Kite, a Gilead Company: Consultancy, Research Funding. Flinn:Karyopharm Therapeutics: Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Research Funding; Roche: Consultancy, Research Funding; Vincera Pharma: Consultancy; Iksuda Therapeutics: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Agios: Research Funding; ArQule: Research Funding; Infinity Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Unum Therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Forma Therapeutics: Research Funding; Forty Seven: Research Funding; Great Point Partners: Consultancy; Pfizer: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Nurix Therapeutics: Consultancy; Curis: Research Funding; MorphoSys: Consultancy, Research Funding; Juno Therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; Acerta Pharma: Research Funding; Genentech, Inc.: Research Funding; Gilead Sciences: Consultancy, Research Funding; F. Hoffmann-La Roche: Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; IGM Biosciences: Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Trillium Therapeutics: Research Funding; Triphase Research & Development Corp.: Research Funding; Verastem: Consultancy, Research Funding; Yingli Pharmaceuticals ≠: Consultancy, Research Funding; Rhizen Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Johnson & Johnson: Other; Teva: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Portola Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Constellation Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Calithera Biosciences: Research Funding; BeiGene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Loxo: Research Funding; Kite Pharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; Curio Science: Consultancy. McSweeney:Fred Hutchinson: Patents & Royalties; Colorado Blood Cancer Institute: Current Employment; Kite, a Gilead Company: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Miklos:Adaptive Biotech: Consultancy, Other: Travel support, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Other: Travel support; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Other: Travel support, Patents & Royalties, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Other: Travel support, Research Funding; Allogene Therapeutics Inc.: Research Funding; Juno-Celgene-Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Other: Travel support, Research Funding; Kite-Gilead: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel support, Research Funding; Miltenyi Biotec: Research Funding. Pagel:Gilead, Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company, and AstraZeneca: Consultancy. Kersten:Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel support; Kite, a Gilead Company: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel support; Celgene: Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; Miltenyi: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel support. Milpied:Celgene: Other: Travel support; Gilead Sciences: Other: consultancy or advisory role; Janssen: Honoraria; Sandoz: Honoraria, Other: consultancy or advisory role; Astellas: Honoraria; Roche: Honoraria, Other: Travel support. Fung:Takeda: Honoraria, Other: speakers' bureau, travel support; Sanotif: Honoraria, Other: speakers' bureau, travel support; Genentech: Honoraria, Other: speakers' bureau, travel support; AbbVie: Honoraria, Other: speakers' bureau, travel support; Kite, a Gilead Company: Honoraria, Other: speakers' bureau, travel support; AstraZeneca: Honoraria, Other: speakers' bureau, travel support; Janssen Oncology: Honoraria, Other: speakers' bureau, travel support. Topp:Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim, KITE, Regeneron, Roche: Research Funding; Amgen, KITE, Novartis, Regeneron, Roche: Consultancy. Houot:Janssen: Honoraria; Gilead: Other: Personal fees; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria. Beitinjaneh:Jazz: Other: speaker's bureau; Kite, a Gilead Company: Honoraria, Other: consulting or advisory role, speaker's bureau, ; ATARA: Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding. Peng:Kite, a Gilead Company: Current Employment; Gilead Sciences: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Zheng:Gilead Sciences: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; Kite, a Gilead Company: Current Employment. Rossi:Kite, a Gilead Company: Current Employment; Gilead Sciences: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Murugappan:Gilead Sciences: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; Kite, a Gilead Company: Current Employment. Kloos:Kite, a Gilead Company: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Reagan:Curis: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Kite, a Gilead Company: Consultancy.

