GLOFITAMAB MONOTHERAPY IN PATIENTS WITH RELAPSED/REFRACTORY (<i>R</i>/<i>R</i>) LARGE B‐CELL LYMPHOMA (LBCL): EXTENDED FOLLOW‐UP AND LANDMARK ANALYSES FROM A PIVOTAL PHASE II STUDY
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Glofitamab is a CD20xCD3 bispecific antibody delivered in a fixed course of 12 three-weekly cycles. In a Phase II study (NCT03075696), glofitamab induced high complete response (CR) rates and had manageable toxicity in pts with R/R LBCL (Dickinson et al., 2022). We present an extended follow-up and a landmark analysis to assess the outcomes of pts in CR. Methods: Pts with LBCL and ≥2 prior therapies received 1000 mg obinutuzumab pretreatment 7 days prior to the first glofitamab dose. IV glofitamab was given as step-up doses: 2.5 mg on Day (D) 1 of Cycle (C) 1, 10 mg on C1D8 and 30 mg (target dose) on D1 of C2–12 (21-day cycles). The primary endpoint was independent review committee (IRC)-assessed CR rate. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) post-hoc analyses were performed in responders (landmark for CR at C3 or end of treatment [EOT]). Results: As of 10 October 2022, 154 pts had received ≥1 dose of study treatment; baseline characteristics were as previously presented. Median number of prior therapies was 3 (range: 2–7); 33% had received prior CAR T-cells and 85% were refractory to their most recent regimen. Median time on study was 20.1 months (range: 0–32). The investigator (INV)-assessed CR rate (BOR) was 38% (40% by IRC) and overall response rate was 59% (52% by IRC). CR rates were consistent in pts with and without prior CAR-Ts (37% vs. 39%). After a median follow-up of 18.3 months (range: 0–30) in pts with a CR (BOR), most CRs (39/59; 66%) were ongoing. Median duration of CR (DoCR) was 24.1 months (95% CI: 19.8–NE); an estimated 70% of pts with a CR at any time remained in remission at 18 months (Figure). The 18-month OS rate was 41% (95% CI: 32.1–49.3). Landmark analyses at 1 year in pts with a CR pre-C3 (PFS rate: 71%, OS rate: 92%) and in pts with a CR at EOT (PFS rate: 80%, OS rate: 94%) showed that most pts were progression free and alive. In a cohort of 101 pts treated with glofitamab doses below the recommended Phase II dose but ≥10 mg with longer median CR follow-up (31 months, range: 1–49), the median DoCR was 30.1 months (95% CI: 5.5–NE) and 55% of pts were still in remission at data cut-off. This further confirms the highly durable responses achieved with glofitamab. CRS (by ASTCT) remained the most common adverse event (AE), occurring in 64% of pts and was mostly Grade (Gr) 1 (48%) or Gr 2 (12%); Gr 3 (3%) and Gr 4 (1%) events were uncommon. The incidence of AEs and serious AEs was stable compared with earlier analyses, with one new Gr 3 AE (acute kidney injury), one new Gr 2 neurologic AE (agitation) and no new glofitamab-related Gr 5 AEs reported. Encore Abstract—This abstract was accepted and previously presented at the 2023 ASCO Annual Meeting. All rights reserved. The research was funded by: NP30179 is sponsored by F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd. Third-party medical writing assistance, under the direction of all authors, was provided by Dikeledi Matlebjane, MSc of Ashfield MedComms, an Inizio company, and was funded by F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd. © 2023 American Society of Clinical Oncology, Inc. Reused with permission. Keywords: aggressive B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma, immunotherapy Conflicts of interests pertinent to the abstract M. Dickinson Consultant or advisory role: Novartis, BMS, Gilead, Roche, Janssen, Abbvie, Genmab Honoraria: Roche, Amgen, MSD, Janssen, BMS, Novartis, Gilead, Abbvie Research funding: Novartis, Roche, Takeda, Celgene, MSD, Abbvie, Lilly Other remuneration: Travel, accommodation, expenses—Roche C. Carlo-Stella Employment or leadership position: Humanitas University Consultant or advisory role: Sanofi, ADC Therapeutics, Karyopharm Tx, Celgene/BMS, Roche, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Scenic