Prophylactic Corticosteroid Use with Axicabtagene Ciloleucel (Axi-Cel) in Patients (Pts) with Relapsed/ Refractory Large B-Cell Lymphoma (R/R LBCL): 2-Year Follow-up of Zuma-1 Cohort 6

Background: The ZUMA-1 safety management Cohort 6 (N=40), which evaluated whether prophylactic corticosteroids and earlier corticosteroids and/or tocilizumab could improve safety outcomes, demonstrated an improved safety profile (no Grade >=3 cytokine release syndrome [CRS];15% Grade >=3 neurologic events [NEs]) vs pivotal Cohorts 1+2, without compromising response rate or durability (95% ORR, 80% CR rate, and 53% ongoing response rate with >=1 y of follow-up;Oluwole, et al. ASH 2021. 2832). Here, 2-y updated outcomes are reported. Method(s): Eligible pts with R/R LBCL underwent leukapheresis (followed by optional bridging therapy) and conditioning chemotherapy, then a single axi-cel infusion. Pts received corticosteroid prophylaxis (once-daily oral dexamethasone 10 mg on Days 0 [before axi-cel], 1, and 2) and earlier corticosteroids and/or tocilizumab for CRS and NE management vs Cohorts 1+2 (Oluwole, et al. Br J Haematol. 2021). The primary endpoints were incidence and severity of CRS and NEs. Secondary endpoints included ORR (investigator-assessed), duration of response (DOR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell levels in blood. Result(s): As of December 16, 2021, the median follow-up time for the 40 treated pts was 26.9 mo. Since the 1-y analysis, no new CRS events were reported (no pts had Grade >=3 CRS to date). The incidence of Grade >=3 NEs increased from 15% to 18%between the 1-y and 2-y analyses. Two new NEs occurred in 2 pts: 1 pt had Grade 2 dementia (onset on Day 685 and ongoing at time of data cutoff;not related to axi-cel) and 1 had Grade 5 axi-cel-related leukoencephalopathy. Since the 1-y analysis, 6 new infections were reported (Grades 1, 2, and 5 COVID-19 [n=1 each], Grade 3 Pneumocystis jirovecii pneumonia [n=1], Grade 3 unknown infectious episode with inflammatory syndrome [n=1], and Grade 2 herpes zoster [n=1]). In total, 8 deaths occurred since the 1-y analysis (progressive disease [n=5], leukoencephalopathy [n=1], and COVID-19 [n=2]). The ORR was 95% (80% CR), which was unchanged from the 1-y analysis. Median DOR and PFS were since reached (25.9 mo [95% CI, 7.8-not estimable] and 26.8 mo [95% CI, 8.7-not estimable], respectively). Median OS was still not reached. Kaplan- Meier estimates of the 2-y DOR, PFS, and OS rates were 53%, 53%, and 62%, respectively. Of 18 pts (45%) in ongoing response at data cutoff, all achieved CR as the best response. By Month 24, 14/20 pts with evaluable samples (70%) had detectable CAR T cells (vs 23/36 pts [64%] in Cohorts 1+2). Conclusion(s): With 2 y of follow-up, the ZUMA-1 Cohort 6 toxicity management strategy continued to demonstrate an improved long-term safety profile of axi-cel in pts with R/R LBCL. Further, responses remained high, durable, and similar to those observed in Cohorts 1+2 (Locke, et al. Lancet Oncol. 2019).Copyright © 2023 American Society for Transplantation and Cellular Therapy

Preliminary results of the FILO phase 2 trial for untreated fit patients with intermediate risk chronic lymphocytic leukemia comparing ibrutinib plus venetoclax (IV) vs. FCR

