Consensus recommendations on the management of toxicity associated with CD3×CD20 bispecific antibody therapy

ABSTRACT

Bispecific antibodies (BsAb) that target CD3 and CD20 represent a new milestone in the treatment of patients with B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma. These drugs have demonstrated remarkable single-agent activity in patients with heavily pretreated disease, and 3 drugs have so far received regulatory approvals in various countries. However, BsAbs can potentially lead to severe toxicity associated with T-cell activation, particularly cytokine release syndrome (CRS). The anticipated widespread use of these off-the-shelf products poses challenges for implementation and highlights the need for guidance in anticipating, mitigating, and managing adverse events. In clinical trials, guidance for the evaluation and treatment of CRS and neurotoxicity associated with BsAb therapy has been modeled after algorithms originally created for chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapies and other immune effector therapies, yet notable differences in timing, quality, and severity exist between the toxicities of BsAbs and CAR T-cell therapies. We therefore convened an international panel of academic and community practice physicians, advanced practitioners, registered nurses, and pharmacists with experience using CD3×CD20 BsAbs in clinical trial and off-trial settings to provide comprehensive, consensus-based recommendations specific to the assessment and management of CD3×CD20 BsAb-related toxicities.

Prognostic Significance of Positron Emission Tomography Delta Radiomics Following Bridging Therapy in Patients with Large B-Cell Lymphoma Undergoing CAR T-Cell Therapy

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE(S)

CAR T-cell therapy is routinely used as a treatment option for relapsed/refractory large B-cell lymphoma (LBCL). Bridging therapy radiation therapy (bRT) is increasingly being utilized prior to chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy for large B-cell lymphoma (LBCL). It is unknown how the extent of debulking as a result of bRT impacts outcomes following CAR T-cell infusion. We hypothesized that the extent of debulking is prognostic of overall response to therapy.

MATERIALS/METHODS

We reviewed patients with LBCL treated with bRT followed by commercially available CAR T-cell therapy between 2017 and 2022. Patients required a F-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography (PET) scan prior to bRT and between completion of bRT and CAR T-cell infusion. On each scan, metabolic tumor volume (MTV), maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax), SUVmean, and total lesion glycolysis (TLG) were determined. Delta-radiomics based on changes of these values between scans in patients overall and irradiated sites were then calculated. Optimal cut points were determined using maximally selected log-rank. The primary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS) and local control (LC), measured from CAR T-cell infusion by Kaplan-Meier and Fine-Gray competing risk survival analyses, respectively.

RESULTS

Twenty-three patients with LBCL with 33 irradiated sites were reviewed. All metabolically active disease was treated in 10 patients. Median equivalent dose in 2 Gy fractions (EQD2) was 26 Gy (14-44). Median interval from bRT to PET was 9 days (2-30). Following bRT, 2 patients achieved complete responses, 16 had partial responses, and 5 had progressive disease. Five irradiated sites progressed through bRT. No local failures were observed when EQD2>32.5 Gy was given. LC was improved with EQD2>20 Gy (24 mo LC: 94.5% vs 68.6%; p = 0.075). Following BRT, median overall decreases in MTV, SUVmax, SUVmean, and TLG were 22.2 cc (63.1%), 8.9 (36.8%), 3.4 (31.1%), and 297.9 cc (75.8%), respectively. Median decreases in MTV, SUVmax, SUVmean, and TLG in irradiated sites were 15.6 cc (91.1%), 17.0 (74.6%), 6.8 (55.3%), and 157.0 cc (94.6%), respectively. PFS was significantly improved in patients with reductions of MTV of at least 36 cc (24 mo PFS: 69.2% vs 0%; p = 0.047) or SUVmax of at least 15 (24-mo PFS: 80.0% vs 28.1%; p < 0.001). LC was significantly improved in lesions with reductions of SUVmax of at least 14 (24-mo LC: 100% vs 67.3%; p < 0.001) or SUVmean of at least 7 (24-mo LC: 100% vs 74.4%; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

bRT led to significant reductions in MTV, SUVmax, SUVmean, and TLG. The extent of these decreases correlated with improved PFS and LC. There appears to be a dose-response relationship. Larger cohorts should validate the value of interim PET following bRT, and associated changes in disease burden as a means of prognosticating patients. Future work might evaluate whether escalation of BT in patients with suboptimal response, using either systemic therapy or higher radiation doses, has an impact on outcomes.

