Consensus recommendations on the management of toxicity associated with CD3×CD20 bispecific antibody therapy.

ABSTRACT: Bispecific antibodies (BsAb) that target CD3 and CD20 represent a new milestone in the treatment of patients with B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma. These drugs have demonstrated remarkable single-agent activity in patients with heavily pretreated disease, and 3 drugs have so far received regulatory approvals in various countries. However, BsAbs can potentially lead to severe toxicity associated with T-cell activation, particularly cytokine release syndrome (CRS). The anticipated widespread use of these off-the-shelf products poses challenges for implementation and highlights the need for guidance in anticipating, mitigating, and managing adverse events. In clinical trials, guidance for the evaluation and treatment of CRS and neurotoxicity associated with BsAb therapy has been modeled after algorithms originally created for chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapies and other immune effector therapies, yet notable differences in timing, quality, and severity exist between the toxicities of BsAbs and CAR T-cell therapies. We therefore convened an international panel of academic and community practice physicians, advanced practitioners, registered nurses, and pharmacists with experience using CD3×CD20 BsAbs in clinical trial and off-trial settings to provide comprehensive, consensus-based recommendations specific to the assessment and management of CD3×CD20 BsAb-related toxicities.

Lisocabtagene maraleucel as second-line therapy for large B-cell lymphoma: primary analysis of the phase 3 TRANSFORM study.

This global phase 3 study compared lisocabtagene maraleucel (liso-cel) with a standard of care (SOC) as second-line therapy for primary refractory or early relapsed (≤12 months) large B-cell lymphoma (LBCL). Adults eligible for autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT; N = 184) were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to liso-cel (100 × 106 chimeric antigen receptor-positive T cells) or SOC (3 cycles of platinum-based immunochemotherapy followed by high-dose chemotherapy and ASCT in responders). The primary end point was event-free survival (EFS). In this primary analysis with a 17.5-month median follow-up, median EFS was not reached (NR) for liso-cel vs 2.4 months for SOC. Complete response (CR) rate was 74% for liso-cel vs 43% for SOC (P < .0001) and median progression-free survival (PFS) was NR for liso-cel vs 6.2 months for SOC (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.400; P < .0001). Median overall survival (OS) was NR for liso-cel vs 29.9 months for SOC (HR = 0.724; P = .0987). When adjusted for crossover from SOC to liso-cel, 18-month OS rates were 73% for liso-cel and 54% for SOC (HR = 0.415). Grade 3 cytokine release syndrome and neurological events occurred in 1% and 4% of patients in the liso-cel arm, respectively (no grade 4 or 5 events). These data show significant improvements in EFS, CR rate, and PFS for liso-cel compared with SOC and support liso-cel as a preferred second-line treatment compared with SOC in patients with primary refractory or early relapsed LBCL. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT03575351.

Single-route CNS prophylaxis for aggressive non-Hodgkin lymphomas: real-world outcomes from 21 US academic institutions.

Prophylaxis is commonly used to prevent central nervous sy stem (CNS) relapse in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), with no clear standard of care. We retrospectively evaluated 1162 adult patients across 21 US academic centers with DLBCL or similar histologies who received single-route CNS prophylaxis as part of frontline therapy between 2013 and 2019. Prophylaxis was administered intrathecally(IT) in 894 (77%) and using systemic high-dose methotrexate (HD-MTX) in 236 (20%); 32 patients (3%) switched route due to toxicity and were assessed separately. By CNS-International Prognostic Index (IPI), 18% were considered low-risk, 51% moderate, and 30% high. Double-hit lymphoma (DHL) was confirmed in 243 of 866 evaluable patients (21%). Sixty-four patients (5.7%) had CNS relapse after median 7.1 months from diagnosis, including 15 of 64 (23%) within the first 6 months. There was no significant difference in CNS relapse between IT and HD-MTX recipients (5.4% vs 6.8%, P = .4), including after propensity score matching to account for differences between respective recipient groups. Weighting by CNS-IPI, expected vs observed CNS relapse rates were nearly identical (5.8% vs 5.7%). Testicular involvement was associated with high risk of CNS relapse (11.3%) despite most having lower CNS-IPI scores. DHL did not significantly predict for CNS relapse after single-route prophylaxis, including with adjustment for treatment regimen and other factors. This large study of CNS prophylaxis recipients with DLBCL found no significant difference in CNS relapse rates between routes of administration. Relapse rates among high-risk subgroups remain elevated, and reconsideration of prophylaxis strategies in DLBCL is of critical need.

Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia/Small Lymphocytic Lymphoma, Version 2.2024, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology

Chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) and small lymphocytic lymphoma (SLL) are essentially different manifestations of the same disease that are similarly managed. A number of molecular and cytogenetic variables with prognostic implications have been identified. Undetectable minimal residual disease at the end of treatment with chemoimmunotherapy or venetoclax-based combination regimens is an independent predictor of improved survival among patients with previously untreated or relapsed/refractory CLL/SLL. The selection of treatment is based on the disease stage, presence or absence of del(17p) or TP53 mutation, immunoglobulin heavy chain variable region mutation status, patient age, performance status, comorbid conditions, and the agent's toxicity profile. This manuscript discusses the recommendations outlined in the NCCN Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of patients with CLL/SLL.

Lisocabtagene maraleucel versus standard of care with salvage chemotherapy followed by autologous stem cell transplantation as second-line treatment in patients with relapsed or refractory large B-cell lymphoma (TRANSFORM): results from an interim analysis of an open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Patients with large B-cell lymphoma (LBCL) primary refractory to or relapsed within 12 months of first-line therapy are at high risk for poor outcomes with current standard of care, platinum-based salvage immunochemotherapy and autologous haematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT). Lisocabtagene maraleucel (liso-cel), an autologous, CD19-directed chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy, has previously demonstrated efficacy and manageable safety in third-line or later LBCL. In this Article, we report a prespecified interim analysis of liso-cel versus standard of care as second-line treatment for primary refractory or early relapsed (within 12 months after response to initial therapy) LBCL. METHODS: TRANSFORM is a global, phase 3 study, conducted in 47 sites in the USA, Europe, and Japan, comparing liso-cel with standard of care as second-line therapy in patients with primary refractory or early (≤12 months) relapsed LBCL. Adults aged 18-75 years, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score of 1 or less, adequate organ function, PET-positive disease per Lugano 2014 criteria, and candidates for autologous HSCT were randomly assigned (1:1), by use of interactive response technology, to liso-cel (100 × 106 CAR+ T cells intravenously) or standard of care. Standard of care consisted of three cycles of salvage immunochemotherapy delivered intravenously-R-DHAP (rituximab 375 mg/m2 on day 1, dexamethasone 40 mg on days 1-4, two infusions of cytarabine 2000 mg/m2 on day 2, and cisplatin 100 mg/m2 on day 1), R-ICE (rituximab 375 mg/m2 on day 1, ifosfamide 5000 mg/m2 on day 2, etoposide 100 mg/m2 on days 1-3, and carboplatin area under the curve 5 [maximum dose of 800 mg] on day 2), or R-GDP (rituximab 375 mg/m2 on day 1, dexamethasone 40 mg on days 1-4, gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2 on days 1 and 8, and cisplatin 75 mg/m2 on day 1)-followed by high-dose chemotherapy and autologous HSCT in responders. Primary endpoint was event-free survival, with response assessments by an independent review committee per Lugano 2014 criteria. Efficacy was assessed per intention-to-treat (ie, all randomly assigned patients) and safety in patients who received any treatment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03575351, and is ongoing. FINDINGS: Between Oct 23, 2018, and Dec 8, 2020, 232 patients were screened and 184 were assigned to the liso-cel (n=92) or standard of care (n=92) groups. At the data cutoff for this interim analysis, March 8, 2021, the median follow-up was 6·2 months (IQR 4·4-11·5). Median event-free survival was significantly improved in the liso-cel group (10·1 months [95% CI 6·1-not reached]) compared with the standard-of-care group (2·3 months [2·2-4·3]; stratified hazard ratio 0·35; 95% CI 0·23-0·53; stratified Cox proportional hazards model one-sided p<0·0001). The most common grade 3 or worse adverse events were neutropenia (74 [80%] of 92 patients in the liso-cel group vs 46 [51%] of 91 patients in the standard-of-care group), anaemia (45 [49%] vs 45 [49%]), thrombocytopenia (45 [49%] vs 58 [64%]), and prolonged cytopenia (40 [43%] vs three [3%]). Grade 3 cytokine release syndrome and neurological events, which are associated with CAR T-cell therapy, occurred in one (1%) and four (4%) of 92 patients in the liso-cel group, respectively (no grade 4 or 5 events). Serious treatment-emergent adverse events were reported in 44 (48%) patients in the liso-cel group and 44 (48%) in the standard-of-care group. No new liso-cel safety concerns were identified in the second-line setting. There were no treatment-related deaths in the liso-cel group and one treatment-related death due to sepsis in the standard-of-care group. INTERPRETATION: These results support liso-cel as a new second-line treatment recommendation in patients with early relapsed or refractory LBCL. FUNDING: Celgene, a Bristol-Myers Squibb Company.

