Transfusion needs after CAR T-cell therapy for large B-cell lymphoma: predictive factors and outcome (a DESCAR-T study)

ABSTRACT

Chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cells targeting CD19 have been approved for the treatment of relapse/refractory large B-cell lymphoma. Hematotoxicity is the most frequent CAR T-cell-related adverse event. Transfusion support is a surrogate marker of severe cytopenias. Transfusion affects patients' quality of life, presents specific toxicities, and is known to affect immunity through the so-called transfusion-related immunomodulation that may affect CAR T-cell efficacy. We analyzed data from 671 patients from the French DESCAR-T registry for whom exhaustive transfusion data were available. Overall, 401 (59.8%) and 378 (56.3%) patients received transfusion in the 6-month period before and after CAR T-cell infusion, respectively. The number of patients receiving transfusion and the mean number of transfused products increased during the 6-month period before CAR T-cell infusion, peaked during the first month after infusion (early phase), and decreased over time. Predictive factors for transfusion at the early phase were age >60 years, ECOG PS ≥2, treatment with axicabtagene ciloleucel, pre-CAR T-cell transfusions, and CAR-HEMATOTOX score ≥2. Predictive factors for late transfusion (between 1 and 6 months after infusion) were pre-CAR T-cell transfusions, CAR-HEMATOTOX score ≥2, ICANS ≥3 (for red blood cells [RBC] transfusion), and tocilizumab use (for platelets transfusion). Early transfusions and late platelets (but not RBC) transfusions were associated with a shorter progression-free survival and overall survival. Lymphoma-related mortality and nonrelapse mortality were both increased in the transfused population. Our data shed light on the mechanisms of early and late cytopenia and on the potential impact of transfusions on CAR T-cell efficacy and toxicity.

Efficacy of haematopoietic stem cell boost as a rescue for poor graft function after haematopoietic stem cell transplantation: A multicentre retrospective study on behalf of the Francophone Society for Bone Marrow Transplantation and Cell Therapy (SFGM-TC)

Haematopoietic stem cell reinjection may be a curative option for poor graft function after haematopoietic stem cell transplantation; however, literature supporting its use remains limited. We conducted a multicentre retrospective study on behalf of the Francophone Society of Bone Marrow Transplantation and Cellular Therapy, including 55 patients. We demonstrated response rates of nearly 40% and two-year survival of more than 60% in the context of an otherwise deadly complication and we observed that the timing of injection and the degree of cytopenia are strongly associated with outcomes. This study shows the feasibility of the procedure informing on its epidemiology, outcomes and prognostic factors, setting the stage for future guidelines.

Late relapse after hematopoietic stem cell transplantation for acute leukemia: a retrospective study by SFGM-TC

Late relapse (LR) after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (AHSCT) for acute leukemia is a rare event (nearly 4.5%) and raises the questions of prognosis and outcome after salvage therapy. We performed a retrospective multicentric study between January 1, 2010, and December 31, 2016, using data from the French national retrospective register ProMISe provided by the SFGM-TC (French Society for Bone Marrow Transplantation and Cellular Therapy). We included patients presenting with LR, defined as a relapse occurring at least 2 years after AHSCT. We used the Cox model to identify prognosis factors associated with LR. During the study period, a total of 7582 AHSCTs were performed in 29 centers, and 33.8% of patients relapsed. Among them, 319 (12.4%) were considered to have LR, representing an incidence of 4.2% for the entire cohort. The full dataset was available for 290 patients, including 250 (86.2%) with acute myeloid leukemia and 40 (13.8%) with acute lymphoid leukemia. The median interval from AHSCT to LR was 38.2 months (interquartile range [IQR], 29.2 to 49.7 months), and 27.2% of the patients had extramedullary involvement at LR (17.2% exclusively and 10% associated with medullary involvement). One-third of the patients had persistent full donor chimerism at LR. Median overall survival (OS) after LR was 19.9 months (IQR, 5.6 to 46.4 months). The most common salvage therapy was induction regimen (55.5%), with complete remission (CR) obtained in 50.7% of cases. Ninety-four patients (38.5%) underwent a second AHSCT, with a median OS of 20.4 months (IQR, 7.1 to 49.1 months). Nonrelapse mortality after second AHSCT was 18.2%. The Cox model identified the following factors as associated with delay of LR: disease status not in first CR at first HSCT (odds ratio [OR], 1.31; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.04 to 1.64; P = .02) and the use of post-transplantation cyclophosphamide (OR, 2.23; 95% CI, 1.21 to 4.14; P = .01). Chronic GVHD appeared to be a protective factor (OR, .64; 95% CI, .42 to .96; P = .04). The prognosis of LR is better than in early relapse, with a median OS after LR of 19.9 months. Salvage therapy associated with a second AHSCT improves outcome and is feasible, without creating excess toxicity.

