Phase 3 study (inMIND) of tafasitamab plus lenalidomide and rituximab for relapsed or refractory follicular lymphoma: Clinical characteristics and outcomes of patients receiving second-line treatment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Introduction: In patients (pts) with follicular lymphoma (FL) durability of response in second-line (2L) therapy is important, as prognosis worsens and burden increases with subsequent lines of therapy. Chemoimmunotherapy is often used as 1L; however, immunotherapy is preferred for relapsed or refractory (R/R) FL. Tafasitamab (tafa) is a humanized CD19-targeting monoclonal antibody (mAb) recently approved in combination with lenalidomide (len) + rituximab (R) for treatment of adult pts with R/R FL in the US. The primary analysis from the inMIND (NCT04680052) study demonstrated significant improvement in investigator-assessed PFS in pts with R/R FL representing a 57% reduction in the risk of progression or death, with a safety profile as expected for the pt population (Sehn LH, et al. Blood. 2024;144[Suppl 2]:LBA1). This post hoc analysis evaluates efficacy and safety outcomes from inMIND in pts with R/R FL who had received 1 prior line of therapy. Methods: Pts aged ≥18 years with R/R CD19+ and CD20+ FL (grade 1-3A), ECOG PS ≤2, and who had received ≥1 prior systemic therapy including an anti-CD20 mAb were eligible. Pts were randomized 1:1 to receive tafa 12 mg/kg IV or placebo (pbo) with standard dosing of len+R for up to 12×28-day cycles. Analyses in pts who received 2L treatment included investigator-assessed PFS (primary endpoint), PFS by IRC, PET-CR rate (FDG-avid population), ORR, TTNT, and safety. Results: Of 548 pts randomized to the tafa arm (n=273) or pbo arm (n=275), 300 (55%) had only 1 prior line of therapy (tafa, n=147; pbo, n=153). Baseline characteristics in the 2L pt subgroup were generally consistent with the overall FL study population and balanced between treatment arms: median age 65 y (range, 31-88); 56% male; 77% intermediate- or high-risk FLIPI; 81% high tumor burden per GELF criteria; 43% POD24 (progression within 24 months of start of initial treatment). In this 2L pt subgroup, median investigator-assessed PFS was improved with the addition of tafa vs pbo (24.0 months vs 15.4 months [hazard ratio (HR) (95% CI) 0.40 (0.26, 0.62)]). Median PFS by IRC (not reached [NR] vs 20.7 months; HR [95% CI] 0.44 [0.28, 0.70]), PET-CR rate (50.7% vs 43.4%; odds ratio [OR] [95% CI] 1.3 [0.84, 2.15]), ORR (86.4% vs 73.9%; OR [95% CI] 2.3 [1.26, 4.17]), and median TTNT (NR vs 28.8 months; HR [95% CI] 0.52 [0.32, 0.84]) were also improved with addition of tafa vs pbo among 2L pts. Outcomes were also evaluated in pts receiving prior anti-CD20 plus chemotherapy as 1L therapy (tafa, n=122; pbo, n=132). Analysis was not performed in pts who received anti-CD20 monotherapy in 1L due to small numbers (tafa, n=26; pbo, n=20). Median investigator-assessed PFS was higher with addition of tafa vs pbo in 2L pts who received 1L anti-CD20+chemo (24.0 months vs 14.4 months; HR [95% CI] 0.45 [0.29, 0.71]). Pts receiving 1L anti-CD20+chemo also had higher median PFS by IRC (not reached [NR] vs 20.1 months; HR [95% CI] 0.51 [0.31, 0.82]), PET-CR rate (52.2% vs 41.6%; odds ratio [OR] [95% CI] 1.6 [0.95, 2.66]), ORR (86.9% vs 71.2%; OR [95% CI] 2.8 [1.40, 5.45]), and median TTNT (NR vs 28.8 months; HR [95% CI] 0.52 [0.31, 0.86]) with addition of tafa vs pbo. Among 2L pts with POD24, median investigator-assessed PFS was improved with the addition of tafa vs pbo (19.2 months vs 11.7 months; HR [95% CI] 0.46 [0.26, 0.82]); median PFS by IRC, PET-CR rate, ORR, and median TTNT were also consistent with the overall 2L population (data will be presented). In the overall 2L pt subgroup, similar rates of TEAEs (100% vs 99%) were observed in the tafa vs pbo arm. Most common TEAEs in the tafa vs pbo arm were neutropenia (47% vs 39%), diarrhea (37% vs 31%), constipation (31% vs 30%), COVID-19 (30% vs 20%), rash (22% vs 24%), fatigue (20% vs 18%), cough (20% vs 17%), nausea (20% vs 14%), and muscle spasm (18% vs 20%). Grade 3 or 4 TEAEs were reported in 69% vs 61% of pts and serious TEAEs in 31% vs 25% of pts in the tafa and pbo arms, respectively. Three (2%) pts in both the tafa and pbo arms experienced fatal AEs. Conclusions: This analysis of R/R FL pts receiving 2L treatment in the inMIND study confirms that addition of tafa to len+R improved PFS, representing a 60% reduction in risk of progression or death, including in pts receiving prior anti-CD20+chemo or with POD24. Improvements were also observed in PET-CR, ORR, and TTNT. The safety profile was manageable in pts receiving 2L treatment with toxicities as expected for the pt population.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".