Lisocabtagene Maraleucel Research Articles

Matching-Adjusted Indirect Comparison (MAIC) of Efficacy and Safety of Lisocabtagene Maraleucel (liso-cel) and Mosunetuzumab for the Treatment (Tx) of Third Line or Later (3L+) Relapsed or Refractory (R/R) Follicular Lymphoma (FL)

Background:The tx landscape of R/R FL is evolving with the availability of anti-CD19 chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cell therapies and CD20xCD3 bispecific T-cell-engaging monoclonal antibodies (mAb). Liso-cel is an autologous, CD19-directed, 4-1BB CAR T cell therapy which recently reported a positive benefit-risk tx profile for the 3L+ tx of patients with R/R FL (Morschhauser F, et al. ICML 2023; LBA4). Mosunetuzumab, a CD20xCD3 bispecific T-cell-engaging mAb, is approved for the tx of R/R FL after 2 or more lines of therapy (LOT). In the absence of head-to-head data, we conducted an unanchored MAIC to compare the efficacy and safety of liso-cel and mosunetuzumab for the 3L+ tx of patients with R/R FL. Methods: Unanchored MAICs were used to estimate population-adjusted relative tx effects between individual patient-level data from TRANSCEND FL (NCT04245839; data as of January 27, 2023; median follow-up of 19.3 months) and aggregate data from GO29781 (NCT02500407; data as of August 27, 2021; median follow-up of 18.3 months; N = 90). For TRANSCEND FL, the leukapheresed (intention to treat [ITT]) set (N = 114) was used for primary comparisons of efficacy endpoints: Progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate, and complete response rate (all per independent review committee assessment). Overall survival was not analyzed due to the low rate of events. The treated efficacy set (n = 101) was used for a sensitivity analysis of efficacy comparisons. The treated set (n = 107) was used for comparisons of safety endpoints: cytokine release syndrome (CRS), neurological events (NEs), serious infections, and use of corticosteroids or tocilizumab for CRS. Baseline characteristics and outcome measures in TRANSCEND FL were redefined to align with those reported in GO29781. Data from TRANSCEND FL were weighted using a method-of-moments propensity score model to match the marginal distribution (ie, mean, variance) of clinical factors among patients from GO29781. A panel of expert clinicians selected and ranked tx effect modifiers separately for efficacy and safety endpoints. For efficacy, factors adjusted for included number of prior systemic LOTs, progression of disease ≤ 24 months from initiation of immunochemotherapy, bulky disease at screening, FL International Prognostic Index risk factor, refractory to last therapy, double refractory to an anti-CD20 antibody and alkylating agent, ECOG PS at screening, sex, and prior autologous HSCT. For safety, factors adjusted for included age, bulky disease at screening, refractory to last therapy, number of prior systemic LOTs, ECOG PS at screening, Ann Arbor stage, and sex. Hazard ratios (HR) were used to compare PFS, and odds ratios (OR) were used for response rates and safety outcomes. Results: After adjusting for all available factors, when compared with mosunetuzumab, liso-cel was associated with higher objective response rate (OR, 3.78 [95% CI, 1.48‒9.67]), and complete response rate (OR, 6.46 [2.85‒14.65]), and improved PFS (HR, 0.28 [0.16‒0.49]) based on an effective sample size (ESS) of 71.4 (Figure). Results were consistent across all scenario analyses, including unadjusted comparisons and sensitivity analyses using the treated efficacy set for TRANSCEND FL. Although liso-cel was associated with higher incidence of any-grade CRS (OR, 1.86 [1.01‒3.43]) and any-grade NEs (OR, 2.16 [0.72‒6.44]), it demonstrated a lower incidence of grade ≥ 3 CRS (OR, 0.45 [0.04‒5.13]) and grade 3-4 serious infections (OR, 0.35 [0.12‒1.03]) based on an ESS of 81.9 compared with mosunetuzumab. Furthermore, liso-cel was associated with reduced use of corticosteroids for CRS management (OR, 0.14 [0.03‒0.65]), while the use of tocilizumab was higher in patients treated with liso-cel (OR, 2.27 [0.86‒5.99]). Conclusions: In this MAIC, liso-cel was associated with improved efficacy compared with mosunetuzumab. Liso-cel had a lower incidence of grade ≥ 3 CRS, grade 3-4 serious infections, and steroid use for management of CRS; however, liso-cel exhibited higher incidence of any-grade CRS, any-grade NEs, and tocilizumab use for CRS management. Safety comparisons were confounded by preventative use of corticosteroids in all patients in GO29781 and definition differences, most notably for NEs. These findings highlight a potential positive benefit-risk profile of liso-cel over mosunetuzumab as a 3L+ tx option for R/R FL.