Effect of cumulative dose of brentuximab vedotin maintenance in relapsed/refractory classical Hodgkin lymphoma after autologous stem cell transplant: an analysis of real-world outcomes.

Sixteen cycles of Brentuximab vedotin (BV) after autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) in high-risk relapsed/refractory classical Hodgkin lymphoma demonstrated an improved 2-year progression-free survival (PFS) over placebo. However, most patients are unable to complete all 16 cycles at full dose due to toxicity. This retrospective, multicenter study investigated the effect of cumulative maintenance BV dose on 2-year PFS. Data were collected from patients who received at least one cycle of BV maintenance after ASCT with one of the following high-risk features: primary refractory disease (PRD), extra-nodal disease (END), or relapse <12 months (RL<12) from the end of frontline therapy. Cohort 1 had patients with >75% of the planned total cumulative dose, cohort 2 with 51-75% of dose, and cohort 3 with ≤50% of dose. The primary outcome was 2-year PFS. A total of 118 patients were included. Fifty percent had PRD, 29% had RL<12, and 39% had END. Forty-four percent of patients had prior exposure to BV and 65% were in complete remission before ASCT. Only 14% of patients received the full planned BV dose. Sixty-one percent of patients discontinued maintenance early and majority of those (72%) were due to toxicity. The 2-year PFS for the entire population was 80.7%. The 2-year PFS was 89.2% for cohort 1 (n=39), 86.2% for cohort 2 (n=33), and 77.9% for cohort 3 (n=46) (P=0.70). These data are reassuring for patients who require dose reductions or discontinuation to manage toxicity.

Cellular therapy in lymphoma.

CD19-directed chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy has had a dramatic impact on the natural history and survival of patients with high-risk B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma. Accompanying this success has been the development of new fields of medicine and investigation into toxicity risks and mitigation therapies, mechanisms of resistance and the development of novel and next generation products and strategies in order to address relapse, and issues related to global access and health care economics. This article is a survey of each of these areas as it pertains to the rapidly evolving field of CAR T-cell therapy, written by an International community of lymphoma experts, who also happen to be women.

Outcomes of COVID-19 in patients with CLL: a multicenter international experience.

Given advanced age, comorbidities, and immune dysfunction, chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) patients may be at particularly high risk of infection and poor outcomes related to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Robust analysis of outcomes for CLL patients, particularly examining effects of baseline characteristics and CLL-directed therapy, is critical to optimally manage CLL patients through this evolving pandemic. CLL patients diagnosed with symptomatic COVID-19 across 43 international centers (n = 198) were included. Hospital admission occurred in 90%. Median age at COVID-19 diagnosis was 70.5 years. Median Cumulative Illness Rating Scale score was 8 (range, 4-32). Thirty-nine percent were treatment naive ("watch and wait"), while 61% had received ≥1 CLL-directed therapy (median, 2; range, 1-8). Ninety patients (45%) were receiving active CLL therapy at COVID-19 diagnosis, most commonly Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitors (BTKi's; n = 68/90 [76%]). At a median follow-up of 16 days, the overall case fatality rate was 33%, though 25% remain admitted. Watch-and-wait and treated cohorts had similar rates of admission (89% vs 90%), intensive care unit admission (35% vs 36%), intubation (33% vs 25%), and mortality (37% vs 32%). CLL-directed treatment with BTKi's at COVID-19 diagnosis did not impact survival (case fatality rate, 34% vs 35%), though the BTKi was held during the COVID-19 course for most patients. These data suggest that the subgroup of CLL patients admitted with COVID-19, regardless of disease phase or treatment status, are at high risk of death. Future epidemiologic studies are needed to assess severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection risk, these data should be validated independently, and randomized studies of BTKi's in COVID-19 are needed to provide definitive evidence of benefit.

