288 | FIVE‐YEAR ANALYSIS OF AN ASIA SUBPOPULATION WITH PREVIOUSLY UNTREATED DLBCL CONFIRMS POLA‐R‐CHP BENEFIT ON OUTCOMES: THE POLARIX STUDY

Introduction: The extended 5-year follow-up analysis of POLARIX (NCT0327449) demonstrated sustained and significant progression-free survival (PFS) and disease-free survival (DFS) benefits for previously untreated diffuse large B cell lymphoma (DLBCL) patients receiving polatuzumab vedotin plus rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and prednisone (Pola-R-CHP) versus rituximab plus cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (R-CHOP). Numerically fewer deaths, especially lymphoma-related deaths, were observed in patients receiving Pola-R-CHP versus R-CHOP (Salles et al. ASH 2024). Here, we report the 5-year results of the Asia subpopulation of this study including molecular outcomes. Methods: Eligible DLBCL patients (18–80 years) were randomized 1:1 to six cycles of Pola-R-CHP or R-CHOP plus two cycles of rituximab alone (Tilly et al. NEJM 2022, Song et al. Blood 2023). The primary endpoint was investigator (INV)-assessed PFS. Secondary end points included INV-assessed event-free survival (EFS), overall survival (OS) and safety. Results: In total, 281 patients were included (China mainland, 150; Japan, 85; Korea, 31; and China Taiwan, 15); 141 were randomized to Pola-R-CHP and 140 to R-CHOP. At time of data cut-off (5 July 2024; median follow-up of 60.0 months [range 0–74]), the 5-year PFS rates were 64.0% (95% CI: 55.01–72.90) in Pola-R-CHP versus 57.3% (95% CI: 48.25–66.27) in R-CHOP (HR 0.74; 95% CI: 0.50–1.10). The 5-year EFS rates for Pola-R-CHP versus R-CHOP were 63.4% (95% CI: 54.51–72.37) versus 53.5% (95% CI: 43.22–63.76) (HR 0.72; 95% CI: 0.49–1.06), respectively. The 5-year OS estimates were 84.6% (95% CI: 78.28–90.92) in Pola-R-CHP versus 77.7% (95% CI: 70.30–85.05) in R-CHOP (HR 0.65; 95% CI: 0.37–1.14). Fewer patients died in the Pola-R-CHP arm (14 deaths, 14.9%) versus R-CHOP arm (21 deaths, 21.4%), showing a trend of OS benefit. Exploratory data also showed a trend toward better 5-year PFS rates with Pola-R-CHP over R-CHOP in high-risk subgroup including patients with double expression lymphoma (DEL) (58.3% vs. 51.1%, HR 0.65, 95% CI: 0.32–1.29), activated B-cell subtype (ABC) (73.1% vs. 53.9%, HR 0.44, 95% CI: 0.23–0.85), low M1-polarized macrophage infiltration levels (M1low) (73.5% vs. 58.8%, HR 0.52, 95% CI: 0.23–1.16) and positive dark zone signature (DZsig) (87.5% vs. 62.5%, HR 0.29, 95% CI: 0.04–2.44). The safety profile was comparable between Pola-R-CHP and R-CHOP, including rates of grade 3 to 5 adverse events (AEs; 75.0% vs. 68.3%, respectively), serious AEs (32.9% vs. 32.4%), grade 5 AEs (1.4% vs. 0.7%), any grade of peripheral neuropathy (45.0% vs. 51.8%) and AEs leading to study treatment discontinuation (5.7% vs. 7.2%). Conclusions: Pola-R-CHP continues to demonstrate a clinically meaningful benefit in INV-assessed PFS compared with R-CHOP in Asia subpopulation. With longer follow-up, there are numerically fewer deaths observed with the treatment, indicating a stable effect on OS. No new safety signals have been identified. Research funding declaration: This study was sponsored by Genentech, Inc and F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd. Keywords: Aggressive B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma; Molecular Targeted Therapies; Combination Therapies Potential sources of conflict of interest: H. Goto Honoraria: Chugai, Abbvie, BMS, Novartis, Gilead, Kyowa Kirin, Takeda, Meiji and MSD Other remuneration: Research funding: Sanofi, BMS, Gilead, Kyowa Kirin, Symbio D. H. Yoon Consultant or advisory role: Abclon, Beigene, BMS, GI cell, GC cell, Verismo, Janssen, Novartis, Roche and Pharos Bio Honoraria: Amgen, Antengene, BMS, Boryung, GSK, Kyowa Kirin, Novartis, Roche, Takeda and Janssen Other remuneration: Research funding: Abbvie, Beigene, Boryung, Celltrion, Kyowa Kirin, Janssen, Samyang and Sanofi D. Maruyama Consultant or advisory role: Janssen, AstraZeneca, Chugai, Roche, AbbVie, Genmab, Sanofi, BMS, Pfizer Honoraria: Ono, Nippon Shinyaku, Janssen, Mundipharma, Eisai, Chugai, Kyowa Kirin, MSD, Zenyaku, Sanofi, Symbio, Takeda, AbbVie, AstraZeneca, BMS, Genmab, Novartis, Pfizer and Roche G. Salles Consultant or advisory role: Abbvie, Ellipses, Genentech/Roche, Genmab, Innate Pharma, Incyte, Kite/Gilead, Modex, Orna Therapeutics, Treeline Other remuneration: Membership on advisory committees: Abbvie, Beigene, BMS, Foresight, Genentech/Roche, Genmab, Janssen, Ipsen, Incyte, Kite/Gilead, Lilly, Merck, Novartis, Nurix, Pfizer, SERB pharmaceuticals. Research funding: Abbvie, Genentech, Genmab, Janssen, Ipsen L. Bu Employment or leadership position: Roche Y. Jiang Employment or leadership position: Genentech S. Chohan Employment or leadership position: Roche M. Sugidono Employment or leadership position: Roche Stock ownership: Roche C. L. Batlevi Employment or leadership position: Roche Stock ownership: Roche M. Yan Employment or leadership position: Roche Stock ownership: Roche C. Xu Employment or leadership position: Roche S. Huang Employment or leadership position: Roche W. Li Employment or leadership position: Roche Y. Zhang Employment or leadership position: Roche K. Izutsu Consultant or advisory role: MSD, AstraZeneca, Abbvie, Bristol Myers Squibb, Novartis, Yakult, Kyowa Kirin, Chugai, Beigene, Genmab, Otsuka, Ono Pharma, Mitsubishi Tanabe Pharmaceutical, Eisai, Symbio, Taked, Zenyakua, Carna Biosciences, Nihon Shinyaku Honoraria: AstraZeneca, Abbvie, Bristol Myers Squibb, Novartis, Pfizer, Janssen, Kyowa Kirin, Daiichi Sankyo, Chugai, Genmab, Gilead, Ono Pharmac, Nihon Kayakueutical, Symbio, Takeda, Lilly, Astellas, Meiji Seika Pharma.

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.