Background: Follicular lymphoma (FL) remains an incurable disease for most patients (pts), characterized by a relapsing and remitting pattern. For pts with relapsed/refractory (r/r) FL, treatment outcomes typically worsen with each subsequent line of therapy, highlighting an unmet need. Tisagenlecleucel (tisa-cel) has demonstrated clinical benefits and manageable safety in pediatric and young adult pts with r/r B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia and adult pts with r/r diffuse large B-cell lymphoma. In a prior phase (Ph) 2a study of 14 pts with r/r FL, 71% achieved durable complete remission with tisa-cel (Chong et al. ICML 2019). Here we present a planned interim analysis of ELARA, a Ph 2, international trial of tisa-cel in adults with r/r FL. Methods: Adults with histologically confirmed FL (grades [Gr] 1-3A) being r/r within 6 mo after second-/later-line therapy (including an anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody with an alkylating agent) or relapsed after autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplant (autoHSCT), and with ECOG performance score of 0-1 were eligible. Pts with histologic transformation, prior allogeneic HSCT, or active CNS involvement were excluded. All pts received lymphodepleting chemotherapy followed by tisa-cel infusion of 0.6-6×108 CAR-T cells (bridging therapy prior to infusion was permitted). Disease was reassessed prior to infusion for all pts who received bridging therapy to establish a new baseline. After infusion, disease assessments were performed every 3 mo. The primary endpoint was complete response rate (CRR) based on best response by central review (Lugano 2014 criteria). Pts evaluable for efficacy had measurable disease at infusion and ≥6 mo follow-up from infusion or discontinued early. Secondary endpoints included overall response rate (ORR), duration of response (DOR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and safety. Results: As of May 26, 2020, 122 pts were screened, 98 were enrolled, 97 received tisa-cel (median follow-up, 6.5 mo), and 52 were evaluable for efficacy (median follow-up, 9.9 mo). At study entry, median age among treated pts was 57 y (range, 29-73), 66% of pts were male, 84% had stage III-IV disease, and 60% had a FLIPI score ≥3. The median number of prior lines of therapy was 4 (range, 2-13), including prior autoHSCT in 36%; 77% were refractory to the last prior treatment (75% ≥2 prior regimens), and 60% had disease progression within 2 y of initial anti-CD20-containing treatment. Overall, 43% of pts received bridging therapy; 18% were treated as outpatient. Of the first 52 pts evaluable for efficacy, CRR was 65.4% (34/52; 99.5% CI, 45.1-82.4) in the intent-to-treat (ITT) population and 71.1% (33/46; 99.5% CI, 56.5-84.0) in the per-protocol (PP) population; ORR was 82.7% (43/52; 95% CI, 69.7-91.8) in the ITT population and 84.8% (39/46; 95% CI, 71.1-93.7) in the PP population. In pts with best response of CR, probability of response lasting ≥6 mo was 89.7% (84.4% for all responding pts [CR+PR]). CRR and ORR were consistent across key prognostic subgroups and per investigator assessment. Median DOR, PFS, OS, and time to next antilymphoma treatment were not reached. Of 97 pts evaluable for safety, 69% experienced Gr ≥3 adverse events, most commonly neutropenia (Gr 3, 13%; Gr 4, 15%); 48% of pts had cytokine release syndrome related to tisa-cel (CRS; Gr 1, 29%; Gr 2, 20%; Gr ≥3, 0%; per Lee scale). To treat CRS, 15% of pts required tocilizumab and 3% required steroids. Any grade serious neurologic events (NEs; per CTCAE v4.03) occurred in 10% of pts; 2% had Gr ≥3 and all recovered (1 pt developed Gr 4 immune-effector cell neurotoxicity syndrome related to tisa-cel concomitant with possible HHV6 encephalitis; 1 pt developed Gr 3 delirium unrelated to tisa-cel after progression of disease and start of salvage therapy). Median time to CRS and serious NEs onset were 4 and 8.5 d, respectively, with respective median time to resolution of 4 and 2 d. Three pts died from progressive disease; no deaths were treatment-related. Conclusions: Preliminary data from ELARA suggest that tisa-cel is effective in extensively treated r/r FL, resulting in high CRRs and ORRs, including in high-risk pts. The overall safety profile is favorable, with no severe CRS and very low NE reported, requiring limited anticytokine therapy. Updated safety and efficacy results on 97 pts (including dose and cellular kinetics data) will be presented at the meeting. Disclosures Fowler: TG Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding. Dickinson:Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Merck Sharp & Dohme: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Dreyling:Astra Zeneca: Consultancy; Abbvie: Research Funding; Roche: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Bayer: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Beigene: Consultancy; Gilead: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy. Martinez-Lopez:Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis: Consultancy; Janssen-cilag: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS: Consultancy, Research Funding; Incyte: Consultancy, Research Funding. Kolstad:Merck: Research Funding; Nordic Nanovector: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Popplewell:Pfizer: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding. Chavez:Genentech: Speakers Bureau; Epizyme: Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Consultancy; Verastem: Consultancy; AbbVie: Consultancy; Karyopharm: Consultancy; BeiGene: Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy; Kite, a Gilead Company: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Consultancy; AstraZeneca: Speakers Bureau; Morphosys: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Merck: Research Funding; Bayer: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy. Bachy:Beigene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche, Celgene, Amgen, Janssen, Gilead, Novartis, Sanofi: Honoraria; Amgen: Research Funding; Roche, Gilead: Consultancy. Kato:AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Celgene, Chugai, Eisai, Janssen, and Novartis: Consultancy; hugai, Takeda, Kyowa-Kirin, Abbvie, Novartis, Eisai, Janssen, Celgene, Ono: Research Funding; Chugai, Takeda, MSD, Kyowa-Kirin, Janssen, Celgene, Ono, Mundi, Dainippon-Sumitomo, Novartis: Honoraria. Harigae:Novartis, Chugai, BMS: Honoraria. Kersten:BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES (paid by any for-profit health care company); Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES (paid by any for-profit health care company), Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES (paid by any for-profit health care company); Janssen/Cilag: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES (paid by any for-profit health care company); Miltenyi Biotech: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES (paid by any for-profit health care company); Takeda: Research Funding; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES (paid by any for-profit health care company), Research Funding; Kite/Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES (paid by any for-profit health care company); MSD: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES (paid by any for-profit health care company); Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES (paid by any for-profit health care company). Andreadis:Novartis: Research Funding; Gilead/Kite: Consultancy; Merck: Research Funding; Incyte: Consultancy; Karyopharm: Honoraria; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria; BMS/Celgene/Juno: Honoraria, Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Riedell:Bayer: Honoraria; Karyopharm Therapeutics: Honoraria; Morphosys: Research Funding; Celgene/Bristol-Myers Squibb Company: Honoraria, Research Funding; Verastem Oncology: Honoraria; Kite Pharmaceuticals/Gilead: Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Nastoupil:Karus Therapeutics: Research Funding; Gamida Cell: Honoraria; Gilead/KITE: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Pfizer: Honoraria, Research Funding; Bayer: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Honoraria, Research Funding; Genentech, Inc.: Honoraria, Research Funding. von Tresckow:Takeda: Honoraria, Other: Travel support, Research Funding; Amgen: Honoraria; Pfizer: Honoraria; Kite/Gilead: Honoraria; Roche: Honoraria; MSD Sharp & Dohme: Honoraria, Research Funding; Takeda: Honoraria, Other: Travel support, Research Funding; Novartis: Other: Travel support, Research Funding. Ferreri:Morphosys: Research Funding; Hutchinson: Research Funding; BMS: Research Funding; Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Teshima:Sharp & Dohme Corp: Consultancy, Honoraria; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria; Pfizer Japan Inc.: Honoraria; Kyowa Kirin Co., Ltd.: Honoraria, Research Funding; TEIJIN PHARMA LIMITED: Honoraria; The Center of Innovation Program from Japan Science and Technology Agency: Other; Fuji Pharma Co., Ltd.: Honoraria; NIPPON SHINYAKU CO., LTD.: Honoraria; Janssen Pharmaceutical K.K.: Other; Japan Society for the Promotion of Science KAKENHI (17H04206): Other; Novartis Pharma K.K.: Consultancy, Other: Manuscript preparation, Research Funding; Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Limited: Consultancy, Honoraria; Chugai Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd.: Research Funding; Astellas Pharma Inc.: Research Funding; Merck: Consultancy, Honoraria; Sanofi K.K.: Research Funding. Patten:Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Astra Zeneca: Honoraria; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria. McGuirk:Novartis: Research Funding; Fresenius Biotech: Research Funding; Astellas: Research Funding; Juno Therapeutics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Allo Vir: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Kite Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Pluristem Ltd: Research Funding; Gamida Cell: Research Funding; Bellicum Pharmaceutical: Research Funding. Petzer:Novartis: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Kite-Gilead: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Viardot:Amgen: Honoraria, Other: advisory board; Novartis: Honoraria, Other: advisory board; Kite/Gilead: Honoraria, Other: advisory board; Roche: Honoraria, Other: advisory board. Zinzani:ADC Therapeutics: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; MSD: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Immune Design: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Merck: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; EUSA Pharma: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Immune Design: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Sanofi: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sandoz: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Portola: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Kyowa Kirin: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Eusapharma: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Verastem: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Kirin Kyowa: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Servier: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; TG Therapeutics, Inc.: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; AbbVie: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Janssen-Cilag: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Celltrion: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Malladi:Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria. Bubuteishvili Pacaud:Novartis: Current Employment. Forcina:Novartis: Current Employment. Zia:Novartis: Current Employment. Schuster:Novartis, Genentech, Inc./ F. Hoffmann-La Roche: Research Funding; AlloGene, AstraZeneca, BeiGene, Genentech, Inc./ F. Hoffmann-La Roche, Juno/Celgene, Loxo Oncology, Nordic Nanovector, Novartis, Tessa Therapeutics: Consultancy, Honoraria. Thieblemont:Cellectis: Speakers Bureau; Roche, Amgen, Kyte Gilead, Celgene, Abbvie, Novartis, Cellectis: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel support; Roche, Hospita: Research Funding.

