RE-MIND2: comparative effectiveness of tafasitamab plus lenalidomide versus polatuzumab vedotin/bendamustine/rituximab (pola-BR), CAR-T therapies, and lenalidomide/rituximab (R2) based on real-world data in patients with relapsed/refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma

Silencing GNAS enhances HDAC3i efficacy in CREBBP wild type B cell lymphoma

The genetic era has opened the opportunity of using personalized therapeutic approaches, in part based on targeting genes with somatic mutations. For example, lymphomas harboring the highly recurrent CREBBP mutation show dependency on HDAC3, thus selective inhibition of HDAC3 reversed the epigenetic effects of CREBBP mutation, halted lymphoma growth, and induced MHC class II expression, enabling the T-cells to recognize and kill lymphoma cells. However, CREBBP wild type (WT) cells are less sensitive to this approach. In this issue of Leukemia, He et al. have executed a genome-wide CRISPR screening that identified GNAS as a target to maximize the therapeutic activity of HDAC3 inhibition in CREBBP WT lymphoma.

Time-dependent cost comparison and health economic impact analysis of second-line interventions for transplant-ineligible patients with relapsed or refractory diffuse large B cell lymphoma

OBJECTIVES

Novel interventions (axicabtagene ciloleucel [axi-cel], lisocabtagene maraleucel [liso-cel], tafasitamab-lenalidomide [Tafa-L], polatuzumab-rituximab-bendamustine [pola-BR]) improve clinical outcomes in second-line (2 L) treatment of transplant-ineligible patients with early relapse or refractory (R/R) diffuse large B cell lymphoma (DLBCL). The costs vary depending on the respective treatment regimen and the treatment duration, difficult comparability in reimbursement decisions. The objective was to analyze the health economic impacts of novel 2 L interventions and conventional immunochemotherapies (bendamustine-rituximab [BR], rituximab-gemcitabine-oxaliplatin [R-GemOx]) from a German healthcare payer's perspective as a function of treatment duration.

METHODS

An economic model was developed to compare treatment costs of 2 L interventions depending on the treatment duration. Treatment duration was measured by progression-free survival (PFS), identified based on a systematic review. Total and average costs were calculated over 5 years to evaluate incremental costs at median PFS for each intervention.

RESULTS

Average costs per month at median PFS ranged from €2846 (95% CI: 5067-1641) to €40 535 (95% CI: 91180-N/A) for BR and liso-cel, respectively. Incremental costs at the lowest median PFS (R-GemOx: 5.3 months) revealed -€664, €5560, €11 817, €53 145, and €67 745 for BR, Tafa-L, pola-BR, axi-cel, and liso-cel as compared to R-GemOx, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Analyses uncovered a variation of incremental costs of 2 L transplant-ineligible DLBCL interventions as a function of time leading to amortization of high-priced interventions.

Externally Controlled Studies Using Real-World Data in Patients With Hematological Cancers: A Systematic Review

Importance

The use of real-world data (RWD) external control arms in prospective studies is increasing. The advantages, including the immediate availability of a control population, must be balanced with the requirements of meeting evidentiary standards.

Objective

To address the question of whether and to what extent the methods of RWD studies compare to standard methods used in randomized clinical trials.

Evidence Review

A systematic search across 4 electronic databases and Google Scholar was conducted from January 1, 2000, to October 23, 2023. Studies were included in the systematic review if they compared an intervention arm in a clinical trial to an RWD control arm in patients with hematological cancers and if they were published between 2000 and 2023.

Findings

Thirty-two prospective intervention studies incorporating external control data from RWD sources of patients with hematological cancers were identified. A total of 4306 patients from intervention arms and 10 594 from RWD control arms were included across all studies. Only 2 studies (6%) included prospectively collected RWD. The complete trial inclusion criteria were applied to the RWD cohort in 7 studies (22%). Four studies (13%) published the statistical analysis plan and prespecified use of RWD. A total of 23 studies (72%) applied matching algorithms for trial and RWD cohorts, including matching for demographic, disease, and/or therapy-related characteristics. The end point criteria were the same as the trial in 8 studies (25%). In contrast, 12 studies (38%) used different end points, and 12 (38%) did not provide an end point definition for the RWD. Twelve studies (38%) had a median follow-up difference of less than a year between arms. Eight studies (25%) reported toxic effect data for the trial arm, of which 5 studies reported toxic effect data for the RWD arm.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this systematic review, limitations were observed in the application of clinical trial eligibility criteria to RWD, statistical rigor and application of matching methods, the definition of end points, follow-up, and reporting of adverse events, which may challenge the conclusions reported in studies using RWD.

