MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4389231884 · doi:10.1182/blood-2023-179474

TRANSCEND FL: Phase 2 Study Primary Analysis of Lisocabtagene Maraleucel as Second-Line Therapy in Patients with High-Risk Relapsed or Refractory Follicular Lymphoma

2023· article· en· W4389231884 sur OpenAlexaff
Franck Morschhauser, Saurabh Dahiya, M. Lia Palomba, Alejandro Martı́n, Juan Luis Reguera, John Kuruvilla, Ulrich Jaeger, Guillaume Cartron, Koji Izutsu, Martin Dreyling, Brad S. Kahl, Hervé Ghesquières, Kirit M. Ardeshna, Hideki Goto, Anna Maria Barbui, Jeremy S. Abramson, Peter Borchmann, Isabelle Fleury, Stephan Mielke, Alan P Skarbnik, Sven de Vos, Manali Kamdar, Reem Karmali, Andreas Viardot, Thalia A. Farazi, Omotayo Fasan, James Lymp, Min Vedal, Rina Nishii, Ariel Avilion, Jessica Papuga, Loretta J. Nastoupil

Notice bibliographique

RevueBlood · 2023
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueCAR-T cell therapy research
Établissements canadiensHôpital Maisonneuve-RosemontPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMedicineInternal medicineFollicular lymphomaRefractory (planetary science)Clinical endpointOncologyCohortPhases of clinical researchLymphomaGastroenterologySurgeryChemotherapyClinical trialBiology

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Background: Results with CD19-directed CAR T cell therapy in patients (pts) with second-line (2L) R/R follicular lymphoma (FL) and high-risk features, such as progression of disease within 24 months (POD24) from diagnosis or double refractory to anti-CD20 antibody plus alkylator, have not been previously reported. TRANSCEND FL (NCT04245839), a global, phase 2, open-label, single-arm, multicohort, pivotal study, assessed efficacy and safety of the anti-CD19 CAR T cell therapy lisocabtagene maraleucel (liso-cel) in pts with second line or later (2L+) R/R indolent NHL. Some data from the primary analysis were previously reported, including safety in 2L+ R/R FL, and focused on efficacy in third line or later R/R FL (Morschhauser F, et al. Hematol Oncol 2023;41[S2]:877‒880). Here, we report primary analysis results in the cohort of pts with 2L high-risk R/R FL. Methods: Eligible pts in the 2L R/R FL cohort had biopsy-confirmed FL before enrollment and must have had POD24 with treatment ≤ 6 months from original FL diagnosis and/or must have had high tumor burden as defined by modified Groupe d'Etude des Lymphomes Folliculaires (mGELF) criteria. All pts received 1 prior combination systemic therapy with an anti-CD20 antibody and alkylator. Eligible pts received liso-cel (100 × 10 6 CAR + T cells) after lymphodepleting chemotherapy (LDC). Bridging therapy was allowed with reconfirmation of PET-positive disease before LDC. The primary endpoint was ORR per independent review committee (IRC) by PET/CT using Lugano 2014 criteria. Secondary endpoints included CR rate, duration of response (DOR), PFS, OS, safety, and cellular kinetics. Pharmacodynamic endpoints were exploratory. Results: At data cutoff (January 27, 2023), 23 of 25 leukapheresed pts received liso-cel and were evaluable for safety and efficacy per IRC; 1 received nonconforming product and 1 reached CR after bridging therapy and no longer met eligibility criteria. Median (range) age was 53 y (34-69), 74% had stage III/IV disease, and 35% were high-risk per FL International Prognostic Index (FLIPI). Sixty-five percent of pts had POD24 from initiation of first-line combination chemoimmunotherapy (52% had POD24 from diagnosis), 70% met mGELF criteria (mGELF only, 48%; mGELF and POD24 from diagnosis, 22%), and 48% were double refractory to anti-CD20 antibody plus alkylator. Median (range) on-study follow-up was 18.1 months (1.0-26.8). In efficacy-evaluable pts, the ORR and CR rate were both 95.7% (95% CI, 78.1-99.9; 1-sided P < 0.0001; Table). With a median follow-up of 16.8 months and 17.8 months, respectively, median DOR and PFS were not reached; 12-month DOR and PFS were 89.8% and 91.3%, respectively. The most common grade (gr) ≥ 3 treatment-emergent AEs (TEAE) were cytopenias; neutropenia was most frequent (52%). Cytokine release syndrome (CRS) occurred in 12 (52%) pts (no gr ≥ 3). Median (range) time to onset and resolution of CRS was 6 days (2-9) and 3 days (2-7), respectively. Neurological events (NE) occurred in 4 (17%) pts, with 1 (4%) gr 3 and no gr 4-5 (Table). Median (range) time to onset and resolution of NEs was 8.5 days (6-11) and 2.5 days (1-4), respectively. Three (13%) pts received tocilizumab/steroids for CRS/NEs. Prolonged cytopenia (gr ≥ 3 laboratory values at Day 29) occurred in 3 (13%) pts; all recovered to gr ≤ 2 by Day 90. No gr ≥ 3 infections were reported. One TEAE death occurred in the context of IRC-assessed disease progression due to gr 5 macrophage activation syndrome (MAS). Liso-cel showed rapid expansion with median (range) time to maximum transgene levels of 10 days (7-11). Persistence of liso-cel transgene was detected up to Month 12 in 5 of 18 (28%) pts. B-cell aplasia (< 3% CD19 + B cells in peripheral blood lymphocytes) after liso-cel infusion was rapid and maintained in ≥ 95% of pts through Month 2. Conclusions: This is the first report of outcomes in 2L high-risk R/R FL with CD19-directed CAR T cell therapy. In this population, liso-cel achieved very high CR rates (22 of 23 pts); deep and durable remissions, with follow-up ongoing; and a favorable safety profile with low rates of severe (gr ≥ 3) CRS, NEs, and prolonged cytopenia, and no severe infections. These data support liso-cel as a potential new treatment option in pts with 2L R/R FL at high-risk for treatment failure.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,002
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Essai non randomisé · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,006
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,021

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0020,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0020,002
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,001
Communication savante0,0010,001
Science ouverte0,0010,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0010,002
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0060,001

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,020
Tête enseignante GPT0,300
Écart entre enseignants0,280 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeEssai non randomisé
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations11
Publié2023
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueBloodMême sujetCAR-T cell therapy researchTravaux en français237 207