Chimeric antigen receptor (CAR)-T cell therapies have improved the outcome for many patients with relapsed or refractory aggressive B-cell lymphomas. In 2017, axicabtagene ciloleucel and soon after tisagenlecleucel became the first approved CAR-T cell products for patients with high-grade B-cell lymphomas or diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) who are relapsed or refractory to ≥ 2 prior lines of therapy; lisocabtagene maraleucel was approved in 2021. Safety and efficacy outcomes from the pivotal trials of each CAR-T cell therapy have been reported. Despite addressing a common unmet need in the large B-cell lymphoma population and utilizing similar CAR technologies, there are differences between CAR-T cell products in manufacturing, pivotal clinical trial designs, and data reporting. Early reports of commercial use of axicabtagene ciloleucel and tisagenlecleucel provide the first opportunities to validate the impact of patient characteristics on the efficacy and safety of these CAR-T cell therapies in the real world. Going forward, caring for patients after CAR-T cell therapy will require strategies to monitor patients for sustained responses and potential long-term side effects. In this review, product attributes, protocol designs, and clinical outcomes of the key clinical trials are presented. We discuss recent data on patient characteristics, efficacy, and safety of patients treated with axicabtagene ciloleucel or tisagenlecleucel in the real world. Finally, we discuss postinfusion management and preview upcoming clinical trials of CAR-T cell therapies.

