Efficacy of checkpoint inhibition after CAR-T failure in aggressive B-cell lymphomas: outcomes from 15 US institutions.

Checkpoint inhibitor (CPI) therapy with anti-PD-1 antibodies has been associated with mixed outcomes in small cohorts of patients with relapsed aggressive B-cell lymphomas after CAR-T failure. To define CPI therapy efficacy more definitively in this population, we retrospectively evaluated clinical outcomes in a large cohort of 96 patients with aggressive B-cell lymphomas receiving CPI therapy after CAR-T failure across 15 US academic centers. Most patients (53%) had diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, were treated with axicabtagene ciloleucel (53%), relapsed early (≤180 days) after CAR-T (83%), and received pembrolizumab (49%) or nivolumab (43%). CPI therapy was associated with an overall response rate of 19% and a complete response rate of 10%. Median duration of response was 221 days. Median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were 54 and 159 days, respectively. Outcomes to CPI therapy were significantly improved in patients with primary mediastinal B-cell lymphoma. PFS (128 vs 51 days) and OS (387 vs 131 days) were significantly longer in patients with late (>180 days) vs early (≤180 days) relapse after CAR-T. Grade ≥3 adverse events occurred in 19% of patients treated with CPI. Most patients (83%) died, commonly because of progressive disease. Only 5% had durable responses to CPI therapy. In the largest cohort of patients with aggressive B-cell lymphoma treated with CPI therapy after CAR-T relapse, our results reveal poor outcomes, particularly among those relapsing early after CAR-T. In conclusion, CPI therapy is not an effective salvage strategy for most patients after CAR-T, where alternative approaches are needed to improve post-CAR-T outcomes.

Diminished humoral and cellular responses to SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia.

Previous studies have demonstrated low rates of seroconversion to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccines in patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). In this national collaboration of 11 cancer centers in the United States, we aimed to further characterize and understand vaccine-induced immune responses, including T-cell responses, and the impact of CLL therapeutics (#NCT04852822). Eligible patients were enrolled in 2 cohorts (1) at the time of initial vaccination and (2) at the time of booster vaccination. The serologic response rates (anti-S) from 210 patients in the initial vaccination cohort and 117 in the booster vaccination cohort were 56% (95% confidence interval [CI], 50-63) and 68% (95% CI, 60-77), respectively. Compared with patients not on therapy, those receiving B-cell-directed therapy were less likely to seroconvert (odds ratio [OR], 0.27; 95% CI, 0.15-0.49). Persistence of response was observed at 6 months; anti-S titers increased with the administration of booster vaccinations. In the initial vaccination cohort, positive correlations were observed between the quantitative serologic response and CD4 T-cell response for the Wuhan variant and, to a lesser degree, for the Omicron variant (Spearman P = 0.45 Wuhan; P = 0.25 Omicron). In the booster vaccination cohort, positive correlations were observed between serologic responses and CD4 T-cell responses for both variants (P = 0.58 Wuhan; P = 0.57 Omicron) and to a lesser degree for CD8 T-cell responses (P = 0.33 Wuhan; P = 0.22 Omicron). Although no deaths from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) have been reported after booster vaccinations, patients should use caution as newer variants emerge and escape vaccine-induced immunity. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT04852822.

Polatuzumab Vedotin for Relapsed/Refractory Aggressive B-cell Lymphoma: A Multicenter Post-marketing Analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Polatuzumab vedotin is approved therapy in the United States for relapsed/refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma in combination with bendamustine and rituximab (Pola+BR). However, the safety and efficacy of Pola+BR outside of a clinical trial setting is unknown. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We analyzed use of pola-based therapy at 5 centers in the United States, including dose, response rates, progression-free survival (PFS), survival, and toxicity. RESULTS: Sixty-nine patients with aggressive B-cell lymphoma, including 66 with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma/high-grade B-cell lymphoma and 84% refractory to prior therapy, were treated. Responses occurred in of 50%, including 24% complete response. Median duration of response was 5.1 months, PFS was 2.0 months, and survival was 5.3 months, at 4 months median follow-up. Inferior PFS was associated with prior refractory disease (median, 57 days vs. not reached; P = .003) and lack of response to Pola+BR (PFS, 27 days vs. 152 days; P < .001). Discontinuation owing to planned cellular therapy was seen in 36% and owing to toxicity occurred in 12%; unplanned hospitalizations occurred in 36%. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that commercial Pola is applied to highly refractory lymphomas at our centers, often with intent to bridge to subsequent therapy. Although some clinical benefit was observed, efficacy was inferior to clinical trial data, especially among those with refractory disease.

Outcomes and factors impacting use of axicabtagene ciloleucel in patients with relapsed or refractory large B-cell lymphoma: results from an intention-to-treat analysis.