Multicenter, Real-World Study in Patients with R/R Large B-Cell Lymphoma (LBCL) Who Received Lisocabtagene Maraleucel (liso-cel) in the United States (US)

Background: Liso-cel is an autologous, CD19-directed, 4-1BB CAR T cell product administered at equal target doses of CD8 + and CD4 + CAR + T cells that has demonstrated efficacy and favorable safety based on clinical studies. Liso-cel is approved in the US for the treatment of adults with R/R LBCL after 1 or more lines of systemic therapy, but data describing outcomes in patients treated with liso-cel in the real-world setting are limited. We report real-world clinical effectiveness and safety of commercial liso-cel in patients with R/R LBCL based on a postmarketing study using data collected at the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research (CIBMTR). Methods: This is a noninterventional, observational, multicenter study of US patients who were followed in the CIBMTR Cellular Therapy Registry between February 2021 and November 2022 after infusion with commercial liso-cel (conforming product only) for the treatment of R/R LBCL. Patients who received nonconforming product are being followed in a separate postmarketing study. The primary objective was to evaluate the real-world clinical effectiveness and safety outcomes of patients with R/R LBCL receiving liso-cel, including ORR, CR, duration of response (DOR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and risk of cytokine release syndrome (CRS) and immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome (ICANS). Results were analyzed and reported descriptively. Results: At data cutoff (May 4, 2023), 323 patients who received commercial liso-cel across > 50 treatment sites were included in the analysis. The median vein-to-vein time (from leukapheresis to liso-cel infusion) was 36 days (IQR, 34‒42), which is consistent with clinical studies of liso-cel. The median age was 70 years (range, 24‒91). Patients included those with high-risk disease (Table). Most patients had DLBCL not otherwise specified (NOS; 81%), 27% had disease transformed from indolent lymphoma, 12% had high-grade B-cell lymphoma (HGBCL), 37% had International Prognostic Index (IPI) ≥ 3, 6% had active CNS involvement, and 15% had prior transplant. The median number of prior lines of systemic therapy was 3 (range, 0‒11), with 25% of patients having received ≥ 4 lines. The median time from diagnosis to liso-cel infusion was 1.4 years (range, 0.2‒29.7). At a median follow-up of 7.4 months, ORR was 79%, with a 65% CR rate. Median time to response was 1.2 months (IQR, 1.0‒3.1). The median DOR has not been reached; DOR rate at 6 months was 73% (95% CI, 66%‒79%). The median PFS and median OS had not been reached at the time of data cutoff. Estimated 6-month PFS and OS rates were 64% and 82%, respectively. Most events of CRS and ICANS were of low grade, with no CRS and ICANS reported in 48% and 70% of patients, respectively. Overall, 52% of patients had CRS and 3% had grade ≥ 3 events. There was a high concordance on CRS grading per Lee 2014 and American Society for Transplantation and Cellular Therapy criteria. The most common treatments for CRS were tocilizumab (20%) and corticosteroids/tocilizumab (12%). ICANS was seen in 30% of patients, with grade ≥ 3 events in 11%. ICANS was mostly treated with corticosteroids (12%) and corticosteroids/antiepileptics (5%). Based on the attributed cause of death, grade 5 CRS or ICANS were observed in 3 and 3 patients, respectively, and all but 2 patients had concomitant causes of death, including disease progression (n = 3) and hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis (n = 2). Prolonged cytopenia (grade 4 thrombocytopenia and/or neutropenia persistent at 30 days postinfusion) occurred in 10% of patients. Conclusions: This is the first large, multicenter, real-world study of patients with R/R LBCL who received commercial liso-cel in the US. Baseline characteristics of patients treated in the real-world setting were consistent with or worse than the liso-cel registrational study experience, including the percentage of patients who had received ≥ 4 lines of prior systemic therapy (25% vs 26% in TRANSCEND). One-time infusion of liso-cel demonstrated deep and durable responses in patients with R/R LBCL across a broad age range, including those with high-risk features characteristic of poor prognosis. The incidence of severe (grade ≥ 3) CRS and ICANS was low. These results further support liso-cel as a therapeutic option with a favorable benefit/risk profile for a broad, real-world population of patients with R/R LBCL.

