Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Improved Quality of Life (QOL) with Lisocabtagene Maraleucel (liso-cel), a CD19-Directed Chimeric Antigen Receptor (CAR) T Cell Therapy, Compared with Standard of Care (SOC) As Second-Line (2L) Treatment in Patients (Pts) with Relapsed or Refractory (R/R) Large B-Cell Lymphoma (LBCL): Results from the Phase 3 Transform Study
Blood ; 138:3845, 2021.
Article in English | EMBASE | ID: covidwho-1582245
ABSTRACT

Background:

Pts with previously treated R/R aggressive LBCL have compromised health-related QOL (HRQOL). Liso-cel is an autologous, CD19-directed, defined composition, 4-1BB CAR T cell product administered at equal target doses of CD8 + and CD4 + CAR + T cells. In a prespecified interim analysis of TRANSFORM (NCT03575351), a randomized, open-label, pivotal trial, liso-cel demonstrated statistically significant and clinically meaningful improvement in the primary endpoint of event-free survival and key secondary endpoints (complete response rate and progression-free survival) in adults with R/R LBCL after failure of first-line (1L) immunochemotherapy compared with SOC, with no new safety signals. Here we present results of the pt-reported outcomes (PRO) analysis from TRANSFORM.

Methods:

Adults (age ≤ 75 yrs) with R/R LBCL (≤ 12 mo after 1L therapy), who were eligible for autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT), were randomized to receive either SOC (3 cycles of salvage chemotherapy [CT] and BEAM + ASCT for responding pts) or liso-cel after lymphodepletion. Crossover to receive liso-cel was allowed in the SOC arm for pts who failed treatment. The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire - 30 items (EORTC QLQ-C30) and the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Lymphoma Subscale (FACT-LymS) were administered at randomization (baseline) and on Days 29 (infusion of liso-cel or 2 cycles of salvage CT), 64 (1 mo post liso-cel or completion of CT), 126 (3 mos post liso-cel or 2 mos post ASCT), and Mo 6 and other prespecified timepoints up to Mo 36 or end of study. No PRO data were collected after crossover. The analysis was based on the PRO-evaluable population (pts with a baseline and ≥ 1 post-baseline assessment). Predefined thresholds determined clinically meaningful changes. Global health/QOL (GH/QOL), physical functioning, cognitive functioning, fatigue, pain, and FACT-LymS were the primary domains of interest based on their relevance to the study population and treatment. A linear mixed model for repeated measures (MMRM) analysis was performed to assess the between-treatment difference in overall least squares (LS) mean change from baseline for each primary domain, using data collected up to Day 126 for visits with a sample size per arm ≥ 10. Proportions of pts with meaningful change from baseline were assessed for each primary domain up to Mo 6. All analyses were descriptive only.

Results:

Of 184 randomized pts, 90 (49%) and 85 (46%), respectively, were included in the PRO-evaluable population for the EORTC QLQ-C30 (SOC vs liso-cel n=43 vs 47) and FACT-LymS (n=40 vs 45, respectively). The PRO assessment completion rate from baseline up to Mo 6 was ≥ 45%, which was lower than expected primarily due to operational challenges during the COVID-19 pandemic but was comparable for both arms. In the MMRM analysis, the liso-cel arm had more favorable overall LS mean changes from baseline to Day 126 than the SOC arm in most of the EORTC QLQ-C30 domains and FACT-LymS. In particular, the between-treatment differences for cognitive functioning (−2.09 vs 2.21) and fatigue (3.75 vs −1.95) for SOC versus liso-cel, respectively, exceeded the prespecified minimal important difference threshold (Table);in those domains, the SOC arm deteriorated while the liso-cel arm improved. In individual-level analyses, the proportion of pts with meaningful improvement for fatigue and GH/QOL was higher, while deterioration was lower, in the liso-cel arm versus SOC arm from baseline up to Mo 6 (Figure). At Mo 6, a higher proportion of pts experienced worsened fatigue (71% vs 18%) and a lower proportion experienced improved fatigue (29% vs 47%) in the SOC arm compared with the liso-cel arm;for GH/QOL, a higher proportion of pts worsened (57% vs 18%) and lower proportion improved (14% vs 53%), respectively. For the other primary domains, the proportions of pts with improvement or deterioration favored liso-cel or were similar between arms.

Conclusions:

Compared with SOC, liso-cel sh wed favorable improvement in most primary PRO domains, particularly EORTC QLQ-C30 cognitive functioning and fatigue and more pts showed PRO improvements and fewer showed deterioration by Mo 6 with liso-cel. The results were achieved despite only responders remaining in the SOC arm after salvage CT. HRQOL was either improved or maintained after liso-cel treatment in pts with R/R LBCL after failure of 1L therapy. [Formula presented] Disclosures Abramson Bristol-Myers Squibb Company Consultancy, Research Funding;Morphosys Consultancy;C4 Therapeutics Consultancy;Kite Pharma Consultancy;Kymera Consultancy;Incyte Corporation Consultancy;Bluebird Bio Consultancy;Astra-Zeneca Consultancy;Allogene Therapeutics Consultancy;Novartis Consultancy;EMD Serono Consultancy;Genmab Consultancy;Seagen Inc. Research Funding;AbbVie Consultancy;Karyopharm Consultancy;Genentech Consultancy;BeiGene Consultancy. Arnason Juno/BMS Honoraria. Glass BMS Consultancy;Roche Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau;Riemser Research Funding;Kite Consultancy;Novartis Consultancy;Helios Klinik Berlin-Buch Current Employment. Crotta Bristol Myers Squibb Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Montheard Bristol Myers Squibb Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Previtali Bristol Myers Squibb Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Liu Bristol Myers Squibb Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Braverman BMS Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Guo Daiichi Sankyo Consultancy;UCB Consultancy;Janssen Consultancy;Gilead Consultancy;Bristol Myers Squibb Consultancy;EMD Serono Consultancy;Evidera Current Employment. Shi Bristol Myers Squibb Consultancy. Kamdar ADC Therapeutics Consultancy;Adaptive Biotechnologies Consultancy;TG Therapeutics Research Funding;Genentech Research Funding;AbbVie Consultancy;KaryoPharm Consultancy;Kite Consultancy;AstraZeneca Consultancy;SeaGen Speakers Bureau;Celgene Other;Genetech Other;Celgene (BMS) Consultancy.
Keywords

Full text: Available Collection: Databases of international organizations Database: EMBASE Language: English Journal: Blood Year: 2021 Document Type: Article

Similar

MEDLINE

...
LILACS

LIS


Full text: Available Collection: Databases of international organizations Database: EMBASE Language: English Journal: Blood Year: 2021 Document Type: Article