GLA/DRST real-world outcome analysis of CAR T-cell therapies for large B-cell lymphoma in Germany.

CD19-directed chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cells have evolved as a new standard-of-care (SOC) treatment in patients with relapsed/refractory (r/r) large B-cell lymphoma (LBCL). Here, we report the first German real-world data on SOC CAR T-cell therapies with the aim to explore risk factors associated with outcomes. Patients who received SOC axicabtagene ciloleucel (axi-cel) or tisagenlecleucel (tisa-cel) for LBCL and were registered with the German Registry for Stem Cell Transplantation (DRST) were eligible. The main outcomes analyzed were toxicities, response, overall survival (OS), and progression-free survival (PFS). We report 356 patients who received axi-cel (n = 173) or tisa-cel (n = 183) between November 2018 and April 2021 at 21 German centers. Whereas the axi-cel and tisa-cel cohorts were comparable for age, sex, lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), international prognostic index (IPI), and pretreatment, the tisa-cel group comprised significantly more patients with poor performance status, ineligibility for ZUMA-1, and the need for bridging, respectively. With a median follow-up of 11 months, Kaplan-Meier estimates of OS, PFS, and nonrelapse mortality (NRM) 12 months after dosing were 52%, 30%, and 6%, respectively. While NRM was largely driven by infections subsequent to prolonged neutropenia and/or severe neurotoxicity and significantly higher with axi-cel, significant risk factors for PFS on the multivariate analysis included bridging failure, elevated LDH, age, and tisa-cel use. In conclusion, this study suggests that important outcome determinants of CD19-directed CAR T-cell treatment of LBCL in the real-world setting are bridging success, CAR-T product selection, LDH, and the absence of prolonged neutropenia and/or severe neurotoxicity. These findings may have implications for designing risk-adapted CAR T-cell therapy strategies.

Antibody response after vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 in adults with hematological malignancies: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 have shown remarkable efficacy and thus constitute an important preventive option against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), especially in fragile patients. We aimed to systematically analyze the outcomes of patients with hematological malignancies who received vaccination and to identify specific groups with differences in outcomes. The primary end point was antibody response after full vaccination (2 doses of mRNA or one dose of vectorbased vaccines). We identified 49 studies comprising 11,086 individuals. Overall risk of bias was low. The pooled response for hematological malignancies was 64% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 59-69; I²=93%) versus 96% (95% CI: 92-97; I²=44%) for solid cancer and 98% (95% CI: 96-99; I²=55%) for healthy controls (P<0.001). Outcome was different across hematological malignancies (P<0.001). The pooled response was 50% (95% CI: 43-57; I²=84%) for chronic lymphocytic leukemia, 76% (95% CI: 67-83; I²=92%) for multiple myeloma, 83% (95% CI: 69-91; I²=85%) for myeloproliferative neoplasms, 91% (95% CI: 82-96; I²=12%) for Hodgkin lymphoma, and 58% (95% CI: 44-70; I²=84%) for aggressive and 61% (95% CI: 48-72; I²=85%) for indolent non-Hodgkin lymphoma. The pooled response for allogeneic and autologous hematopoietic cell transplantation was 82% and 83%, respectively. Being in remission and prior COVID-19 showed significantly higher responses. Low pooled response was identified for active treatment (35%), anti-CD20 therapy ≤1 year (15%), Bruton kinase inhibition (23%), venetoclax (26%), ruxolitinib (42%), and chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy (42%). Studies on timing, value of boosters, and long-term efficacy are needed. This study is registered with PROSPERO (clinicaltrials gov. Identifier: CRD42021279051).