Antibody-mediated blockade of co-inhibitory molecules such as cytotoxic T lymphocyte-associated protein 4, PD1 and PDL1 elicits potent antitumor responses and improves the prognosis of many patients with cancer. As these immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are increasingly prescribed to a diverse patient population, a broad range of adverse effects is emerging. Atherosclerosis, a lipid-driven chronic inflammatory disease of the large arteries, may be aggravated by ICI treatment. In this review, we discuss recent clinical studies that analyze the correlation between ICI use and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (CVD). Indeed, several studies report an increased incidence of atherosclerotic CVD after ICI administration, with the occurrence of pathologies such as myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke and coronary artery disease significantly higher after ICI use. Increased awareness and better monitoring of ICI-treated patients can elucidate risk factors that contribute to ICI-induced aggravation of atherosclerosis and identify promising treatment strategies. For now, optimal cardiovascular risk assessment is required to protect ICI-receiving patients and long-term survivors of cancer from the detrimental effects of ICI therapy on atherosclerotic CVD.

The BCR-ABL1 fusion gene is the driver oncogene in chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) and Philadelphia-chromosome positive (Ph+) acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL). The introduction of tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) targeting the ABL kinase (such as imatinib) has dramatically improved survival of CML and Ph+ ALL patients. However, primary and acquired resistance to TKIs remains a clinical challenge. Ph+ leukemia patients who achieve a complete cytogenetic (CCR) or deep molecular response (MR) (≥4.5log reduction in BCR-ABL1 transcripts) represent long-term survivors. Thus, the fast and early eradication of leukemic cells predicts MR and is the prime clinical goal for these patients. We show here that the first-in-class inhibitor of the Nedd8-activating enzyme (NAE1) MLN4924 effectively induced caspase-dependent apoptosis in Ph+ leukemia cells, and sensitized leukemic cells for ABL tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) and hydroxyurea (HU). We demonstrate that MLN4924 induced DNA damage in Ph+ leukemia cells by provoking the activation of an intra S-phase checkpoint, which was enhanced by imatinib co-treatment. The combination of MLN4924 and imatinib furthermore triggered a dramatic shift in the expression of MCL1 and NOXA. Our data offers a clear rationale to explore the clinical activity of MLN4924 (alone and in combination with ABL TKI) in Ph+ leukemia patients

This is a phase II dose escalation trial of carfilzomib in combination with thalidomide and dexamethasone for induction and consolidation in transplant-eligible patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM). The results of four dose levels are reported. Induction therapy consisted of four cycles of carfilzomib 20/27 mg/m2 (n=50), 20/36 mg/m2 (n=20), 20/45 mg/m2 (n=21), and 20/56 mg/m2 (n=20) on days 1, 2, 8, 9, 15, 16 of a 28-day cycle; thalidomide 200 mg on day 1 through 28 and dexamethasone 40 mg weekly. Induction therapy was followed by high-dose melphalan and autologous stem cell transplantation and consolidation therapy with four cycles of carfilzomib, thalidomide and dexamethasone in the same schedule except a lower dose of thalidomide (50 mg). Very good partial response rate or better and complete response rate or better after induction therapy were 65% and 18%, respectively, increasing to 86% and 63%, respectively, after consolidation therapy. In all cohorts combined, after a median follow up of 58.7 months, median progression-free survival was 58 months (95%CI: 45-67 months). Median overall survival was 83 months (95%CI: 83 months-not reached). Grade 3/4 adverse events consisted mainly of infections, respiratory disorders, skin and vascular disorders in 11%, 8%, 9%, and 9%, respectively. Grade 3 polyneuropathy was only reported in one patient. Cardiac events were limited: grade 3/4 in 5% of patients. Carfilzomib, thalidomide and dexamethasone as induction and consolidation treatment after high-dose melphalan and autologous stem cell transplantation is highly efficacious and safe in transplant-eligible patients with NDMM. This study was registered as #NTR2422 at http://www.trialregister.nl