Cost-effectiveness of polatuzumab vedotin combined with chemoimmunotherapy in untreated diffuse large B-cell lymphoma

In patients with treatment-naive diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), the POLARIX study (A Study Comparing the Efficacy and Safety of Polatuzumab Vedotin With Rituximab-Cyclophosphamide, Doxorubicin, and Prednisone [R-CHP] Versus Rituximab-Cyclophosphamide, Doxorubicin, Vincristine, and Prednisone [R-CHOP] in Participants With Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma) reported a 6.5% improvement in the 2-year progression-free survival (PFS), with no difference in overall survival (OS) or safety using polatuzumab vedotin, rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and prednisone (pola-R-CHP) compared with standard rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (R-CHOP). We evaluated the cost-effectiveness of pola-R-CHP for DLBCL. We modeled a hypothetical cohort of US adults (mean age, 65 years) with treatment-naive DLBCL by developing a Markov model (lifetime horizon) to model the cost-effectiveness of pola-R-CHP and R-CHOP using a range of plausible long-term outcomes. Progression rates and OS were estimated from POLARIX. Outcome measures were reported in incremental cost-effectiveness ratios, with a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of $150 000 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). Assuming a 5-year PFS of 69.6% with pola-R-CHP and 62.7% with R-CHOP, pola-R-CHP was cost-effective at a WTP of $150 000 (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, $84 308/QALY). pola-R-CHP was no longer cost-effective if its 5-year PFS was 66.1% or lower. One-way sensitivity analysis revealed that pola-R-CHP is cost-effective up to a cost of $276 312 at a WTP of $150 000. pola-R-CHP was the cost-effective strategy in 56.6% of the 10 000 Monte Carlo iterations at a WTP of $150 000. If the absolute benefit in PFS is maintained over time, pola-R-CHP is cost-effective compared with R-CHOP at a WTP of $150 000/QALY. However, its cost-effectiveness is highly dependent on its long-term outcomes and costs of chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy. Routine usage of pola-R-CHP would add significantly to health care expenditures. Price reductions or identification of subgroups that have maximal benefit would improve cost-effectiveness.

Cost-effectiveness of second-line axicabtagene ciloleucel in relapsed refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma

The ZUMA-7 (Efficacy of Axicabtagene Ciloleucel Compared to Standard of Care Therapy in Subjects With Relapsed/Refractory Diffuse Large B Cell Lymphoma) study showed that axicabtagene ciloleucel (axi-cel) improved event-free survival (EFS) compared with standard of care (SOC) salvage chemoimmunotherapy followed by autologous stem cell transplant in primary refractory/early relapsed diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL); this led to its recent US Food and Drug Administration approval in this setting. We modeled a hypothetical cohort of US adults (mean age, 65 years) with primary refractory/early relapsed DLBCL by developing a Markov model (lifetime horizon) to model the cost-effectiveness of second-line axi-cel compared with SOC using a range of plausible long-term outcomes. EFS and OS were estimated from ZUMA-7. Outcome measures were reported in incremental cost-effectiveness ratios, with a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of $150 000 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). Assuming a 5-year EFS of 35% with second-line axi-cel and 10% with SOC, axi-cel was cost-effective at a WTP of $150 000 per QALY ($93 547 per QALY). axi-cel was no longer cost-effective if its 5-year EFS was ≤26.4% or if it cost more than $972 061 at a WTP of $150 000. Second-line axi-cel was the cost-effective strategy in 73% of the 10 000 Monte Carlo iterations at a WTP of $150 000. If the absolute benefit in EFS is maintained over time, second-line axi-cel for aggressive relapsed/refractory DLBCL is cost-effective compared with SOC at a WTP of $150 000 per QALY. However, its cost-effectiveness is highly dependent on long-term outcomes. Routine use of second-line chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy would add significantly to health care expenditures in the United States (more than $1 billion each year), even when used in a high-risk subpopulation. Further reductions in the cost of chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy are needed to be affordable in many regions of the world.