NCCN Guidelines® Insights: Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia/Small Lymphocytic Lymphoma, Version 3.2022.

The treatment landscape of chronic lymphocytic leukemia/small lymphocytic lymphoma (CLL/SLL) has significantly evolved in recent years. Targeted therapy with Bruton's tyrosine kinase (BTK) inhibitors and BCL-2 inhibitors has emerged as an effective chemotherapy-free option for patients with previously untreated or relapsed/refractory CLL/SLL. Undetectable minimal residual disease after the end of treatment is emerging as an important predictor of progression-free and overall survival for patients treated with fixed-duration BCL-2 inhibitor-based treatment. These NCCN Guidelines Insights discuss the updates to the NCCN Guidelines for CLL/SLL specific to the use of chemotherapy-free treatment options for patients with treatment-naïve and relapsed/refractory disease.

Acalabrutinib with or without obinutuzumab versus chlorambucil and obinutuzmab for treatment-naive chronic lymphocytic leukaemia (ELEVATE TN): a randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Acalabrutinib is a selective, covalent Bruton tyrosine-kinase inhibitor with activity in chronic lymphocytic leukaemia. We compare the efficacy of acalabrutinib with or without obinutuzumab against chlorambucil with obinutuzumab in patients with treatment-naive chronic lymphocytic leukaemia. METHODS: ELEVATE TN is a global, phase 3, multicentre, open-label study in patients with treatment-naive chronic lymphocytic leukaemia done at 142 academic and community hospitals in 18 countries. Eligible patients had untreated chronic lymphocytic leukaemia and were aged 65 years or older, or older than 18 years and younger than 65 years with creatinine clearance of 30-69 mL/min (calculated by use of the Cockcroft-Gault equation) or Cumulative Illness Rating Scale for Geriatrics score greater than 6. Additional criteria included an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score of 2 or less and adequate haematologic, hepatic, and renal function. Patients with significant cardiovascular disease were excluded, and concomitant treatment with warfarin or equivalent vitamin K antagonists was prohibited. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1) centrally via an interactive voice or web response system to receive acalabrutinib and obinutuzumab, acalabrutinib monotherapy, or obinutuzumab and oral chlorambucil. Treatments were administered in 28-day cycles. To reduce infusion-related reactions, acalabrutinib was administered for one cycle before obinutuzumab administration. Oral acalabrutinib was administered (100 mg) twice a day until progressive disease or unacceptable toxic effects occurred. In the acalabrutinib-obinutuzumab group, intravenous obinutuzumab was given on days 1 (100 mg), 2 (900 mg), 8 (1000 mg), and 15 (1000 mg) of cycle 2 and on day 1 (1000 mg) of cycles 3-7. In the obinutuzumab-chlorambucil group, intravenous obinutuzumab was given on days 1 (100 mg), 2 (900 mg), 8 (1000 mg), and 15 (1000 mg) of cycle 1 and on day 1 (1000 mg) of cycles 2-6. Oral chlorambucil was given (0·5 mg/kg) on days 1 and 15 of each cycle, for six cycles. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival between the two combination-therapy groups, assessed by independent review committee. Crossover to acalabrutinib was allowed in patients who progressed on obinutuzumab-chlorambucil. Safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of treatment. Enrolment for this trial is complete, and the study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02475681. FINDINGS: Between Sept 14, 2015, and Feb 8, 2017, we recruited 675 patients for assessment. 140 patients did not meet eligibility criteria, and 535 patients were randomly assigned to treatment. 179 patients were assigned to receive acalabrutinib-obinutuzumab, 179 patients were assigned to receive acalabrutinib monotherapy, and 177 patients were assigned to receive obinutuzumab-chlorambucil. At median follow-up of 28·3 months (IQR 25·6-33·1), median progression-free survival was longer with acalabrutinib-obinutuzumab and acalabrutinib monotherapy, compared with obinutuzumab-chlorambucil (median not reached with acalabrutinib and obinutuzumab vs 22·6 months with obinutuzumab, hazard ratio [HR] 0·1; 95% CI 0·06-0·17, p<0·0001; and not reached with acalabrutinib monotherapy vs 22·6 months with obinutuzumab, 0·20; 0·13-0·3, p<0·0001). Estimated progression-free survival at 24 months was 93% with acalabrutinib-obinutuzumab (95% CI 87-96%), 87% with acalabrutinib monotherapy (81-92%), and 47% with obinutuzumab-chlorambucil (39-55%). The most common grade 3 or higher adverse event across groups was neutropenia (53 [30%] of 178 patients in the acalabrutinib-obinutuzumab group, 17 [9%] of 179 patients in the acalabrutinib group, and 70 [41%] of 169 patients in the obinutuzumab-chlorambucil group). All-grade infusion reactions were less frequent with acalabrutinib-obinutuzumab (24 [13%] of 178 patients) than obinutuzumab-chlorambucil (67 [40%] of 169 patients). Grade 3 or higher infections occurred in 37 (21%) patients given acalabrutinib-obinutuzumab, 25 (14%) patients given acalabrutinib monotherapy, and 14 (8%) patients given obinutuzumab-chlorambucil. Deaths occurred in eight (4%) patients given acalabrutinib-obinutuzumab, 12 (7%) patients given acalabrutinib, and 15 (9%) patients given obinutuzumab-chlorambucil. INTERPRETATION: Acalabrutinib with or without obinutuzumab significantly improved progression-free survival over obinutuzumab-chlorambucil chemoimmunotherapy, providing a chemotherapy-free treatment option with an acceptable side-effect profile that was consistent with previous studies. These data support the use of acalabrutinib in combination with obinutuzumab or alone as a new treatment option for patients with treatment-naive symptomatic chronic lymphocytic leukaemia. FUNDING: Acerta Pharma, a member of the AstraZeneca Group, and R35 CA198183 (to JCB).