7548 Background: Elderly pts with R/R LBCL are at risk of inferior outcomes, increased toxicity, and inability to tolerate second-line (2L) SOC treatment (Tx) (Di M, et al. Oncologist. 2021). Further 2L SOC Tx is often associated with poor health-related quality of life (QoL) (Lin V, et al. J Clin Oncol . 2020;38:e20070). In the pivotal Phase 3 ZUMA-7 study, we assessed outcomes, including PROs, of 2L axi-cel (an autologous anti-CD19 CAR T-cell therapy) versus SOC in elderly pts with R/R LBCL. Methods: Pts aged ≥65 y were assessed in a planned subgroup analysis. Pts with ECOG PS 0-1 and R/R LBCL ≤12 mo after 1L chemoimmunotherapy (CIT) were randomized 1:1 to axi-cel or SOC (2-3 cycles of platinum-based CIT; pts with partial or complete response [CR] proceeded to HDT-ASCT). PRO instruments, including the EORTC QLQ-C30 (Global Health [GH] and Physical Functioning [PF]) and the EQ-5D-5L VAS, were administered at timepoints including baseline (BL; prior to Tx), Day (D) 50, D100, D150, and Month (M) 9, then every 3 mo up to 24 mo or time of event-free survival event (EFS), whichever occurred first. The QoL analysis set included all pts who had a BL PRO and ≥1 completed measure at D50, D100, or D150. A clinically meaningful change was defined as 10 points for each EORTC QLQ-C30 score, 7 points for EQ-5D-5L VAS score. Results: As of 03/18/2021, 51 and 58 elderly pts were randomized to the axi-cel and SOC arms, respectively, with median ages (range) of 70 y (65-80) and 69 y (65-81). At BL, more axi-cel versus SOC pts had high-risk features, including 2L age-adjusted IPI 2-3 (53% vs 31%) and elevated LDH (61% vs 41%). EFS was superior with axi-cel versus SOC (HR, 0.276, P< 0.0001), with higher CR rates (75% vs 33%). Grade ≥3 Tx-emergent adverse events (AEs) occurred in 94% and 82% of axi-cel and SOC pts, respectively, and Grade 5 Tx-related AEs occurred in 0 and 1 pt. In the QoL analysis set comprising 46 axi-cel and 42 SOC pts, there were statistically significant and clinically meaningful differences in mean change of scores from BL at D100 favoring axi-cel for EORTC QLQ-C30 GH ( P