With the emergence of targeted therapies, defining the best strategy for the treatment of previously untreated CLL patients remains challenging. The aim of this phase 2 study was to compare the efficacy of an association with ibrutinib and venetoclax (IV) to the standard FCR regimen in fit patients with intermediate-risk CLL defined by either unmutated IGHV status, 11q deletion, or complex karyotype in the absence of TP53 abnormality. Patients were randomized 1:1 between two treatment arms, i.e. FCR 6 cycles or IV. After a lead-in phase of ibrutinib as a single agent from the month (M)1 to M3, the total duration of treatment with IV was based on the response achieved at M9;if bone marrow (BM) MRD was <0.01% using flow cytometry, the treatment was continued for 6 additional months until M15 and then stopped;if BM MRD at M9 was ≥0.01%, the treatment with IV was continued for 18 additional months until M27. The primary endpoint was the percentage of patients with BM MRD <0.01% at M27 in both arms. We present here the preliminary results on the first evaluation done at M9 including CT-scan, BM biopsy, and MRD assessment in PB and BM after the inclusion of all the 120 patients as initially planned. One hundred and twenty patients were enrolled from September 2019 to February 2021. The median age was 59 [34-72] and 61 [34-74] years in the FCR and IV arms, respectively. The characteristics of the patients were well-balanced between the 2 arms in terms of gender (male 72% FCR, 74% IV), PS ECOG 0-1 (59% FCR, 68% IV), and Binet stage (A, B, and C 15, 64, 21% for FCR;8.5, 59, and 32% for IV). No major difference in terms of cytogenetic features was noted, all patients but one had unmutated IGHV. At the time of data cut-off for this interim analysis, the median follow-up for all cohort was 12.7 [4.5.9-21.4] months. The frequency of patients presenting all grades adverse events (AE) so far was 90% (grade ≥3: 45%) in the FCR arm and 80% (grade ≥3: 45%) in the IV arm. The rate of infusion-related reactions (IRR) in the FCR arm was 35% on cycle 1-day 1 (14% grade 3-4);for the IV arm, 5% of patients experienced tumor lysis syndrome (TLS) (grade 3 for 1 patient). Ibrutinib doses were reduced for seven patients (four permanently stopped and three resumed at a lower dose because of toxicities (digestive, hepatic, or hematological). Venetoclax was permanently discontinued before M9 in four patients (digestive toxicities and grade 4 neutropenia). Fifty-two serious adverse events were reported of which 22 were in the IV arm (among them one sudden death, one ischemic stroke, one acute coronary syndrome, two atrial fibrillations, two TLS, two acute renal failures, one hepatitis, one neutropenia, two COVID pneumonitis, and one osteoporotic fracture) and 30 in the FCR arm (among them five febrile neutropenia, one hemolytic anemia, one thrombocytopenia, three IRR, three TLS, three COVID pneumonitis, one acute myeloid leukemia, one myelodysplasic syndrome). All patients with COVID pneumonitis had a favorable evolution with the need for intensive care and convalescent plasma for three of them. The first 85 patients included in the study have reached M9 and among them, nine prematurely discontinued the study, (one active hemolysis, one ischemic stroke, one TLS, one hepatitis, and one sudden death in the IV arm;three hematologic toxicities and one early progression in the FCR arm). In the evaluated patients (n=74), 69% of patients in the FCR arm and 43% of patients in the IV arm achieved bone BM MRD <0.01%. The complete (CR, CRi) and partial response rates were 56 and 44% in the FCR arm and 74 and 26% in the IV arm, respectively. In conclusion, preliminary results show a lower BM MRD rate in the IV arm compared to the FCR arm at M9, with toxicity that remains significant and relatively similar between the two arms. However, BM MRD rate may improve after longer exposure to the IV combination and the analysis of the primary endpoint at M27 will be decisive in determining the best therapeutic strategy.

Preliminary Results of the Filo Phase 2 Trial for Untreated Fit Patients with Intermediate Risk Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia Comparing Ibrutinib Plus Venetoclax (IV) Versus FCR

