Search

Summary: Background: Tisagenlecleucel was approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in 2017 for refractory B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia (B-ALL) and B-ALL in ≥2nd relapse. Outcomes of patients receiving commercial tisagenlecleucel upon 1st relapse have yet to be established. We aimed to report real-world tisagenlecleucel utilisation patterns and outcomes across indications, specifically including patients treated in 1st relapse, an indication omitted from formal FDA approval. Methods: We conducted a retrospective analysis of real-world tisagenlecleucel utilisation patterns across 185 children and young adults treated between August 30, 2017 and March 6, 2020 from centres participating in the Pediatric Real-World CAR Consortium (PRWCC), within the United States. We described definitions of refractory B-ALL used in the real-world setting and categorised patients by reported Chimeric Antigen Receptor (CAR) T-cell indication, including refractory, 1st relapse and ≥2nd relapse B-ALL. We analysed baseline patient characteristics and post-tisagenlecleucel outcomes across defined cohorts. Findings: Thirty-six percent (n = 67) of our cohort received tisagenlecleucel following 1st relapse. Of 66 evaluable patients, 56 (85%, 95% CI 74–92%) achieved morphologic complete response. Overall-survival (OS) and event-free survival (EFS) at 1-year were 69%, (95% CI 58–82%) and 49%, (95% CI 37–64%), respectively, with survival outcomes statistically comparable to remaining patients (OS; p = 0.14, EFS; p = 0.39). Notably, toxicity was increased in this cohort, warranting further study. Interestingly, of 30 patients treated for upfront refractory disease, 23 (77%, 95% CI 58–90%) had flow cytometry and/or next-generation sequencing (NGS) minimum residual disease (MRD)-only disease at the end of induction, not meeting the historic morphologic definition of refractory. Interpretation: Our findings suggested that tisagenlecleucel response and survival rates overlap across patients treated with upfront refractory B-ALL, B-ALL ≥2nd relapse and B-ALL in 1st relapse. We additionally highlighted that definitions of refractory B-ALL are evolving beyond morphologic measures of residual disease. Funding: St. Baldrick's/Stand Up 2 Cancer, Parker Institute for Cancer Immunotherapy, Virginia and D.K. Ludwig Fund for Cancer Research.

Background Immunocompromised patients are at increased risk of SARS-CoV-2 infections. Patients undergoing chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy for relapsed/refractory B-cell malignancies are uniquely immunosuppressed due to CAR T-mediated B-cell aplasia (BCA). While SARS-CoV-2 mortality rates of 33%–40% are reported in adult CAR T-cell recipients, outcomes in pediatric and young adult CAR T-cell recipients are limited.Methods We created an international retrospective registry of CAR T recipients aged 0–30 years infected with SARS-CoV-2 within 2 months prior to or any time after CAR T infusion. SARS-CoV-2-associated illness was graded as asymptomatic, mild, moderate, or severe COVID-19, or multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children (MIS-C). To assess for risk factors associated with significant SARS-CoV-2 infections (infections requiring hospital admission for respiratory distress or supplemental oxygen), univariate and multivariable regression analyses were performed.Results Nine centers contributed 78 infections in 75 patients. Of 70 SARS-CoV-2 infections occurring after CAR T infusion, 13 (18.6%) were classified as asymptomatic, 37 (52.9%) mild, 11 (15.7%) moderate, and 6 (8.6%) severe COVID-19. Three (4.3%) were classified as MIS-C. BCA was not significantly associated with infection severity. Prior to the emergence of the Omicron variant, of 47 infections, 19 (40.4%) resulted in hospital admission and 7 (14.9%) required intensive care, while after the emergence of the Omicron variant, of 23 infections, only 1 (4.3%) required admission and the remaining 22 (95.7%) had asymptomatic or mild COVID-19. Death occurred in 3 of 70 (4.3%); each death involved coinfection or life-threatening condition. In a multivariable model, factors associated with significant SARS-CoV-2 infection included having two or more comorbidities (OR 7.73, CI 1.05 to 74.8, p=0.048) and age ≥18 years (OR 9.51, CI 1.90 to 82.2, p=0.014). In the eight patients infected with SARS-CoV-2 before CAR T, half of these patients had their CAR T infusion delayed by 15–30 days.Conclusions In a large international cohort of pediatric and young adult CAR-T recipients, SARS-CoV-2 infections resulted in frequent hospital and intensive care unit admissions and were associated with mortality in 4.3%. Patients with two or more comorbidities or aged ≥18 years were more likely to experience significant illness. Suspected Omicron infections were associated with milder disease.

OBJECTIVES/SPECIFIC AIMS: Objectives: To examine the differences in health outcomes of adolescents and young adults treated for malignancy at a pediatric cancer center compared to an adult cancer center. To determine the differences in receipt of supportive care for adolescents and young adults with malignancy who are treated at a pediatric cancer center compared to an adult cancer center. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: Methods: This will be a retrospective cohort study of patients from the ages of 15 to 39 years who are diagnosed with a malignancy common between adult and pediatric facilities within 2013-2017. Data will be abstracted from an existing database at MCW containing patient information at the adult and pediatric centers. Study population: Patients ages 15-39 years of age who are categorized as young adolescent and adult patients (AYAs). Patients are eligible for the cohort if they have a diagnosis that is common between adult and pediatric oncology centers and that is made within the years 2013-2017. These diagnoses will include ALL, AML, Hodgkin Lymphoma, Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma, Germ cell tumors, Osteosarcoma, Ewing Sarcoma, other sarcomas, and CNS tumors. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: There will be a difference in health care utilization, clinical trial enrollment and toxicity of therapy in AYAs with malignancies treated at an adult facility than AYAs treated for similar malignancy at pediatric facility. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT: There will be a difference in receipt of supportive care referrals, including psychology, social work, sperm banking, initiation of palliative care, in AYAs treated at a pediatric facility compared to AYAs treated at adult facility.