7518 Background: Brexucabtagene autoleucel (KTE-X19) is an autologous anti-CD19 chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy approved for the treatment of patients (pts) with relapsed/refractory (R/R) mantle cell lymphoma (MCL). In ZUMA-2, a 93% objective response rate (ORR; 67% complete response [CR] rate) was reported with KTE-X19 in pts with R/R MCL (median follow-up: 12.3 mo; 60 efficacy-evaluable pts; Wang et al. N Engl J Med. 2020). Here, we present updated outcomes with 2 years of additional follow-up. Methods: Adult pts (≥18 years) with R/R MCL underwent leukapheresis and conditioning chemotherapy followed by a single infusion of KTE-X19. Minimal residual disease (MRD) was an exploratory endpoint (sensitivity 10-5) evaluated in peripheral blood using next-generation sequencing. Updated results are reported for all 68 treated pts. Results: After 35.6 mo median follow-up, the ORR (CR + partial response) was 91% (95% CI, 81.8-96.7), with a 68% CR rate (95% CI, 55.2-78.5). The median duration of response (DOR) was 28.2 mo (95% CI, 13.5-47.1), with 25 of 68 treated pts (37%) still in ongoing response (all CR) at data cutoff. Late relapse > 24 mo post-infusion was infrequent (n = 3). The medians for progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were 25.8 mo (95% CI, 9.6-47.6) and 46.6 mo (95% CI, 24.9-not estimable), respectively. MRD was analyzed in 29 pts total; 24 of 29 were MRD-negative at mo 1, and 15 of 19 with available data were MRD-negative at mo 6. At data cutoff, the medians for DOR, PFS, and OS in the 15 MRD-negative pts were all not reached, vs 6.1, 7.1, and 27.0 mo, in the 4 MRD-positive pts, respectively. MRD-negative status at mo 1, 3, and 6 was associated with durable response, with 55%, 71%, and 69% of MRD-negative pts at those timepoints remaining in ongoing CR at data cutoff. Circulating tumor DNA analysis of MRD at mo 3 and 6 was predictive of relapse (AUC 0.80 and 0.75, respectively). No new safety signals were observed. Only 3% of treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs) of interest occurred since the primary report. The most frequent Grade ≥3 AE was neutropenia (1 [1%] Grade 3; 7 [10%] Grade 4). Two pts had KTE-X19-related Grade 3 serious infections: pneumonia and upper respiratory tract infection (n = 1); influenza (n = 1). There were no new cytokine release syndrome AEs and 1 new serious neurologic AE of Grade 3 encephalopathy (13.0 mo post-infusion) that was considered not related to study treatment. Three new Grade 5 AEs occurred, none of which were considered related to study treatment: Salmonella bacteremia (24.9 mo post-infusion), myelodysplastic syndrome (25.2 mo post-infusion), and acute myeloid leukemia (37.5 mo post-infusion). Conclusions: These data represent the longest follow-up of CAR T-cell therapy in pts with MCL to date and suggest that KTE-X19 induces durable long-term responses with manageable safety and low late relapse potential in R/R MCL. Clinical trial information: NCT02601313.

7555 Background: Quality of life (QoL) post cancer therapy is increasingly important. We conducted a Q-TWiST analysis to compare the quality-adjusted survival of axicabtagene ciloleucel (axi-cel, a chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy) versus standard of care (SOC) among relapsed/refractory (R/R) large B-cell lymphoma (LBCL) patients enrolled in ZUMA-7 (NCT03391466), a Phase 3, randomized, open-label, multicenter study. ZUMA-7 met its primary endpoint of event-free survival; events were defined as death, progression, or new lymphoma therapy. Methods: Overall survival (OS) in the intention-to-treat (ITT) cohort was partitioned into 3 mutually exclusive health states as measured through a median follow-up duration of 23.5 months (m): time with grade 3/4 adverse events (AE) before an event (TOX); time without symptoms from events or toxicity (TWiST); and time after event (REL). Q-TWiST was calculated as the average time spent in each state, weighted by state-specific QoL utility (u, ranging from 0 to 1), assuming a base case u(TOX)=0.5, u(REL)=0.5, u(TWiST)=1. Threshold analyses assessed the mean Q-TWiST differences between axi-cel and SOC by varying u(TOX) and u(REL) from 0 to 1. Relative gains for axi-cel (axi-cel Q-TWIST gain divided by mean SOC OS) ≥15% were considered “clearly clinically important” using published norms. Nonparametric bootstrap 95% confidence intervals (CI) were computed. Subgroup analyses were performed for relapse status and age. Sensitivity analyses varying the follow-up duration from 3 to 37.7m were explored. Results: For the ITT cohort (n=359), mean time spent in TOX and TWiST was significantly longer for the axi-cel cohort compared to SOC, and mean time spent in REL was significantly shorter for axi-cel (Table). Using the base case, quality-adjusted survival was significantly longer for axi-cel by 3.7m, representing a 21.9% relative gain. In threshold analyses, the difference in Q-TWiST ranged from 1.2m (u(TOX)=0, u(REL)=1) to 6.2m (u(TOX)=1, u(REL)=0) in favor of axi-cel. Q-TWiST gains favored axi-cel across all subgroup analyses. Q-TWiST gains from axi-cel increased with longer follow-up. Conclusions: Axi-cel was associated with statistically significant and “clearly clinically important” gains in quality-adjusted OS vs. SOC in R/R LBCL, regardless of the relative decline in QoL associated with treatment toxicity, disease progression, or additional cancer treatment.[Table: see text]