Effective sequencing of chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy in the treatment of LBCL in 2023

Over the last decade, CD19-targeting chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy has profoundly changed the management of relapsed/refractory large-B-cell lymphoma (LBCL). At present, there are three FDA-approved anti-CD19 CAR T-cell products for LBCL: axicabtagene ciloleucel (axi-cel), lisocabtagene maraleucel (liso-cel), and tisagenlecleucel (tisa-cel). Two of these (axi-cel & liso-cel) are approved for use in the second-line setting under certain conditions. As CAR T-cell therapy continues to define a new role in the treatment armamentarium for LBCL, questions remain regarding which product to use and how to sequence CAR T-cell therapy with other therapeutic options. Here we will briefly review the key features of each FDA-approved anti-CD19 CAR T-cell product and the data that led to regulatory approval for each. Next, we will focus on the recent landmark studies that have established the use of CAR T-cell therapy as second-line treatment. While no direct prospective head-to-head comparisons exist of the 3 constructs, we will review some retrospective studies that suggest some emerging differences between the products. Lastly, we will turn our attention to the horizon as we explore some of the ongoing questions of how to best leverage the curative potential of CAR T-cell therapy for the most effective management of LBCL. These areas include the consideration of CAR T-cell therapy in the frontline setting, the optimal timing for CAR T-cell referral, the optimal bridging approach, and how to continue advancing novel CAR T-cell approaches in the context of the current treatment landscape.

Two-year follow-up of lisocabtagene maraleucel in relapsed or refractory large B-cell lymphoma in TRANSCEND NHL 001

AbstractLisocabtagene maraleucel (liso-cel) demonstrated significant efficacy with a manageable safety profile as third-line or later treatment for patients with relapsed or refractory (R/R) large B-cell lymphoma (LBCL) in the TRANSCEND NHL 001 study. Primary end points were adverse events (AEs), dose-limiting toxicities, and objective response rate (ORR) per independent review committee. Key secondary end points were complete response (CR) rate, duration of response (DOR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). After 2-year follow-up, patients could enroll in a separate study assessing long-term (≤15 years) safety and OS. Liso-cel–treated patients (N = 270) had a median age of 63 years (range, 18-86 years) and a median of 3 prior lines (range, 1-8) of systemic therapy, and 181 of them (67%) had chemotherapy-refractory LBCL. Median follow-up was 19.9 months. In efficacy-evaluable patients (N = 257), the ORR was 73% and CR rate was 53%. The median (95% confidence interval) DOR, PFS, and OS were 23.1 (8.6 to not reached), 6.8 (3.3-12.7), and 27.3 months (16.2-45.6), respectively. Estimated 2-year DOR, PFS, and OS rates were 49.5%, 40.6%, and 50.5%, respectively. In the 90-day treatment-emergent period (N = 270), grade 3 to 4 cytokine release syndrome and neurological events occurred in 2% and 10% of patients, respectively. The most common grade ≥3 AEs in treatment-emergent and posttreatment-emergent periods, respectively, were neutropenia (60% and 7%) and anemia (37% and 6%). Liso-cel demonstrated durable remissions and a manageable safety profile with no new safety signals during the 2-year follow-up in patients with R/R LBCL. These trials were registered at www.ClinicalTrials.gov as #NCT02631044 and #NCT03435796.

Evolving Role of CAR T Cell Therapy in First- and Second-Line Treatment of Large B Cell Lymphoma.

We review the recent practice-changing trials of anti-CD19 chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cell therapies in large B cell lymphoma (LBCL) including phase 3 comparisons with second-line standard-of-care (SOC) and phase 2 investigations in transplant-ineligible patients or as part of first-line treatment. ZUMA-7 found significantly improved overall survival and event-free survival (EFS) with axicabtagene ciloleucel (axi-cel) versus SOC of salvage chemotherapy followed by autologous stem-cell transplantation. This represents the first such survival improvement in nearly 30years for early-relapsed or refractory (r/r) LBCL. TRANSFORM demonstrated prolonged EFS for lisocabtagene maraleucel (liso-cel) versus SOC but BELINDA did not for tisagenlecleucel. Second-line CAR T cell was a viable curative-intent therapy in elderly (ZUMA-7; axi-cel) and/or transplant-ineligible (PILOT; liso-cel) patients. ZUMA-12 demonstrated effectiveness for axi-cel as part of first-line treatment for high-risk LBCL. These results support a role for CAR T cell therapy as new second-line SOC for r/r LBCL and highlight its potential evolution into future first-line treatment for high-risk disease.

CT-045 Primary Results From OUTREACH: A Phase II Study of Lisocabtagene Maraleucel (Liso-Cel) Administered in the Community Setting as Outpatient or Inpatient Treatment in Patients With Relapsed or Refractory (R/R) Large B-Cell Lymphoma (LBCL)

CT-045 Primary Results From OUTREACH: A Phase II Study of Lisocabtagene Maraleucel (Liso-Cel) Administered in the Community Setting as Outpatient or Inpatient Treatment in Patients With Relapsed or Refractory (R/R) Large B-Cell Lymphoma (LBCL)

Cost-effectiveness analysis of transplant-ineligible relapsed or refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma treatment options-Experience of the efficiency frontier approach.