Outcomes of Burkitt lymphoma with central nervous system involvement: evidence from a large multicenter cohort study.

Central nervous system (CNS) involvement in Burkitt lymphoma (BL) poses a major therapeutic challenge, and the relative ability of contemporary regimens to treat CNS involvement remains uncertain. We described prognostic significance of CNS involvement and incidence of CNS recurrence/progression after contemporary immunochemotherapy using real-world clinicopathologic data on adults with BL diagnosed between 2009 and 2018 across 30 US institutions. We examined associations between baseline CNS involvement, patient characteristics, complete response (CR) rates, and survival. We also examined risk factors for CNS recurrence. Nineteen percent (120/641) of patients (age 18-88 years) had CNS involvement. It was independently associated with HIV infection, poor performance status, involvement of ≥2 extranodal sites, or bone marrow involvement. First-line regimen selection was unaffected by CNS involvement (P=0.93). Patients with CNS disease had significantly lower rates of CR (59% versus 77% without; P<0.001), worse 3-year progression-free survival (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 1.53, 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.14-2.06, P=0.004) and overall survival (aHR, 1.62, 95%CI, 1.18-2.22, P=0.003). The 3-year cumulative incidence of CNS recurrence was 6% (95%CI, 4-8%). It was significantly lower among patients receiving other regimens (CODOX-M/IVAC, 4%, or hyperCVAD/MA, 3%) compared with DA-EPOCH-R (13%; adjusted sub-HR, 4.38, 95%CI, 2.16-8.87, P<0.001). Baseline CNS involvement in BL is relatively common and portends inferior prognosis independent of first-line regimen selection. In real-world practice, regimens with highly CNS-penetrant intravenous systemic agents were associated with a lower risk of CNS recurrence. This finding may be influenced by observed suboptimal adherence to the strict CNS staging and intrathecal therapy procedures incorporated in DA-EPOCH-R.