CD22-directed CAR T-cell therapy for large B-cell lymphomas progressing after CD19-directed CAR T-cell therapy: a dose-finding phase 1 study

BACKGROUND

Outcomes are poor for patients with large B-cell lymphoma who relapse after CD19-directed chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy (CAR19). CD22 is a nearly universally expressed B-cell surface antigen and the efficacy of a CD22-directed CAR T-cell therapy (CAR22) in large B-cell lymphoma is unknown, which was what we aimed to examine in this study.

METHODS

In this single centre, open-label, dose-escalation phase 1 trial, we intravenously administered CAR22 at two dose levels (1 million and 3 million CAR22-positive T cells per kg of bodyweight) to adult patients (aged ≥18 years) who relapsed after CAR19 or had CD19-negative large B-cell lymphoma. The primary endpoints were manufacturing feasibility, safety measured by the incidence and severity of adverse events and dose-limiting toxicities, and identification of the maximum tolerated dose (ie, the recommended phase 2 dose). This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04088890) and is active, but closed for enrolment.

FINDINGS

From Oct 17, 2019, to Oct 19, 2022, a total of 41 patients were assessed for eligibility; however, one patient withdrew. 40 patients underwent leukapheresis and 38 (95%) had CAR T-cell products manufactured successfully. The median age was 65 years (range 25-84), 17 (45%) were women, 32 (84%) had elevated pretreatment lactate dehydrogenase, 11 (29%) had refractory disease to all previous therapies, and patients had received a median of four lines of previous therapy (range 3-8). Of the 38 patients treated, 37 (97%) had relapsed after previous CAR19. The identified maximum tolerated dose was 1 million CAR T cells per kg. Of 29 patients who received the maximum tolerated dose, no patients developed a dose-limiting toxicity or grade 3 or higher cytokine release syndrome, immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome, or immune effector cell-associated haemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis-like syndrome.

INTERPRETATION

This trial identifies CD22 as an immunotherapeutic target in large B-cell lymphoma and demonstrates the durable clinical activity of CAR22 in patients with disease progression after CAR19 therapy. Although these findings are promising, it is essential to recognise that this is a phase 1 dose-finding study. Further investigations are warranted to establish the long-term efficacy and to delineate the patient subgroups that will derive the most benefit from this therapeutic approach.

FUNDING

National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Stanford Cancer Institute, Leukemia & Lymphoma Society, Parker Institute for Cancer Immunotherapy, Lymph & Co, and the European Hematology Association.

Novel Targets and Advanced Therapies in Diffuse Large B Cell Lymphomas

Since the introduction of rituximab in the late 1990s, significant progress has been made in advancing targeted therapies for B cell lymphomas, improving patients' chance of being cured and clinicians' therapeutic armamentarium. A better understanding of disease biology and pathogenic pathways, coupled with refinements in immunophenotypic and molecular diagnostics, have been instrumental in these achievements. While traditional chemotherapy remains fundamental in most cases, concerns surrounding chemorefractoriness and cumulative toxicities, particularly the depletion of the hemopoietic reserve, underscore the imperative for personalized treatment approaches. Integrating targeted agents, notably monoclonal antibodies, alongside chemotherapy has yielded heightened response rates and prolonged survival. A notable paradigm shift is underway with innovative-targeted therapies replacing cytotoxic drugs, challenging conventional salvage strategies like stem cell transplantation. This review examines the landscape of emerging targets for lymphoma cells and explores innovative therapies for diffuse large B cell lymphoma (DLBCL). From Chimeric Antigen Receptor-T cells to more potent monoclonal antibodies, antibody-drug conjugates, bispecific antibodies, checkpoint inhibitors, and small molecules targeting intracellular pathways, each modality offers promising avenues for therapeutic advancement. This review aims to furnish insights into their potential implications for the future of DLBCL treatment strategies.

New Frontiers in Monoclonal Antibodies for Relapsed/Refractory Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma

Diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) is the most common aggressive lymphoma. Approximately 60% of patients are cured with R-CHOP as a frontline treatment, while the remaining patients experience primary refractory or relapsed disease (R/R). The prognosis for R/R DLBCL patients who are neither eligible for autologous stem-cell transplantations nor CAR-T-cell treatment is poor, representing an important unmet need. Monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) have dramatically improved therapeutic options in anti-cancer strategies, offering new opportunities to overcome chemo-refractoriness in this challenging disease, even in cases of primary non-responder DLBCL. Several novel mAbs, characterized by different mechanisms of action and targets, are now available for R/R DLBCL. Unbound mAbs induce an immune response against cancer cells, triggering different mechanisms, including antibody-dependent cellular cytotoxicity (ADCC), activation of antibody-dependent cell-mediated phagocytosis (ADCP) and complement-dependent cytotoxicity (CDC). Antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs) and radioimmunotherapy (RIT), respectively, deliver a cytotoxic payload or a beta-emitter radionuclide to the targeted cells and nearby bystanders. Bispecific T-cell engagers (BiTes) and immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) redirect and enhance the immune response against tumor cells. Here, we review therapeutic strategies based on monoclonal antibodies for R/R DLBCL.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of transplant-ineligible relapsed or refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma treatment options-Experience of the efficiency frontier approach

