Lancet
Lisocabtagene maraleucel versus standard of care with salvage chemotherapy followed by autologous stem cell transplantation as second-line treatment in patients with relapsed or refractory large B-cell lymphoma (TRANSFORM): results from an interim analysis of an open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial.
Abstract
Background
Patients with large B-cell lymphoma (LBCL) primary refractory to or relapsed within 12 months of first-line therapy are at high risk for poor outcomes with current standard of care, platinum-based salvage immunochemotherapy and autologous haematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT). Lisocabtagene maraleucel (liso-cel), an autologous, CD19-directed chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy, has previously demonstrated efficacy and manageable safety in third-line or later LBCL. In this Article, we report a prespecified interim analysis of liso-cel versus standard of care as second-line treatment for primary refractory or early relapsed (within 12 months after response to initial therapy) LBCL.
Methods
TRANSFORM is a global, phase 3 study, conducted in 47 sites in the USA, Europe, and Japan, comparing liso-cel with standard of care as second-line therapy in patients with primary refractory or early (≤12 months) relapsed LBCL. Adults aged 18-75 years, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score of 1 or less, adequate organ function, PET-positive disease per Lugano 2014 criteria, and candidates for autologous HSCT were randomly assigned (1:1), by use of interactive response technology, to liso-cel (100 × 106 CAR+ T cells intravenously) or standard of care. Standard of care consisted of three cycles of salvage immunochemotherapy delivered intravenously-R-DHAP (rituximab 375 mg/m2 on day 1, dexamethasone 40 mg on days 1-4, two infusions of cytarabine 2000 mg/m2 on day 2, and cisplatin 100 mg/m2 on day 1), R-ICE (rituximab 375 mg/m2 on day 1, ifosfamide 5000 mg/m2 on day 2, etoposide 100 mg/m2 on days 1-3, and carboplatin area under the curve 5 [maximum dose of 800 mg] on day 2), or R-GDP (rituximab 375 mg/m2 on day 1, dexamethasone 40 mg on days 1-4, gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2 on days 1 and 8, and cisplatin 75 mg/m2 on day 1)-followed by high-dose chemotherapy and autologous HSCT in responders. Primary endpoint was event-free survival, with response assessments by an independent review committee per Lugano 2014 criteria. Efficacy was assessed per intention-to-treat (ie, all randomly assigned patients) and safety in patients who received any treatment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03575351, and is ongoing.
Findings
Between Oct 23, 2018, and Dec 8, 2020, 232 patients were screened and 184 were assigned to the liso-cel (n=92) or standard of care (n=92) groups. At the data cutoff for this interim analysis, March 8, 2021, the median follow-up was 6·2 months (IQR 4·4-11·5). Median event-free survival was significantly improved in the liso-cel group (10·1 months [95% CI 6·1-not reached]) compared with the standard-of-care group (2·3 months [2·2-4·3]; stratified hazard ratio 0·35; 95% CI 0·23-0·53; stratified Cox proportional hazards model one-sided p<0·0001). The most common grade 3 or worse adverse events were neutropenia (74 [80%] of 92 patients in the liso-cel group vs 46 [51%] of 91 patients in the standard-of-care group), anaemia (45 [49%] vs 45 [49%]), thrombocytopenia (45 [49%] vs 58 [64%]), and prolonged cytopenia (40 [43%] vs three [3%]). Grade 3 cytokine release syndrome and neurological events, which are associated with CAR T-cell therapy, occurred in one (1%) and four (4%) of 92 patients in the liso-cel group, respectively (no grade 4 or 5 events). Serious treatment-emergent adverse events were reported in 44 (48%) patients in the liso-cel group and 44 (48%) in the standard-of-care group. No new liso-cel safety concerns were identified in the second-line setting. There were no treatment-related deaths in the liso-cel group and one treatment-related death due to sepsis in the standard-of-care group.
Interpretation
These results support liso-cel as a new second-line treatment recommendation in patients with early relapsed or refractory LBCL.
Funding
Celgene, a Bristol-Myers Squibb Company.
Related Questions
How would you consolidate a patient with primary refractory double hit lymphoma with secondary CNS involvement?
Thiotepa-based transplants are particularly rough. We haven't had good outcomes with them in terms of relapse and mortality is much higher than BEAM or Mel autos.Having said that, this patient has chemo-refractory disease. The initial concern with CAR-T in primary CNS or secondary involvement was th...
How would you manage a transplant-eligible patient with DLBCL who relapsed 6-12 months following a CR1 to R-CHOP and then attained a CR2 to platinum-based salvage chemoimmunotherapy?
In this case, given that the patient obtained a CR2 to salvage therapy, I would, if they are otherwise eligible, take this patient to transplant given the data presented by Shadman et al., PMID 34570879 which indicates that those with at least a PR from salvage chemotherapy appeared to benefit as mu...
What salvage chemotherapy, if any, would you recommend for a patient with primary refractory DLBCL who progressed after two cycles of R-CHOP?
Primary progressive DLBCL is certainly clinically challenging. After biopsy confirms the diagnosis, how best to proceed depends on many factors including burden of disease, tempo of disease, and patient characteristics. ZUMA-7 establishes axi-cel as superior to the standard approach of platinum-base...
What radiation dose do you typically use for relapsed DLBCL following 6 cycles of R-CHOP?
There are several potential scenarios, all with different answers, so I will illustrate a few.Historically, second-line chemotherapy (e.g., R-ICE) would first be pursued for relapsed DLBCL, and if the disease was still responsive to chemotherapy (CR or PR), then the patient would proceed with high-d...
What is the best approach for patients with DLBCL with early relapse (< 6 months) after initially attaining a CR with 6 cycles RCHOP?
Early relapse, regardless of interim imaging, suggests chemorefractory disease. It may be that we selected a more chemo/rituxan resistant clone that comprised a smaller % initially that has now become dominant. Regardless of pathophysiology, I think for today we are stuck with the same paradigm: sal...
How do you incorporate CAR-T cell therapy for DLBCL in transplant-eligible patients?
The role of sequential therapy including CARs vs high dose chemotherapy + ASCT post primary induction failure/relapse in large cell lymphoma is a matter of active research. Given the present FDA indication of CARs is in relapsed/refractory large cell lymphoma after failure of at least 2 lines of pri...