Risk and subtypes of secondary primary malignancies in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma survivors change over time based on stage at diagnosis.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies have shown an increased risk of secondary primary malignancies (SPMs) after diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) treatment. Whether stage of DLBCL at diagnosis affects the subtypes of SPMs that occur has not been previously described. METHODS: The Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database was queried for patients aged >18 years diagnosed with primary DLBCL from 1973 to 2010 and categorized by early stage (ES) (stage I-II) or advanced stage (AS) (stage III-IV) disease. Differences in overall and location-specific SPM incidence by stage and time since diagnosis were assessed in 5-year intervals using a Fine-Gray hazards model. Overall survival was compared using the log-rank test. A Cox proportional hazards model was used to assess differences in survival. RESULTS: In total, 26,038 patients with DLBCL were identified, including 14,724 with ES and 11,314 with AS disease. The median follow-up was 13.3 years. Overall, 13.0% of patients developed SPM, with a higher but nonsignificantly increased risk of SPM development in those who had ES disease compared with those who had AS disease (14% vs 11.6%; P = .14). During the first 5 years after diagnosis, patients who had ES disease had a higher risk of SPM than those who had AS disease, specifically colorectal, pancreas, breast, and prostate SPMs. During the period from 10 to 15 years after diagnosis, patients who had AS disease had a higher risk of SPM than those who had ES disease, specifically hematologic SPMs. Development of SPM was found to significantly increase the risk of death regardless of stage at diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS: In this large, population-based study, distinctly different subtypes and temporal patterns of SPM development were identified based on stage of DLBCL at diagnosis. The current study merits consideration of tailored site-specific and time-specific surveillance for patients with DLBCL according to stage and time interval since diagnosis.

Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia/Small Lymphocytic Lymphoma, Version 4.2020, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology.

Chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) and small lymphocytic lymphoma (SLL) are characterized by a progressive accumulation of leukemic cells in the peripheral blood, bone marrow, and lymphoid tissues. Treatment of CLL/SLL has evolved significantly in recent years because of the improved understanding of the disease biology and the development of novel targeted therapies. In patients with indications for initiating treatment, the selection of treatment should be based on the disease stage, patient's age and overall fitness (performance status and comorbid conditions), and cytogenetic abnormalities. This manuscript discusses the recommendations outlined in the NCCN Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of patients with CLL/SLL.

PD-1 blockade for relapsed lymphoma post-allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplant: high response rate but frequent GVHD.

Given the limited treatment options for relapsed lymphoma post-allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (post-allo-HCT) and the success of programmed death 1 (PD-1) blockade in classical Hodgkin lymphoma (cHL) patients, anti-PD-1 monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) are increasingly being used off-label after allo-HCT. To characterize the safety and efficacy of PD-1 blockade in this setting, we conducted a multicenter retrospective analysis of 31 lymphoma patients receiving anti-PD-1 mAbs for relapse post-allo-HCT. Twenty-nine (94%) patients had cHL and 27 had ≥1 salvage therapy post-allo-HCT and prior to anti-PD-1 treatment. Median follow-up was 428 days (range, 133-833) after the first dose of anti-PD-1. Overall response rate was 77% (15 complete responses and 8 partial responses) in 30 evaluable patients. At last follow-up, 11 of 31 patients progressed and 21 of 31 (68%) remain alive, with 8 (26%) deaths related to new-onset graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) after anti-PD-1. Seventeen (55%) patients developed treatment-emergent GVHD after initiation of anti-PD-1 (6 acute, 4 overlap, and 7 chronic), with onset after a median of 1, 2, and 2 doses, respectively. GVHD severity was grade III-IV acute or severe chronic in 9 patients. Only 2 of these 17 patients achieved complete response to GVHD treatment, and 14 of 17 required ≥2 systemic therapies. In conclusion, PD-1 blockade in relapsed cHL allo-HCT patients appears to be highly efficacious but frequently complicated by rapid onset of severe and treatment-refractory GVHD. PD-1 blockade post-allo-HCT should be studied further but cannot be recommended for routine use outside of a clinical trial.

NCCN Guidelines Insights: Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia/Small Lymphocytic Lymphoma, Version 2.2019.

Chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) is generally characterized by an indolent disease course. Histologic transformation (also known as Richter's transformation) to more aggressive lymphomas, such as diffuse large B-cell lymphoma or Hodgkin lymphoma, occurs in approximately 2% to 10% of patients and is associated with a poor prognosis. These NCCN Guidelines Insights discuss the recommendations for the diagnosis and management of patients with histologic transformation.

Plain language summary of the TRANSFORM study primary analysis results: liso-cell as a second treatment regimen for large B-cell lymphoma following failure of the first treatment regimen.