Biotech, Novartis Honoraria: Celgene/BMS, Incyte, Roche, Janssen Oncology, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Astra-Zeneca, Gilead Research funding: Sanofi, ADC Therapeutics, Roche Other remuneration: Travel, accommodation, expenses—Takeda, Janssen Oncology F. Morschhauser Consultant or advisory role: Roche, Gilead, AbbVie Other remuneration: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees—Roche, Gilead, Novartis, Bristol-Myers Squibb, AbbVie, Genmab, Miltenyi, Allogenetherapeutics, AstraZeneca, Janssen L. Falchi Consultant or advisory role: Genmab, Abbvie, Roche/Genentech, ADC Therapeutics, Seattle Genetics, AstraZeneca Research funding: Roche, Genmab, Genentech Other remuneration: Travel, accommodation, expenses—Genmab E. Bachy Consultant or advisory role: Roche, Gilead Sciences, Incyte, Takeda, Novartis Honoraria: Gilead Sciences, Roche, Amgen, Janssen-Cilag, Novartis, Takeda, Incyte Research funding: Amgen, BMS Other remuneration: Travel, accommodation, expenses—Janssen-Cilag, Roche, Gilead Sciences, Incyte G. Cartron Consultant or advisory role: Roche, Celgene, Mabqi, MedxCell Honoraria: Gilead Sciences, Janssen, Celgene, Roche, Abbvie, Novartis Other remuneration: Travel, accommodation, expenses—Roche C. Khan Consultant or advisory role: Beigene, Astrazeneca, Morphosys Honoraria: Roche, Astrazenca, Beigene, SeaGen, Abbvie, JNJ, Gilead Sciences, BMS, Amgen, ADC Therapeutics, Karyopharm, GSK, Morphosys, Sanofi, Epizyme Research funding: Roche, Epizyme, Beigene, Astrazeneca Other remuneration: Speaker's Bureau—Roche, Astrazenca, Beigene, SeaGen, Abbvie, JNJ, Gilead Sciences, BMS, Amgen, ADC Therapeutics, Karyopharm, GSK, Morphosys, Sanofi, Epizyme; Travel, accommodation, expenses—F. Hoffmann-La Roche, Astrazenca, Beigene, SeaGen, Abbvie, JNJ, Gilead Sciences, BMS, Amgen, ADC Therapeutics, Karyopharm, GSK, Morphosys, Sanofi, Epizyme M. Tani Consultant or advisory role: Abbvie, Kiowa-Kirin, Incyte J. Martinez-Lopez Employment or leadership position: Complutense University Consultant or advisory role: Janssen/BMS/Novartis/Roche/Pfizer/Sanofi Research funding: BMS/Roche/Asltellas Other remuneration: Speaker's Bureau—Janssen/BMS/Novartis/Roche/Pfizer/Sanofi; Travel, accommodation, expenses—Janssen/Gilead N. Bartlett Consultant or advisory role: Seattle Genetics, Roche/Genentech, ADC Therapeutics, BTG, Acerta Pharma, Foresight Diagnostics Research funding: Seattle Genetics, Merck, Forty Seven, Janssen, Pharmacyclics, Millennium, ADC Therapeutics, Autolus, Roche/Genentech, Bristol-Myers Squibb/Celgene, Gilead/Kite Pharma A. Salar Research funding: Gilead, Roche, Abbvie Other remuneration: Speaker's bureau—BeiGene, BMS/Celgene, EusaPharma, Incyte, Janssen, Roche; Travel, accommodation, expenses—Janssen, Roche J. Brody Consultant or advisory role: Genentech, Merck, Kite/Gilead, SeaGen, ADC Therapeutics, Epizyme S. Leppä Consultant or advisory role: Genmab, GILEAD, Incyte, Novartis, Orion, Roche Honoraria: Gilead, Novartis Research funding: Bayer, Celgene, Genmab, Hutchmed, Novartis, Nordic Nanovector, Roche E. Mulvihill Employment or leadership position: Hoffmann-La Roche Stock ownership: Hoffmann-La Roche Other remuneration: Travel, accommodation, expenses—Hoffmann-La Roche L. Lundberg Employment or leadership position: F. Hoffmann-La Roche Stock ownership: F. Hoffmann-La Roche Other remuneration: Patent—F. Hoffmann-La Roche J. Relf Employment or leadership position: Roche Products limited Stock ownership: Roche, F-Star Therapeutics and Harpoon Therapeutics Y. Xie Employment or leadership position: Roche A. Bottos Employment or leadership position: F. Hoffmann-La Roche Stock ownership: F. Hoffmann-La Roche K. Humphrey Employment or leadership position: Roche Stock ownership: Roche M. Hutchings Consultant or advisory role: Takeda, Roche, Genmab, Janssen, Abbvie Research funding: Celgene, Genmab, Roche, Takeda, Novartis, Janssen, Merck, Abbvie, AstraZeneca
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".