Exercise effects in cancer patients often appear modest, possibly because interventions rarely target patients most in need. This study investigated the moderator effects of baseline values on the exercise outcomes of fatigue, aerobic fitness, muscle strength, quality of life (QoL), and self-reported physical function (PF) in cancer patients during and post-treatment. Methods: Individual patient data from 34 randomized exercise trials (n = 4519) were pooled. Linear mixed-effect models were used to study moderator effects of baseline values on exercise intervention outcomes and to determine whether these moderator effects differed by intervention timing (during vs post-treatment). All statistical tests were two-sided. Results: Moderator effects of baseline fatigue and PF were consistent across intervention timing, with greater effects in patients with worse fatigue (Pinteraction = .05) and worse PF (Pinteraction = .003). Moderator effects of baseline aerobic fitness, muscle strength, and QoL differed by intervention timing. During treatment, effects on aerobic fitness were greater for patients with better baseline aerobic fitness (Pinteraction = .002). Post-treatment, effects on upper (Pinteraction < .001) and lower (Pinteraction = .01) body muscle strength and QoL (Pinteraction < .001) were greater in patients with worse baseline values. Conclusion: Although exercise should be encouraged for most cancer patients during and post-treatments, targeting specific subgroups may be especially beneficial and cost effective. For fatigue and PF, interventions during and post-treatment should target patients with high fatigue and low PF. During treatment, patients experience benefit for muscle strength and QoL regardless of baseline values; however, only patients with low baseline values benefit post-treatment. For aerobic fitness, patients with low baseline values do not appear to benefit from exercise during treatment. Sin financiación 13.757 JCR (2018) Q1, 6/196 Oncology 5.827 SJR (2018) Q1, 6/226 Cancer Research, 10/381 Oncology No data IDR 2018 UEM

Contains fulltext : 230393.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access)

This study compared overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), complete response rate (CRR), and overall response rate (ORR) of tisagenlecleucel (tisa-cel) and lisocabtagene maraleucel (liso-cel) in relapsed or refractory large B-cell lymphomas (r/r LBCL). Using matching-adjusted indirect comparison (MAIC), individual patient-level data from JULIET (tisa-cel) were weighted to match the patient population in TRANSCEND (liso-cel). The main analysis compared infused JULIET patients (N = 106) with the TRANSCEND efficacy-evaluable set (EES) (N = 256 [infused]). After adjustment, OS, PFS, and the CRR were comparable between tisa-cel and liso-cel EES patients. The estimated adjusted 2-year OS, 2-year PFS, ORR, and CRR were 45.6, 38.2, 62.9, and 47.7%, respectively, for tisa-cel vs. 43.8, 42.1, 72.7, and 53.1% for liso-cel. A scenario analysis compared JULIET patients to the TRANSCEND primary analysis set (PAS) (N = 133). ORR was significantly higher in the TRANSCEND PAS compared with matched JULIET patients, but no significant differences in CRR were observed.

Contemporary diagnosed WM patients, compared to the general population, continue to experience excess mortality regardless of having survived up to 15 years post-diagnosis. This gradual increase in excess mortality might result from the incurable nature of this disease characterized by multiple relapses throughout the disease course with limited efficacious treatment options in the released/refractory setting.

Discrimination between Waldenström macroglobulinemia (WM) and marginal zone lymphoma (MZL) of the bone marrow (BM) can be difficult due to overlap in clinical, histopathologic, and immunophenotypic characteristics. We determined which characteristics can aid in the differential diagnosis of ‘gray zone’ cases. We compared clinical, histopathologic, immunophenotypic, and molecular features of 222 WM and 65 MZL patients. LASSO regression was employed for variable selection. The most distinguishing clinical features of WM compared to MZL were the presence of the B-symptom weight loss and IgM paraprotein. Histopathological findings were plasmacytoid differentiation, monoclonal plasma cells, and increased mast cells in the BM. Regarding flow cytometry, only CD10 and CD38 were distinguishing markers. Finally, as the expected presence of the MYD88L265P mutation showed to be of great value in the distinction between WM and MZL. Despite the great overlap, WM can often be distinguished from MZL by using a combination of characteristics. These characteristics should be weighed in complex, ‘gray zone’ cases.