The treatment of relapsed/refractory (R/R) diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) changed remarkably since the European Medicines Agency-approved chimeric antigen receptor T-cell (CAR-T) therapies (axicabtagene ciloleucel [axi-cel], lisocabtagene maraleucel [liso-cel], tisagenlecleucel [tisa-cel]) for the third-line onwards (3+L), and targeted therapies (polatuzumab vedotin-bendamustine-rituximab [pola-BR], tafasitamab-lenalidomide [Tafa-L]) for the second-line (2L) onwards. As associated rising treatment costs represent an economic burden, the cost-effectiveness of transplant-ineligible R/R DLBCL interventions was assessed from a German healthcare payer's perspective, using the efficiency frontier (EF) approach. A systematic literature review was performed to determine the clinical benefit concerning median overall survival (OS) of bendamustine-rituximab (BR), rituximab-gemcitabine-oxaliplatin (R-GemOx), axi-cel, liso-cel, tisa-cel, pola-BR, and Tafa-L. First-year treatment costs (drug and medical services costs) were calculated. Results were merged on two-dimensional graphs illustrating 2L and 3+L EFs. Second-line EF is formed by BR (median OS 11.49 months, €23 958) and Tafa-L (45.7, €104 541), 3+L EF is formed by R-GemOx (12.0, €29 080), Tafa-L (15.5, €104 541), and axi-cel (18.69, €308 516). These interventions build the respective cost-effectiveness thresholds for novel interventions. Using the EF approach, the currently most cost-effective interventions (based on cost-effectiveness ratios) in the indication of R/R DLBCL were identified to guide international reimbursement decisions.

Estimating the Cost per Clinical Outcome of Second-Line Liso-Cel Versus Autologous Stem Cell Transplantation in Patients with Transplantation-Intended Relapsed/Refractory Large B Cell Lymphoma

It is important to consider the total cost of care (TCOC) associated with a therapy and clinical benefit for relapsed or refractory (R/R) large B cell lymphoma (LBCL). We estimated the 1-year TCOC and cost per clinical outcome for patients with R/R LBCL treated with second-line lisocabtagene maraleucel (liso-cel) versus autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) using data from the TRANSFORM study (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03575351). A cost per clinical outcome analysis using a Monte Carlo simulation approach was conducted. Cost inputs were generated from a retrospective microcosting analysis of healthcare resource utilization (HCRU). Patient-level data from an interim analysis (March 2021) were used to derive HCRU and clinical inputs. Clinical inputs included median event-free survival (EFS), median progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate, and complete response (CR) rate. In the intention-to-treat analysis, the mean (standard deviation) TCOC per patient was $550,864 ($173,087) for liso-cel and $413,200 ($290,802) for ASCT. The cost per clinical outcome model estimated a mean cost for liso-cel versus ASCT per EFS month of $57,295 versus $186,369, per PFS month of $40,949 versus $78,797, per overall responder of $653,965 versus $881,804, and per complete responder of $828,045 versus $1,063,822. This economic model shows reductions in mean estimated TCOC per EFS month, PFS month, overall responder, and complete responder with liso-cel versus ASCT owing to the superior efficacy of liso-cel. Although liso-cel-treated patients incurred greater upfront costs, fewer required subsequent therapy, and they accumulated less downstream costs. These results underscore the importance of considering the durability of response and clinical benefit when assessing total costs.

In brief: Lisocabtagene maraleucel (Breyanzi) for large B-cell lymphoma.

The FDA has approved lisocabtagene maraleucel (Breyanzi – BMS) for treatment of adults with large B-cell lymphoma (LBCL), including diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) not otherwise specified, high-grade B-cell lymphoma, primary mediastinal large B-cell lymphoma, or follicular lymphoma grade 3B who have disease refractory to first-line chemoimmunotherapy, relapsed within 12 months of or after first-line chemoimmunotherapy, are not eligible for hematopoietic stem cell transplantation due to comorbidities or age, or have relapsed or refractory disease after ≥2 lines of systemic therapy.

Value for Money of CAR-T Cell Therapy for Patients with Diffuse Large B-cell Lymphoma in China: Evidence from a Cost-Effectiveness Analysis.