A real-world comparison of tisagenlecleucel and axicabtagene ciloleucel CAR T cells in relapsed or refractory diffuse large B cell lymphoma

Axicabtagene ciloleucel (axi-cel) and tisagenlecleucel (tisa-cel) have both demonstrated impressive clinical activity in relapsed/refractory (R/R) diffuse large B cell lymphoma (DLBCL). In this study, we analyzed the outcome of 809 patients with R/R DLBCL after two or more previous lines of treatment who had a commercial chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cells order for axi-cel or tisa-cel and were registered in the retrospective French DESCAR-T registry study ( NCT04328298 ). After 1:1 propensity score matching (n = 418), the best overall response rate/complete response rate (ORR/CRR) was 80%/60% versus 66%/42% for patients treated with axi-cel compared to tisa-cel, respectively (P < 0.001 for both ORR and CRR comparisons). After a median follow-up of 11.7 months, the 1-year progression-free survival was 46.6% for axi-cel and 33.2% for tisa-cel (hazard ratio (HR) = 0.61; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.46-0.79; P = 0.0003). Overall survival (OS) was also significantly improved after axi-cel infusion compared to after tisa-cel infusion (1-year OS 63.5% versus 48.8%; HR = 0.63; 95% CI, 0.45-0.88; P = 0.0072). Similar findings were observed using the inverse probability of treatment weighting statistical approach. Grade 1-2 cytokine release syndrome was significantly more frequent with axi-cel than with tisa-cel, but no significant difference was observed for grade ≥3. Regarding immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome (ICANS), both grade 1-2 and grade ≥3 ICANS were significantly more frequent with axi-cel than with tisa-cel. In conclusion, our matched comparison study supports a higher efficacy and also a higher toxicity of axi-cel compared to tisa-cel in the third or more treatment line for R/R DLBCL.

Eye amputation following lifitegrast treatment for ocular graft-versus-host disease: First case report

Graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) is a common complication in patients undergoing allogeneic stem cell transplantation for acute myeloblastic leukemia that could be very difficult to treat. Lifitegrast 5% (Xiidra@, Novartis), a new immunosuppressive eye drop, was recently approved by the FDA for the treatment of severe dry eye and is currently under review by the European Medicines Agency. In France, lifitegrast has been approved by the French authorities for temporary use in refractory dry eye syndrome resistant to tear substitutes and topical cyclosporine. To date, serious complications have been reported only exceptionally. In this article, we report the case of a 65-year-old patient with a medical history of acute myeloid leukemia (AML) diagnosed in 2015 who received a first matched related donor transplant. In 2019, this patient developed chronic GVH involving the skin, oral mucosa and eye. Despite taking topical and systemic medications for 3 months, the patient did not report relief of ocular symptoms. Therefore, lifitegrast was prescribed. To our knowledge, we report the first case of corneal perforation in which evisceration was required following treatment with topical lifitegrast for chronic GVH. In the case presented here, it can be assumed that the underlying mechanisms leading to corneal perforation are multifactorial. Using drug accountability criteria, lifitegrast appears to be strongly associated with the development of bacterial keratitis and corneal perforation.