With the emergence of targeted therapies, defining the best strategy for the treatment of previously untreated CLL patients remains challenging. The aim of this phase 2 study was to compare the efficacy of an association with ibrutinib and venetoclax (IV) to the standard FCR regimen in fit patients with intermediate risk CLL defined by either unmutated IGHV status, 11q deletion or complex karyotype in the absence of TP53 abnormality. Patients were randomized 1:1 between two treatment arms, ie FCR 6 cycles or IV. After a lead-in phase of ibrutinib as a single agent from month (M)1 to M3, the total duration of treatment with IV was based on the response achieved at M9;if bone marrow (BM) MRD was < 0.01% using flow cytometry, the treatment was continued for 6 additional months until M15 and then stopped;if BM MRD at M9 was ≥ 0.01%, the treatment with IV was continued for 18 additional months until M27. The primary endpoint was the percentage of patients with BM MRD < 0.01% at M27 in both arms. We present here the preliminary results on the first evaluation done at M9 including CT-scan, BM biopsy and MRD assessment in PB and BM after the inclusion of all the 120 patients as initially planned. One hundred and twenty patients were enrolled from September 2019 to February 2021. The median age was 59 [34-72] and 61 [34-74] years in the FCR and IV arms, respectively. The characteristics of the patients were well balanced between the 2 arms in terms of gender (male 72% FCR, 74% IV), PS ECOG 0-1 (59% FCR, 68% IV) and Binet stage (A, B and C 15%, 64%, 21% for FCR;8.5%, 59% and 32% for IV). No major difference in terms of cytogenetic features was noted, all patients but one had unmutated IGHV. At the time of data cut-off for this interim analysis, the median follow-up for the all cohort was 11 [2.9 - 19.8] months. The frequency of all grades adverse events (AE) observed so far was 53% (grade 3-4, 24%) in the FCR arm and 47% (grade 3-4, 17%) in the IV arm. The rate of infusion-related reactions (IRR) in the FCR arm was 35% on cycle 1-day 1 (14% grade 3-4);for the IV arm, 6% of patients experienced tumor lysis syndrome (TLS) (grade 4 for 4 patients). ibrutinib doses were reduced for 7 patients (4 permanently stopped and 3 resumed at a lower dose because of toxicities (digestive, hepatic or haematological)). Venetoclax was permanently discontinued before M9 in 4 patients (digestive toxicities and grade 4 neutropenia). Forty serious adverse events were reported of which 15 in the IV arm (1 sudden death, 1 ischemic stroke, 2 atrial fibrillations, 2 clinical TLS, 1 hepatitis, 1 neutropenia, 4 COVID pneumonitis and one osteoporotic fracture) and 25 in the FCR arm (2 neutropenias, 1 anemia, 1 thrombocytopenia, 1 autoimmune haemolytic anemia, 3 IRR, 4 TLS, 2 COVID pneumonitis, 4 fever episodes of undetermined origin, 1 community-acquired pneumonia, 1 gastrointestinal toxicity, 1 confusion, 2 chest pains, 1 acute myeloid leukemia, 1 myelodysplasic syndrome). The patients with COVID pneumonitis had a favorable evolution with the need for intensive care and convalescent plasma for 3 of them. The first 60 patients included in the study have reached M9 and among them, 6 prematurely discontinued the study, 3 in each arm (active hemolysis, ischemic stroke and sudden death in the IV arm;2 grade 4 hematologic toxicities and 1 early progression in the FCR arm). In the evaluated patients (n=54), 71% of patients in the FCR arm and 48% of patients in the IV arm achieved bone BM MRD < 0.01%. The complete (CR, CRi) and partial response rates were 54% and 46% in the FCR arm and 76% and 24% in the IV arm respectively. In conclusion, the preliminary results show a lower BM MRD rate in the IV arm compared to the FCR arm at M9, with a toxicity that remains significant and relatively similar between the two arms. However, BM MRD rate should improve after longer exposure to the IV combination and the analysis of the primary endpoint at M27 will be decisive in determining the best therapeutic strategy. Disclosures: Quinquenel: Abbvie: Honoraria;Jansse : Honoraria;AstraZeneca: Honoraria. Laribi: Le Mans Hospital: Research Funding;Novartis: Other: Personal Fees, Research Funding;Takeda: Other: Personal Fees, Research Funding;BeiGene: Other: Personal Fees;IQONE: Other: Personal Fees;AbbVie: Other: Personal Fees, Research Funding;Astellas Phama, Inc.: Other: Personal Fees;AstraZeneca: Other: Personal Fees;Jansen: Research Funding. Cymbalista: Lilly-LOXO: 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;ASTRA ZENECA: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees;Abbvie: 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. Leblond: AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees;Lilly: Consultancy;AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel Support;Roche: Honoraria;Amgen: Honoraria;Beigene: 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. Dartigeas: Astra-Zeneca: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: travel grants/Congress;Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: travel grants/Congress;Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: travel grants/Congress. Ferrant: Janssen: Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses;AbbVie: Honoraria, Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses;AstraZeneca: Honoraria. de Guibert: Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria;AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria;Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria. Feugier: Astrazeneca: Consultancy, Honoraria;Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria;Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria;Amgen: Honoraria;Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria. Cartron: Roche, Celgene-BMS: Consultancy;Danofi, Gilead, Novartis, Jansen, Roche, Celgene-BMS, Abbvie, Takeda: Honoraria. Ysebaert: Abbvie, AstraZeneca, Janssen, Roche: Other: Advisory Board, Research Funding.