Data on real-world outcomes of axicabtagene ciloleucel (axi-cel) therapy for relapsed/refractory large B-cell lymphoma (R/R LBCL) are limited. In this intent to treat (ITT) analysis, we reviewed records of 38 consecutive patients with R/R LBCL for whom axi-cel was intended. Twenty-seven (71%) patients received axi-cel and 11 (29%) did not. Patients in the non-axi-cel group had a higher hematopoietic cell transplantation comorbidity index (HCT-CI) (median 4 vs. 2, p = .04). Median overall survival for the ITT, axi-cel and non-axi-cel group was 10 (95% CI, 3.7 to 13), 13 (95% CI, 7.7 to N.R.) and 1 (95% CI, 0.4 to 3.7) month(s) respectively. Factors limiting axi-cel use were disease progression, sepsis, manufacturing failure and socioeconomic barrier in 6 (55%), 3 (27%), 1 (9%) and 1 (9%) patient(s) respectively. Additional strategies are needed to ensure all LBCL patients for whom chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy is prescribed can receive this treatment.

Assessment of the Efficacy of Therapies Following Venetoclax Discontinuation in CLL Reveals BTK Inhibition as an Effective Strategy.

PURPOSE: Venetoclax-based therapy is a standard-of-care option in first-line and relapsed/refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). Patient management following venetoclax discontinuation remains nonstandard and poorly understood. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: To address this, we conducted a large international study to identify a cohort of 326 patients who discontinued venetoclax and have been subsequently treated. Coprimary endpoints were overall response rate (ORR) and progression-free survival for the post-venetoclax treatments stratified by treatment type [Bruton's tyrosine kinase inhibitor (BTKi), PI3K inhibitor (PI3Ki), and cellular therapies]. RESULTS: We identified patients with CLL who discontinued venetoclax in the first-line (4%) and relapsed/refractory settings (96%). Patients received a median of three therapies prior to venetoclax; 40% were BTKi naïve (n = 130), and 81% were idelalisib naïve (n = 263). ORR to BTKi was 84% (n = 44) in BTKi-naïve patients versus 54% (n = 30) in BTKi-exposed patients. We demonstrate therapy selection following venetoclax requires prior novel agent exposure consideration and discontinuation reasons. CONCLUSIONS: For BTKi-naïve patients, selection of covalently binding BTKis results in high ORR and durable remissions. For BTKi-exposed patients, covalent BTK inhibition is not effective in the setting of BTKi resistance. PI3Kis following venetoclax do not appear to result in durable remissions. We conclude that BTKi in naïve or previously responsive patients and cellular therapies following venetoclax may be the most effective strategies.See related commentary by Rogers, p. 3501.

A retrospective comparison of venetoclax alone or in combination with an anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody in R/R CLL.

Venetoclax (VEN) is approved for relapsed/refractory (R/R) chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) as monotherapy (VENmono) or in combination with rituximab. Whether VEN plus anti-CD20 (VENcombo) is superior to VENmono is unknown. We conducted a multicenter, retrospective cohort analysis comparing 321 CLL patients treated with VENmono vs VENcombo across the United States and the United Kingdom. We examined demographics, baseline characteristics, dosing, adverse events, response rates, and outcomes. The primary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS), estimated by Kaplan-Meier method, in patients treated with VENmono vs VENcombo. Univariate and bivariate analyses were performed with COX regression. Three hundred twenty-one CLL patients were included (3 median prior treatments, 78% prior ibrutinib). The overall response rates (ORRs) were similar (VENmono, 81% ORR, 34% complete remission [CR] vs VENcombo, 84% ORR, 32% CR). With a median follow-up of 13.4 months, no differences in PFS and OS were observed between the groups. In unadjusted analyses, the hazard ratios (HRs) for PFS and OS for VENmono vs VENcombo were HR 1.0 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.6-1.8; P = .7) and HR 1.2 (95% CI, 0.6-2.3; P = .5), respectively. When adjusting for differences between the cohorts, the addition of an anti-CD20 antibody in combination with VEN did not impact PFS (HR, 1.0; 95% CI, 0.5-2.0; P = .9) or OS (HR, 1.1; 95% CI, 0.4-2.6; P = .8). We demonstrate comparable efficacy between VENmono and VENcombo in a heavily pretreated, high-risk, retrospective cohort, in terms of both response data and survival outcomes. Prospective studies are needed to validate these findings.

Tumor Lysis, Adverse Events, and Dose Adjustments in 297 Venetoclax-Treated CLL Patients in Routine Clinical Practice.