Tisagenlecleucel is an autologous anti-CD19 chimeric antigen receptor-T cell therapy with clinically meaningful outcomes demonstrated in patients with relapsed/refractory (r/r) B-cell lymphoma. In a previous pilot study of tisagenlecleucel in r/r follicular lymphoma (FL), 71% of patients achieved a complete response (CR). Here we report the primary, prespecified interim analysis of the ELARA phase 2 multinational trial of tisagenlecleucel in adults with r/r FL after two or more treatment lines or who relapsed after autologous stem cell transplant (no. NCT03568461). The primary endpoint was CR rate (CRR). Secondary endpoints included overall response rate (ORR), duration of response, progression-free survival, overall survival, pharmacokinetics and safety. As of 29 March 2021, 97/98 enrolled patients received tisagenlecleucel (median follow-up, 16.59 months; interquartile range, 13.8–20.21). The primary endpoint was met. In the efficacy set (n = 94), CRR was 69.1% (95% confidence interval, 58.8–78.3) and ORR 86.2% (95% confidence interval, 77.5–92.4). Within 8 weeks of infusion, rates of cytokine release syndrome were 48.5% (grade ≥3, 0%), neurological events 37.1% (grade ≥3, 3%) and immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome (ICANS) 4.1% (grade ≥3, 1%) in the safety set (n = 97), with no treatment-related deaths. Tisagenlecleucel is safe and effective in extensively pretreated r/r FL, including in high-risk patients., The study was sponsored and designed by Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation and was approved by the IRB at each participating institution.

Context Tisagenlecleucel demonstrated durable responses and manageable safety in adult patients with r/r diffuse large B-cell lymphoma. Objective Determine the efficacy and safety of tisagenlecleucel in adult patients with r/r FL. Design ELARA (NCT03568461) is an international, multicenter, single-arm, phase 2 trial of tisagenlecleucel treatment. Patients or Other Participants Adult (≥18 years) patients with r/r FL (grades 1–3A) after ≥2 lines of therapy or whose disease relapsed after autologous stem cell transplant were eligible. As of September 28, 2020, 98 patients were enrolled. Interventions Bridging therapy was permitted, and disease status was reassessed prior to infusion. Patients received tisagenlecleucel (0.6–6×10 8 CAR+ viable T-cells) after lymphodepleting chemotherapy. Main Outcomes Measures Primary endpoint was complete response rate (CRR) by central review (Lugano 2014 criteria). Secondary endpoints included overall response rate (ORR), duration of response (DOR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), safety, and cellular kinetics. Results Ninety-seven patients received tisagenlecleucel (median follow-up, 10.6 months). Median age at study entry was 57 years (range, 29-73), 85% had stage III–IV disease, 60% had a FLIPI score ≥3, 65% had bulky disease, and 42% had LDH > upper limit of normal. Median number of prior therapies was 4 (range, 2–13); 78% of patients were refractory to their last treatment, and 60% progressed ≤2 years of initial anti-CD20-containing treatment. Among 94 patients evaluable for efficacy, CRR was 66% (95% CI, 56%–75%), and ORR was 86% (95% CI, 78%–92%). Estimated DOR (CR) and PFS rates at 6 months were 94% (95% CI, 82%–98%) and 76% (95% CI, 65%–84%), respectively. Of 97 patients evaluable for safety, 65% experienced grade ≥3 adverse events ≤8 weeks post-infusion, most commonly neutropenia (28%) and anemia (13%). Any-grade cytokine release syndrome (Lee scale) occurred in 49% of patients. Any-grade neurological events (per CTCAE v4.03) occurred in 9% of patients. Three patients died from disease progression. C(max) and AUC(0–28d) for tisagenlecleucel were similar between responders and nonresponders. C(max) was achieved at a median of 10 days in responders and 12.9 days in nonresponders. Conclusions Tisagenlecleucel demonstrated efficacy and a favorable safety profile in patients with r/r FL. The study was funded by Novartis.

Background: Efficacy of lenalidomide plus rituximab (R-LEN) compared to rituximab monotherapy (R-mono) for patients with previously treated follicular lymphoma (FL) was investigated in AUGMENT (NCT01938001). Our aim was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of R-LEN versus R-mono in this setting from a Dutch perspective.Methods: Cost-effectiveness was assessed through a partitioned survival model with three health states from three perspectives (i.e. societal, healthcare and societal including future non-medical costs). Patient-level data from AUGMENT informed effectiveness parameters (i.e. long-term survival) and health state utilities. Resource use and prices were based on AUGMENT and the literature. Clinical experts validated efficacy input parameters and results. Uncertainty was explored through sensitivity and scenario analyses.Results: R-LEN resulted in 1.7 incremental discounted QALYs. Total incremental discounted costs were 67,161 EUR from a societal perspective, resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of 40,493 EUR/QALY (healthcare: 37,951 EUR/QALY; societal including future non-medical costs: 49,296 EUR/QALY). Sensitivity analyses indicated some uncertainty in the model results. In some scenarios R-LEN exceed an ICER of 50,000 EUR/QALY.Conclusion: R-LEN was cost-effective at a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of 50,000 EUR/QALY in the base-case analyses. Scenario and sensitivity analyses indicated some level of uncertainty regarding this conclusion, depending on the chosen WTP-threshold and perspective.