This research assesses the cost effectiveness of Axicabtagene ciloleucel (Axi-cel), Tisagenlecleucel (Tis-cel), Relmacabtagene autoleucel (Rel-cel) and Lisocabtagene maraleucel (Lis-cel) against standard of care (SOC) for patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) in the first-line setting (1L), second-line setting (2L) and third-line or later setting (3L+). Markov modelling based on a flexible survival model was adopted to evaluate four chimeric antigen receptor T-cell (CAR-T) therapies compared with SOC for patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL). The clinical inputs and utility values of the model were derived from the most recent clinical trials and the health care costs from a Chinese provincial clinical center. Costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were used to derive incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) from the Chinese health care system perspective. The ICER of Axi-cel (1L) versus SOC was approximately Chinese Yuan (CNY)2,125,311 per QALY. The ICER for Axi-cel (2L), Tis-cel (2L) and Liso-cel (2L)) versus SOC in transplant-eligible patients were approximately CNY363,977, CNY32,066,781 and CNY347,746 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY), respectively. The ICER for Liso-cel (2L) versus SOC in transplant-ineligible patients was approximately CNY1,233,972 per QALY. The ICERs for Axi-cel (3L+), Tis-cel (3L+), Rel-cel (3L+) and Liso-cel (3L+) versus SOC were approximately CNY346,009, CNY654,344, CNY280,964 and CNY436,858 per QALY, respectively. In the scenario analysis using mixture cure models, the long-term survival benefit for CAR-T and SOC groups was found higher, and only Rel-cel (3L+) was found to be cost effective. Our results demonstrated that CAR-T treatments are not cost effective in any-line settings for DLBCL patients at the WHO-recommended willingness-to-pay threshold (CNY257,241 per QALY) in the base-case analysis. Price reduction of CAR-T therapies is the main approach for lowering ICERs and ensuring that the drug costs are proportional to patient health benefits.

Lisocabtagene maraleucel in chronic lymphocytic leukaemia and small lymphocytic lymphoma (TRANSCEND CLL 004): a multicentre, open-label, single-arm, phase 1–2 study

Patients with relapsed or refractory chronic lymphocytic leukaemia or small lymphocytic lymphoma for whom treatment has failed with both Bruton tyrosine kinase (BTK) inhibitor and venetoclax have few treatment options and poor outcomes. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of lisocabtagene maraleucel (liso-cel) at the recommended phase 2 dose in patients with relapsed or refractory chronic lymphocytic leukaemia or small lymphocytic lymphoma. We report the primary analysis of TRANSCEND CLL 004, an open-label, single-arm, phase 1-2 study conducted in the USA. Patients aged 18 years or older with relapsed or refractory chronic lymphocytic leukaemia or small lymphocytic lymphoma and at least two previous lines of therapy, including a BTK inhibitor, received an intravenous infusion of liso-cel at one of two target dose levels: 50 × 106 (dose level 1) or 100 × 106 (dose level 2, DL2) chimeric antigen receptor-positive T cells. The primary endpoint was complete response or remission (including with incomplete marrow recovery), assessed by independent review according to the 2018 International Workshop on Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia criteria, in efficacy-evaluable patients with previous BTK inhibitor progression and venetoclax failure (the primary efficacy analysis set) at DL2 (null hypothesis of ≤5%). This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03331198. Between Jan 2, 2018, and June 16, 2022, 137 enrolled patients underwent leukapheresis at 27 sites in the USA. 117 patients received liso-cel (median age 65 years [IQR 59-70]; 37 [32%] female and 80 [68%] male; 99 [85%] White, five [4%] Black or African American, two [2%] other races, and 11 [9%] unknown race; median of five previous lines of therapy [IQR 3-7]); all 117 participants had received and had treatment failure on a previous BTK inhibitor. A subset of patients had also experienced venetoclax failure (n=70). In the primary efficacy analysis set at DL2 (n=49), the rate of complete response or remission (including with incomplete marrow recovery) was statistically significant at 18% (n=9; 95% CI 9-32; p=0·0006). In patients treated with liso-cel, grade 3 cytokine release syndrome was reported in ten (9%) of 117 (with no grade 4 or 5 events) and grade 3 neurological events were reported in 21 (18%; one [1%] grade 4, no grade 5 events). Among 51 deaths on the study, 43 occurred after liso-cel infusion, of which five were due to treatment-emergent adverse events (within 90 days of liso-cel infusion). One death was related to liso-cel (macrophage activation syndrome-haemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis). A single infusion of liso-cel was shown to induce complete response or remission (including with incomplete marrow recovery) in patients with relapsed or refractory chronic lymphocytic leukaemia or small lymphocytic lymphoma, including patients who had experienced disease progression on a previous BTK inhibitor and venetoclax failure. The safety profile was manageable. Juno Therapeutics, a Bristol-Myers Squibb Company.