What is this summary about? People diagnosed with a disease called large B-cell lymphoma (LBCL) may experience return, or early relapse, of their disease within the first year after receiving and responding to their first (first-line) treatment regimen. Others may have primary refractory disease, meaning that the disease either did not respond to first-line treatment at all or only responded for a very brief period. Second (second-line) treatment includes immunotherapy followed by high-dose chemotherapy and ASCT, which has the potential to cure LBCL. However, if the disease does not respond to immunotherapy, people cannot receive ASCT, and less than 30% of people are cured.Therefore, new second-line treatment options are required, such as CAR T cell therapy, which uses a person's own genetically engineered lymphocytes, also called T cells, to fight their lymphoma. In this article, we summarize the key results of the phase 3 TRANSFORM clinical study that tested if liso-cel, a CAR T cell treatment, can safely and effectively be used as a second-line treatment for people with early relapsed or primary refractory (relapsed/refractory) LBCL.A total of 184 adults with relapsed/refractory LBCL who were able to receive ASCT were randomly treated with either liso-cel or standard of care (SOC) as second-line treatment. SOC included immunochemotherapy followed by high-dose chemotherapy and ASCT.What were the key takeaways? Almost all (97%) people in the liso-cel group completed treatment, whereas 53% of people in the SOC group did not complete treatment, mostly due to their disease not responding or relapsing, and therefore they were not able to receive ASCT. People who received liso-cel as a second-line treatment lived longer without the occurrence of an unfavorable medical event or worsening of the disease and had a better response to treatment than those who received SOC as second-line treatment. People who received liso-cel reported side effects that researchers considered to be manageable, and that were known to occur with CAR T cell treatment.What were the main conclusions reported by the researchers? Results from the TRANSFORM study support the use of liso-cel as a more effective second-line treatment compared with SOC that is safe for people with relapsed/refractory LBCL.Clinical Trial Registration: NCT03575351 (TRANSFORM study) (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Thiotepa-Based Intensified Reduced-Intensity Conditioning Adult Double-Unit Cord Blood Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation Results in Decreased Relapse Rate and Improved Survival Compared with Transplantation Following Standard Reduced-Intensity Conditioning: A Retrospective Cohort Comparison.

The "Minnesota" reduced-intensity conditioning (RIC) cord blood transplantation (CBT) regimen (standard RIC) of fludarabine (Flu) (200 mg/m2), cyclophosphamide (Cy) (50 mg/kg), and 200- or 300-cGy total body irradiation (TBI) is the most published RIC CBT regimen. Though well tolerated, high relapse rates remain a concern with this regimen. Intensification of conditioning may reduce relapse without increasing transplant-related mortality (TRM). We performed a retrospective cohort comparison of outcomes in adult patients who underwent first double-unit CBT with standard RIC as compared with the intensified regimen of Flu 150 mg/m2, Cy 50 mg/kg, thiotepa 10 mg/kg, and 400-cGy TBI (intensified RIC). Of the 99 patients studied, 47 received intensified RIC. Acute myelogenous leukemia was the major indication for transplant. The median age at transplant was 67 years (range, 24 to 74 years) and 54 years (range, 25 to 67 years) in standard RIC and intensified RIC, respectively. Median hematopoietic stem cell transplantation comorbidity index was 3 (range, 0 to 5) and 1 (range, 0 to 6) in the standard RIC and intensified RIC groups, respectively. Median follow-up among survivors was 22 months (range, 3.7 to 79 months) following standard RIC and 15 months (range, 2.8 to 36 months) following intensified RIC. The cumulative incidence (CI) of relapse was significantly lower following intensified RIC compared with standard RIC (P = .0013); this finding maintained significance in multivariate analysis (P = .045). TRM was comparable between the 2 groups (P = .99). Overall survival (OS) was significantly improved following intensified RIC as compared with standard RIC (P = .03). Median OS was 17 months following standard RIC versus not reached followed intensified RIC. The CI of grade II to IV acute graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) was significantly higher in the intensified RIC cohort than the standard RIC-cohort (P = .007), while CI of grade III to IV acute GVHD, any chronic GVHD, and moderate-to-severe chronic GVHD was comparable in each cohort (P = .20, P = .21, and P = .61, respectively). This retrospective analysis shows an improvement in OS and decreased relapse without increase in TRM in patients receiving intensified RIC as compared with standard RIC. Our data suggest that consideration of thiotepa-based intensified RIC may improve outcomes in fit, older patients undergoing double-unit CBT.