PURPOSE: Clinical trials of venetoclax reported negligible rates of clinical tumor lysis syndrome (TLS) in patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) when using an extended dose escalation schedule. We aimed to understand TLS prophylaxis, rates of select adverse events (AE), and impact of dosing modifications in routine clinical practice. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: This retrospective cohort study included 297 CLL venetoclax-treated patients outside of clinical trials in academic and community centers. Demographics, baseline disease characteristics, venetoclax dosing, TLS risk and prophylaxis, and AEs were collected. RESULTS: The group was 69% male, 96% had relapsed/refractory CLL, 45% had deletion chromosome 17p, 84% had unmutated IGHV, 80% received venetoclax monotherapy, and median age was 67. TLS risk was categorized as low (40%), intermediate (32%), or high (28%), and 62% had imaging prior to venetoclax initiation. Clinical TLS occurred in 2.7% of patients and laboratory TLS occurred in 5.7%. Pre-venetoclax TLS risk group and creatinine clearance independently predict TLS development in multivariable analysis. Grade 3/4 AEs included neutropenia (39.6%), thrombocytopenia (29.2%), infection (25%), neutropenic fever (7.9%), and diarrhea (6.9%). Twenty-two patients (7.4%) discontinued venetoclax due to an AE. Progression-free survival was similar regardless of number of dose interruptions, length of dose interruption, and stable venetoclax dose. CONCLUSIONS: These data provide insights into current use of venetoclax in clinical practice, including TLS rates observed in clinical practice. We identified opportunities for improved adherence to TLS risk stratification and prophylaxis, which may improve safety.

Maintenance rituximab or observation after frontline treatment with bendamustine-rituximab for follicular lymphoma.

Bendamustine (B) with rituximab (R) is a standard frontline treatment for medically fit follicular lymphoma (FL) patients. The safety and efficacy of maintenance rituximab (MR) after BR induction has not been formally compared to observation for FL, resulting in disparate practice patterns. Prospective trials have shown benefit of MR after R-CHOP (rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, prednisone) or R-CVP (rituximab, cyclophosphamide, vincristine, prednisone), yet recent data from the GALLIUM study comparing outcomes of patients treated with chemotherapy with R or obinutuzumab (G) showed higher than anticipated fatal adverse events with BR/BG. In order to assess the efficacy and tolerability of MR after BR, we retrospectively collected data on 640 newly diagnosed patients treated with FL. We found that patients who achieved partial remission (PR) after ≥4 cycles of BR had improved duration of response (DOR) with MR vs. no maintenance, whereas those in complete remission did not. These findings were confirmed in a validation cohort. In the entire study population, the known fatal adverse event rate after BR was 2·5% and did not significantly differ in those receiving MR versus no maintenance. [Correction added on 14 January 2019, after online publication: The preceding sentence has been corrected in this current version.] Within the limitations inherent to retrospective analysis, these data suggest that FL patients with a PR to BR experience prolongation of remission with MR with an acceptable safety profile.

Real-world outcomes and management strategies for venetoclax-treated chronic lymphocytic leukemia patients in the United States.

Venetoclax is a BCL2 inhibitor approved for 17p-deleted relapsed/refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia with activity following kinase inhibitors. We conducted a multicenter retrospective cohort analysis of patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia treated with venetoclax to describe outcomes, toxicities, and treatment selection following venetoclax discontinuation. A total of 141 chronic lymphocytic leukemia patients were included (98% relapsed/refractory). Median age at venetoclax initiation was 67 years (range 37-91), median prior therapies was 3 (0-11), 81% unmutated IGHV, 45% del(17p), and 26.8% complex karyotype (≥ 3 abnormalities). Prior to venetoclax initiation, 89% received a B-cell receptor antagonist. For tumor lysis syndrome prophylaxis, 93% received allopurinol, 92% normal saline, and 45% rasburicase. Dose escalation to the maximum recommended dose of 400 mg daily was achieved in 85% of patients. Adverse events of interest included neutropenia in 47.4%, thrombocytopenia in 36%, tumor lysis syndrome in 13.4%, neutropenic fever in 11.6%, and diarrhea in 7.3%. The overall response rate to venetoclax was 72% (19.4% complete remission). With a median follow up of 7 months, median progression free survival and overall survival for the entire cohort have not been reached. To date, 41 venetoclax treated patients have discontinued therapy and 24 have received a subsequent therapy, most commonly ibrutinib. In the largest clinical experience of venetoclax-treated chronic lymphocytic leukemia patients, the majority successfully completed and maintained a maximum recommended dose. Response rates and duration of response appear comparable to clinical trial data. Venetoclax was active in patients with mutations known to confer ibrutinib resistance. Optimal sequencing of newer chronic lymphocytic leukemia therapies requires further study.