BONE MARROW VOLUME IRRADIATED AND RISK OF CYTOPENIAS IN AGGRESSIVE B‐CELL LYMPHOMA PATIENTS BRIDGED WITH RADIATION THERAPY FOR CART CELL THERAPY

Introduction: Patients (pts) with aggressive B cell lymphomas undergoing anti-CD19-directed chimeric antigen receptor T cell therapy (CART) can benefit from bridging radiation therapy (bRT) as immune priming. Previously, by measuring the bone marrow (BM) volume irradiated in multiple myeloma pts, we established that RT does not adversely affect stem cell collection.1 Here, we examined the impact of irradiated BM distribution on the risk of acute cytopenias after bRT prior to CART. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed adults with DLBCL between 2017 and 2022 who received bRT prior to CART, which included axicabtagene ciloleucel, tisagenlecleucel, or lisocabtagene maraleucel. Clinical characteristics, labs, and response were extracted. RT plans were reviewed; % BM irradiated was calculated as described previously with published estimates of skeletal BM distribution.2 Progression free survival (PFS), disease specific survival (DSS) and overall survival (OS) were modeled using the Kaplan-Meier method. Binary logistic regression and Mann-Whitney U correlated RT distribution with cytopenias (anemia, thrombocytopenia, and neutropenia per CTCAE v4.03). Results: Fifty-one pts received bRT, of which 13 (25.5%) had bulky disease (≥10 cm). Majority received bRT alone; 16 (31.4%) were additionally bridged with systemic therapy. The median bRT was 30 Gy (range: 4–48 Gy) and 26 pts (51%) pts received ≥30 Gy. Thirty-one pts (61%) received bRT comprehensively to all disease sites. The incidence of ≥Grade 3 cytopenias in timepoints following bRT are shown below. The median cumulative % of BM irradiated was 5.05% (range: 0%–50%). Nine pts (18%) received bRT encompassing ≥15% of the BM, for whom there was no increased incidence of ≥Grade 3 cytopenias overall (as well as specifically anemia, thrombocytopenia, and neutropenia) at any timepoint (all p > 0.2). Receipt of RT comprehensively to all disease sites, or bridging with both RT + systemic therapy, or delivery of ≥30 Gy bRT did not correlate with the incidence of ≥Grade 3 cytopenias at any timepoint. Regarding outcomes, 26 pts (51%) had CR at 30 days post-CART. Sixteen had PR (31.4%), and 9 pts (17.6%) had PD or SD. The OS/PFS were 84% (71–92)/78% (64–87) at 1 year, and 59% (44–71)/57% (42–70) at 2 years. Twenty-seven pts (52.9%) remain alive at last follow-up, 19 (70.4%) of whom have no evidence of disease. Conclusions: bRT is not associated with increased incidence of cytopenias, even for doses ≥30 Gy, when encompassing ≥15% of the BM, or when pts are treated comprehensively to all disease sites. While bRT can be delivered safely, we still urge careful field design to ensure minimum BM is treated to incorporate into pre-CART regimens. Keywords: aggressive B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma, cellular therapies, radiation therapy Conflicts of interests pertinent to the abstract R. E. Steiner Research funding from Seagen, BMS, GSK and Rafael pharmaceuticals.

EE86 Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Axicabtagene Ciloleucel, Lisocabtagene Maraleucel, and Tisagenlecleucel CAR T-Cell Therapies for Treatment of Relapsed or Refractory Large B-Cell Lymphoma (LBCL)

Background: Axicabtagene ciloleucel (axi-cel), lisocabtagene Maraleucel (liso-cel), and tisagenlecleucel (tisa-cel) are chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapies used to treat adult patients with large B-cell lymphoma (LBCL) who relapsed within 12 months of first line therapy. However, no head-to-head clinical trials have been conducted to compare them.

Subgroup analyses of primary refractory (refr) vs early relapsed (rel) large B-cell lymphoma (LBCL) from the TRANSFORM study of lisocabtagene maraleucel (liso-cel) vs standard of care (SOC) as second-line (2L) therapy.