OBJECTIVES

The treatment of relapsed/refractory (R/R) diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) changed remarkably since the European Medicines Agency-approved chimeric antigen receptor T-cell (CAR-T) therapies (axicabtagene ciloleucel [axi-cel], lisocabtagene maraleucel [liso-cel], tisagenlecleucel [tisa-cel]) for the third-line onwards (3+L), and targeted therapies (polatuzumab vedotin-bendamustine-rituximab [pola-BR], tafasitamab-lenalidomide [Tafa-L]) for the second-line (2L) onwards. As associated rising treatment costs represent an economic burden, the cost-effectiveness of transplant-ineligible R/R DLBCL interventions was assessed from a German healthcare payer's perspective, using the efficiency frontier (EF) approach.

METHODS

A systematic literature review was performed to determine the clinical benefit concerning median overall survival (OS) of bendamustine-rituximab (BR), rituximab-gemcitabine-oxaliplatin (R-GemOx), axi-cel, liso-cel, tisa-cel, pola-BR, and Tafa-L. First-year treatment costs (drug and medical services costs) were calculated. Results were merged on two-dimensional graphs illustrating 2L and 3+L EFs.

RESULTS

Second-line EF is formed by BR (median OS 11.49 months, €23 958) and Tafa-L (45.7, €104 541), 3+L EF is formed by R-GemOx (12.0, €29 080), Tafa-L (15.5, €104 541), and axi-cel (18.69, €308 516). These interventions build the respective cost-effectiveness thresholds for novel interventions.

CONCLUSIONS

Using the EF approach, the currently most cost-effective interventions (based on cost-effectiveness ratios) in the indication of R/R DLBCL were identified to guide international reimbursement decisions.

Changing Trends in B-Cell Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma Treatment: The Role of Novel Monoclonal Antibodies in Clinical Practice

We are currently witnessing a dramatic shift in our approach to the treatment of B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma (B-NHL). In the evolving clinical landscape, novel treatments for this clinically heterogeneous disease span a wide range of interventions, encompassing targeted agents, cell therapy approaches, and novel monoclonal antibodies (NMABs). Among these, the latter are likely to exert the most profound impact due to their distinctive high efficacy and versatile applicability. NMABs represent a heterogeneous group of agents, including naked antibodies, immunotoxins, and T-cell-engaging molecules. In recent times, several NMABs have either gained regulatory approval or are on the verge of introduction into clinical practice, addressing multiple therapeutic indications and treatment regimens. Their anticipated impact is expected to be broad, initially in the context of relapsed/refractory (R/R) disease and subsequently extending to early treatment lines. The scope of this review is to provide a comprehensive overview of the biological characteristics, clinical properties, efficacy, and toxicity profiles of NMABs that have recently been introduced or are nearing integration into clinical practice.

Second-line treatment of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma: Evolution of options

In the era of immunochemotherapy, approximately 60%-70% of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) patients achieve remission with first-line rituximab-based chemoimmunotherapy. However, 30%-40% relapse after initial response to first-line therapy and, out of them, 20%-50% are refractory or experience early relapse. The second-line therapy algorithm for DLBCL has recently evolved, thanks to the recent approval of new therapeutic agents or their combinations. The new guidelines suggest a stratification of relapsed/refractory (R/R) DLBCL based on the time to relapse. For transplant-eligible patients, autologous stem cell transplant remains the preferred option when the patient relapses after 12 months from diagnosis, while anti-CD19 CART-cell therapy is the current preferred choice for high-risk DLBCL, defined as primary refractory or relapse ≤12 months. For transplant-ineligible or CAR T-cell therapy-ineligible patients, the therapeutic arsenal historically lacked effective options. However, new therapeutic options, including polatuzumab vedotin combined with bendamustine-rituximab and tafasitamab with lenalidomide, have been recently approved, and novel agents such as loncastuximab tesirine, selinexor, anti-CD19 CAR T-cell therapy, and bispecific antibodies have shown promising efficacy and manageable safety in this setting offering new hope to patients in this challenging scenario.