A Randomized Phase II Study of Mosunetuzumab SC Plus Polatuzumab Vedotin Demonstrates Improved Outcomes Versus Rituximab Plus Polatuzumab Vedotin in Patients (Pts) with Relapsed or Refractory (R/R) Large B-Cell Lymphoma (LBCL)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: The ongoing Phase Ib/II study (NCT03671018) evaluates mosunetuzumab (Mosun) plus polatuzumab vedotin (Pola; M-Pola) in pts with R/R LBCL. The Phase II single-arm expansion cohort showed a manageable safety profile and highly durable responses with M (IV administration)-Pola at primary analysis (Budde et al. Nat Med 2024). To delineate the contribution of Mosun to the M-Pola combination, we conducted an analysis of a Phase II randomized cohort evaluating M (SC administration)-Pola vs rituximab (R)-Pola in R/R LBCL. Methods: Eligible pts had confirmed R/R LBCL (diffuse LBCL [DLBCL] not otherwise specified, follicular lymphoma [FL] Grade [Gr] 3b, high-grade B-cell lymphoma [HGBCL], or transformed [tr]FL) and had received ≥1 prior therapy (including an anti-CD20 antibody). Pts were randomized 1:1 to M (SC)-Pola or R-Pola (stratified by number of prior therapies [1 vs ≥2]). Treatment cycles were 21 days. Mosun SC was given with Cycle (C)1 step-up dosing (5mg on C1 Day [D]1; 45mg on C1D8, C1D15, and D1 of C2-8) to mitigate cytokine release syndrome (CRS). Hospitalization was not mandatory. Pola IV (1.8mg/kg) was given on D1 of C1-6. Rituximab IV (375mg/m2) was given on D1 of C1-8. Pts on R-Pola with disease progression during or at end of treatment (EOT) or stable disease at EOT could cross over to receive M-Pola (up to 8 cycles of cumulative Pola). Primary endpoint was best ORR using Lugano 2014 criteria. CRS events were defined per ASTCT criteria. Results: As of January 30, 2024, 80 pts were enrolled to receive M (SC)-Pola (n=40) or R-Pola (n=40). 20 pts on R-Pola received crossover treatment with M-Pola, and 1 pt in the R-Pola arm did not receive treatment (study withdrawal). For M-Pola vs R-Pola, median age was 71.5 vs 67.0 years, 48% vs 54% had IPI 3-5, and 78% vs 85% had Ann Arbor Stage III/IV disease, 68% vs 82% of pts had DLBCL, 8% vs 3% of pts had Gr 3b FL, and 25% vs 15% of pts had HGBCL; among pts with DLBCL and HGBCL, 13% vs 23% had trFL. Median number of prior therapies in the M-Pola vs R-Pola arms was 2 (range 1-5) vs 3 (range 1-9), 35% vs 39% of pts received prior CAR-T, and 15% vs 23% had prior ASCT. A total of 50% vs 62% of pts on M-Pola vs R-Pola were primary refractory (relapse <6 months after first-line [1L] therapy), 71% (n=10/14) vs 80% (n=12/15) were refractory to CAR-T, and 13% vs 8% had early relapse (6-12 months after 1L therapy). For M-Pola vs R-Pola, ORR was 78% (95% CI: 61.6-89.2) vs 50% (95% CI: 33.8-66.2), CR rate was 58% (95% CI: 40.9-73.0) vs 35% (95% CI: 20.6-51.7), median duration of response was NR vs 10.1 months (95% CI: 3.6-NR; HR 0.40 [95% CI: 0.1-1.2]), median duration of CR was NR in both arms (HR 0.38 [95% CI: 0.1-1.3]), and median PFS was NR vs 6.4 months (95% CI: 4.7-NR; HR 0.48 [95% CI: 0.2-1.0]). OS was NR in the M-Pola and R-Pola arms (median follow-up 18 months). Adverse events (AEs) occurring in ≥30% of pts with M-Pola were injection-site reaction (55%), diarrhea (48%), fatigue (35%), and constipation (30%). AEs in ≥30% of pts with R-Pola were nausea (36%), diarrhea (33%), and fatigue (33%). Serious AE rates were similar between arms (M-Pola, 33%; R-Pola, 26%). The most common Gr 3/4 AE in both arms was neutropenia (M-Pola, 30%; R-Pola, 21%). One Gr 3 febrile neutropenia event occurred with M-Pola. Gr 5 AEs occurred in 2 (5%) pts on M-Pola (both COVID-19 related) vs 1 (3%) pt on R-Pola (hepatic failure). CRS events occurred in 4 (10%) pts on M-Pola (all Gr 1/2, all during C1, all resolved). Median CRS duration was 3 days (range 2-5), and 1 pt was treated with tocilizumab. In pts experiencing CRS, mean IL-6 and IFN-γ levels were elevated ~2-fold 24 hours after Mosun SC treatment. Peripheral neuropathy (PN) occurred in 4 (10%) pts on M-Pola (Gr 1, n=3; Gr 2, n=1) and 2 (5%) pts on R-Pola (all Gr 1). One neurologic event potentially consistent with ICANS was observed with M-Pola (Gr 2 seizure). Serious infections occurred in 9 (23%) pts on M-Pola and 7 (18%) pts on R-Pola (mainly COVID-19/COVID-19 pneumonia). Treatment was discontinued due to AEs in 3 pts on M-Pola (PN, n=2 [1 Pola related]; COVID-19 pneumonia, n=1]); and 2 pts on R-Pola (PN, n=1; pain in extremity, n=1 [neither treatment related]). Conclusions: Fixed-duration outpatient M (SC)-Pola improved efficacy, with higher ORR and CR rate, promising durability, low rates of CRS events, and no excess toxicities vs R-Pola in pts with R/R LBCL. These results strongly support the continued evaluation of the M (SC)-Pola regimen being investigated in the Phase III SUNMO study (NCT05171647).
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".