Search

Summary: The success of CD19 Chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T‐cell therapy in large B‐cell lymphoma (LBCL) has been partially offset by toxicity and logistical challenges, which off‐the‐shelf agents like CD20xCD3 bispecific antibodies might potentially overcome. However, when using CAR T outcomes as the ʽstandard‐of‐care comparator̕ for relapsed/refractory (r/r) LBCL, a potential learning curve with implementing a novel, complex therapy like CAR T needs to be considered. To address this, we analysed 726 UK patients intended to be treated with CD19 CAR T for r/r LBCL and compared outcomes between the first year of the national CAR T programme (Era 1; 2019) and the more recent treatment era (Era 2; 2020–2022). We identified significant improvements for Era 2 versus Era 1 in dropout rate (17% vs. 27%, p = 0.001), progression‐free survival (1‐year PFS 50% vs. 32%, p < 0.001) and overall survival (1‐year OS 60% vs. 40%, p < 0.001). We also observed increased use of bridging therapy, improvement in bridging outcomes, more tocilizumab/corticosteroid use, reduced high‐grade cytokine release syndrome (4% vs. 9%, p = 0.01) and intensive care unit admissions (20% vs. 32%, p = 0.001). Our results demonstrate significant improvement in CAR T outcomes over time, highlighting the importance of using up‐to‐date clinical data when comparing CAR T against new treatment options for r/r LBCL. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Summary: Large B‐cell lymphoma (LBCL) patients with comorbidities and/or advanced age are increasingly considered for treatment with CD19 CAR T, but data on the clinical benefit of CAR T in the less fit patient population are still limited. We analysed outcomes of consecutive patients approved for treatment with axicabtagene ciloleucel (axi‐cel) or tisagenlecleucel (tisa‐cel) by the UK National CAR T Clinical Panel, according to fitness for autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT). 81/404 (20%) of approved patients were deemed unfit for ASCT. Unfit patients were more likely to receive tisa‐cel versus axi‐cel (52% vs. 48%) compared to 20% versus 80% in ASCT‐fit patients; p < 0.0001. The drop‐out rate from approval to infusion was significantly higher in the ASCT‐unfit group (34.6% vs. 23.5%; p = 0.042). Among infused patients, response rate, progression‐free and overall survival were similar in both cohorts. CAR T was well‐tolerated in ASCT‐unfit patients with an incidence of grade ≥3 cytokine release syndrome and neurotoxicity of 2% and 11%, respectively. Results from this multicentre real‐world cohort demonstrate that CD19 CAR T can be safely delivered in carefully selected older patients and patients with comorbidities who are not deemed suitable for transplant. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Summary: CD19 CAR‐T have emerged as a new standard treatment for relapsed/refractory (r/r) large B‐cell lymphoma (LBCL). CAR‐T real‐world (RW) outcomes published to date suggest significant variability across countries. We provide results of a large national cohort of patients intended to be treated with CAR‐T in the UK. Consecutive patients with r/r LBCL approved for CAR‐T by the National CAR‐T Clinical Panel between December 2018 and November 2020 across all UK CAR‐T centres were included. 404/432 patients were approved [292 axicabtagene ciloleucel (axi‐cel), 112 tisagenlecleucel (tisa‐cel)], 300 (74%) received the cells. 110/300 (38.3%) patients achieved complete remission (CR) at 6 months (m). The overall response rate was 77% (52% CR) for axi‐cel, 57% (44% CR) for tisa‐cel. The 12‐month progression‐free survival was 41.8% (axi‐cel) and 27.4% (tisa‐cel). Median overall survival for the intention‐to‐treat population was 10.5 m, 16.2 m for infused patients. The incidence of grade ≥3 cytokine release syndrome and neurotoxicity were 7.6%/19.6% for axi‐cel and 7.9%/3.9% for tisa‐cel. This prospective RW population of CAR‐T eligible patients offers important insights into the clinical benefit of CD19 CAR‐T in LBCL in daily practice. Our results confirm long‐term efficacy in patients receiving treatment similar to the pivotal trials, but highlight the significance of early CAR‐T failure. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]