7526 Background: The TRANSFORM primary analysis (PA; NCT03575351) confirmed the superior efficacy of liso-cel vs SOC as 2L therapy in patients (pts) with primary refr or early rel LBCL (Abramson et al. Blood 2022). Response to first-line (1L) therapy (refr vs rel), which was a study randomization stratification factor, may influence future treatment response. Here, we present results for refr and rel LBCL subgroups from the TRANSFORM PA. Methods: TRANSFORM is a randomized phase 3 study of liso-cel vs SOC (salvage chemotherapy [CT] followed by high-dose CT [HDCT]/autologous SCT [ASCT]) in adults ≤ 75 y with LBCL primary refr to or rel ≤ 12 mo after 1L therapy and eligible for HDCT/ASCT. The primary endpoint was event-free survival (EFS); key secondary endpoints were CR rate, PFS, and OS. In this predefined subgroup analysis, refr was SD, PD, PR, or CR with rel < 3 mo after 1L therapy; rel was CR with rel ≥ 3 mo and ≤ 12 mo after 1L therapy. Results: 92 pts were randomized to each arm. Most pts in the liso-cel and SOC arms had refr disease (73% and 76%, respectively; rel disease, 27% and 24%). Baseline characteristics in the refr and rel subgroups, respectively, were generally balanced: median LDH (U/L; liso-cel, 228.5 and 225; SOC, 259 and 259); median SPD (cm2; liso-cel, 11 and 12; SOC, 15.5 and 18); high-grade B-cell lymphoma (liso-cel, 27% and 16%; SOC, 27% and 9%); diffuse LBCL not otherwise specified (liso-cel, 58% and 56%; SOC, 49% and 73%). Consistent with the overall study population, EFS, CR rate, and PFS favored liso-cel vs SOC in both subgroups (Table). Safety was also consistent. Grade ≥ 3 cytokine release syndrome (CRS) and neurological events (NE) were low in refr (1% and 4%) and rel (0 and 4%) subgroups, respectively, with no grade 4/5 CRS or NEs. Conclusions: In TRANSFORM, liso-cel showed benefits in EFS, PFS, and CR rate vs SOC irrespective of prior response to 1L therapy. As refr LBCL is historically difficult to treat, outcomes for liso-cel in this subgroup are encouraging. Clinical trial information: NCT03575351 . [Table: see text]

Cost-Effectiveness of Lisocabtagene Maraleucel Versus Axicabtagene Ciloleucel and Tisagenlecleucel in the Third-Line or Later Treatment Setting for Relapsed or Refractory Large B-cell Lymphoma in the United States.

The objective of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of lisocabtagene maraleucel (liso-cel) versus other available chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapies, including axicabtagene ciloleucel (axi-cel) and tisagenlecleucel (tisa-cel), in patients who had received at least two prior therapies from a United States (US) commercial third-party payer perspective. To capture this heterogeneity in survival outcomes, we used mixture cure models to extrapolate progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Patient-level data from TRANSCEND NHL 001 for liso-cel and reconstructed patient-level data from ZUMA-1 for axi-cel, JULIET for tisa-cel, and SCHOLAR-1 for salvage chemotherapy, derived using the Guyot method, were used for OS and PFS. The model included adverse events associated with liso-cel, axi-cel, and tisa-cel. Liso-cel was less costly (incremental cost of - $74,980) and marginally more effective (0.002 incremental quality-adjusted life-years [QALY]) than axi-cel and had an incremental cost of $67,925 and 2.02 incremental QALYs over tisa-cel in the base case. Results remained consistent in sensitivity analyses, with the liso-cel OS cure fraction being the main driver of cost-effectiveness compared with both axi-cel and tisa-cel. This analysis estimated that liso-cel is cost-effective compared with tisa-cel and axi-cel from a commercial US payer perspective.

44 - Primary Analysis (PA) Results from the Randomized, Phase 3 TRANSFORM Study of Lisocabtagene Maraleucel (liso-cel) Versus Standard of Care (SOC) with Salvage Chemotherapy (CT) Followed By Autologous Stem Cell Transplantation (ASCT) As Second-Line (2L) Treatment in Patients (Pts) with Relapsed or Refractory Large B-Cell Lymphoma (LBCL)

44 - Primary Analysis (PA) Results from the Randomized, Phase 3 TRANSFORM Study of Lisocabtagene Maraleucel (liso-cel) Versus Standard of Care (SOC) with Salvage Chemotherapy (CT) Followed By Autologous Stem Cell Transplantation (ASCT) As Second-Line (2L) Treatment in Patients (Pts) with Relapsed or Refractory Large B-Cell Lymphoma (LBCL)

Lisocabtagene maraleucel for relapsed or refractory large B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma

ABSTRACT Introduction Chimeric antigen receptor T (CAR T) cell therapy epitomizes the success of T cell engineering. Today, it is an integral component of the treatment algorithm for various types of B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL). Large B-cell lymphoma (LBCL) is the most common subtype of NHL accounting for 30–35% of cases. A lack of response to second-line therapy portends a poor prognosis as only 7–15% of patients attain complete remission (CR) with subsequent conventional chemoimmunotherapy. Areas covered Lisocabtagene maraleucel (liso-cel) is an autologous CD-19 directed CAR T-cell product with a 4–1BB co-stimulatory domain administered as a sequential infusion of 2 separately manufactured components: CD8+ and CD4+ CAR T-cells in equal doses. Liso-cel showed an impressive objective response rate of 73% (CR = 53%) in patients who had received a median of 3 prior therapies. Median time-to-first CR or partial response (PR) was 1 month. Expert opinion When evaluated in the second line setting in LBCL, liso-cel demonstrated superior event-free survival (EFS) versus standard of care. While acknowledging that choice of a particular CAR T-cell is based chiefly on familiarity of the treating physician with a specific product, liso-cel definitely represents an important addition to the treatment armamentarium of R/R LBCL whether in the second-line setting or beyond.