Avelumab in Combination Regimens for Relapsed/Refractory DLBCL: Results from the Phase Ib JAVELIN DLBCL Study

Background

Relapsed/refractory (R/R) diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) is associated with a poor prognosis despite the availability of multiple treatment options. Preliminary evidence suggests that DLBCL may be responsive to programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1)/programmed death 1 inhibitors.

Objective

The JAVELIN DLBCL study was conducted to assess whether a combination of agents could augment and sustain the antitumor immunity of avelumab, an anti-PD-L1 antibody, in R/R DLBCL.

Methods

This was a multicenter, randomized, open-label, parallel-arm study with a phase Ib and a phase III component. Reported here are the results from the phase Ib study, wherein 29 adult patients with DLBCL were randomized 1:1:1 to receive avelumab in combination with utomilumab (an immunoglobulin G2 4-1BB agonist) and rituximab (arm A), avelumab in combination with utomilumab and azacitidine (arm B), or avelumab in combination with bendamustine and rituximab (arm C). The primary endpoints were dose-limiting toxicities and objective response as assessed by the investigator per Lugano Response Classification criteria.

Results

Of the seven patients in arm A, one (14.3%) experienced two grade 3 dose-limiting toxicities (herpes zoster and ophthalmic herpes zoster); no dose-limiting toxicities were reported in arms B or C. No new safety concerns emerged for avelumab. One partial response was reported in arm A, three complete responses in arm C, and no responses in arm B. Given the insufficient antitumor activity in arms A and B and the infeasibility of expanding arm C, the study was discontinued before initiation of the phase III component.

Conclusions

The low level of clinical activity suggests that PD-L1 inhibitor activity may be limited in R/R DLBCL.

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier

NCT02951156.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11523-021-00849-8.

Autologous stem-cell transplantation after second-line brentuximab vedotin in relapsed or refractory Hodgkin lymphoma

Background

We previously demonstrated that brentuximab vedotin (BV) used as second-line therapy in patients with Hodgkin lymphoma is a tolerable and effective bridge to autologous hematopoietic cell transplantation (AHCT). Here, we report the post-AHCT outcomes of patients treated with second-line standard/fixed-dose BV and an additional cohort of patients where positron-emission tomography adapted dose-escalation of second-line BV was utilized.

Patients and methods

Patients on the dose-escalation cohort received 1.8 mg/kg of BV intravenously every 3 weeks for two cycles. Patients in complete remission (CR) after two cycles received two additional cycles of BV at 1.8 mg/kg, while patients with stable disease or partial response were escalated to 2.4 mg/kg for two cycles. All patients, regardless of treatment cohort, proceeded directly to AHCT or received additional pre-AHCT therapy at the discretion of the treating physician based on remission status after second-line BV.

Results

Of the 20 patients enrolled to the BV dose-escalation cohort, 8 patients underwent BV dose-escalation. BV escalation was well-tolerated, but no patients who were escalated converted to CR. Of 56 evaluable patients treated across cohorts, the overall response rate (ORR) to second-line BV was 75% with 43% CR. Twenty-eight (50%) patients proceeded directly to AHCT without post-BV chemotherapy, and a total of 50 patients proceeded to AHCT. Thirteen patients received consolidative post-AHCT therapy with either radiation, BV, or a PD-1 inhibitor. After AHCT, the 2-year progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival were 67% and 93%, respectively. The 2-year PFS among patients in CR at the time of AHCT (n = 37) was 71% compared with 54% in patients not in CR (p = 0.12). The 2-year PFS in patients who proceeded to AHCT directly after receiving BV alone was 77%.

Conclusions

Second-line BV is an effective bridge to AHCT that produces responses of sufficient depth to provide durable remission in conjunction with AHCT (clinicaltrials.gov: NCT01393717).