Use of a real-world synthetic control arm for direct comparison of lisocabtagene maraleucel and conventional therapy in relapsed/refractory large B-cell lymphoma

This study used a real-world population as a synthetic comparator for the single-arm TRANSCEND NHL 001 study (TRANSCEND; NCT02631044) to evaluate the efficacy of lisocabtagene maraleucel (liso-cel) compared with conventional (noncellular) therapies in patients with relapsed/refractory (R/R) large B-cell lymphoma (LBCL). Inclusion and exclusion criteria for the real-world study closely matched the enrollment criteria in TRANSCEND. The analytic comparator cohort was created by matching and balancing observed baseline characteristics of real-world patients with those in TRANSCEND using propensity score methodology. Efficacy outcomes comparing liso-cel– (n = 257) and conventional therapy–treated (n = 257) patients, respectively, significantly favored liso-cel: overall response rate (74% vs 39%; p < 0.0001), complete response rate (50% vs 24%; p < 0.0001), median overall survival (23.5 vs 6.8 months; p < 0.0001), and median progression-free survival (3.5 vs 2.2 months; p < 0.0001). These results demonstrated a statistically significant and clinically meaningful benefit of liso-cel in patients with third- or later-line R/R LBCL relative to conventional therapies. Clinical trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02631044

Exploration of Tumor Biopsy Gene Signatures to Understand the Role of the Tumor Microenvironment in Outcomes to Lisocabtagene Maraleucel.

In the TRANSCEND NHL 001 study, 53% of patients with relapsed/refractory large B-cell lymphoma (LBCL) treated with lisocabtagene maraleucel (liso-cel) achieved a complete response (CR). To determine characteristics of patients who did and did not achieve a CR, we examined the tumor biology and microenvironment from lymph node tumor biopsies. LBCL biopsies from liso-cel-treated patients were taken pretreatment and ∼11 days posttreatment for RNA sequencing (RNA-seq) and multiplex immunofluorescence (mIF). We analyzed gene expression data from pretreatment biopsies (N = 78) to identify gene sets enriched in patients who achieved a CR to those with progressive disease. Pretreatment biopsies from month-3 CR patients displayed higher expression levels of T-cell and stroma-associated genes, and lower expression of cell-cycle genes. To interpret whether LBCL samples were "follicular lymphoma (FL)-like," we constructed an independent gene expression signature and found that patients with a higher "FL-like" gene expression score had longer progression-free survival (PFS). Cell of origin was not associated with response or PFS, but double-hit gene expression was associated with shorter PFS. The day 11 posttreatment samples (RNA-seq, N = 73; mIF, N = 53) had higher levels of chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell densities and CAR gene expression, general immune infiltration, and immune activation in patients with CR. Further, the majority of T cells in the day 11 samples were endogenous. Gene expression signatures in liso-cel-treated patients with LBCL can inform the development of combination therapies and next-generation CAR T-cell therapies.

Safety evaluation of axicabtagene ciloleucel for relapsed or refractory large B-cell lymphoma

ABSTRACT Introduction CD19-directed chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy is a highly effective therapy for patients with relapsed/refractory large B-cell lymphoma (LBCL) and three CD19 CAR T-cell products (axicabtagene ciloleucel, tisagenlecleucel and lisocabtagene maraleucel) are currently approved for this indication. Despite the clinical benefit of CD19 directed CAR T-cell therapy, this treatment is associated with significant morbidity from treatment-emergent toxicities. Areas covered This Review discusses the safety considerations of axicabtagene ciloleucel in patients with LBCL. This includes discussion of the frequently observed immune-mediated toxicities of cytokine release syndrome and immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome. Additionally, we review CAR T-cell therapy related cytopenias, infection, organ dysfunction and the more recently described hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis. Expert Opinion A thorough understanding of the toxicities associated with CD19-directed CAR T-cell therapy will facilitate the optimal selection of patients for this therapy. Furthermore, knowledge of preventative measures of CAR T-cell related complications, and early recognition and appropriate intervention will lead to the safe administration of these therapies, and ultimately improved outcomes for our patients.