Comparison of real-world survival outcomes and time toxicity of CAR T-cell versus bispecific antibody therapies in relapsed/refractory follicular lymphoma: A multicenter cohort from 15 US academic institutions
Abstract
Abstract Background Chimeric antigen receptor T-cell (CAR-T) and bispecific antibody (BsAb) therapies are both effective for patients with relapsed/refractory (R/R) follicular lymphoma (FL), but differ in treatment schedules and associated “time toxicity,” or contact days spent physically interacting with the healthcare system. While contact days can be estimated from clinical trials, real-world data provides a more nuanced depiction of treatment-related time burden, which may guide treatment decision-making. The comparative time toxicity of CAR-T vs BsAb in R/R FL is not defined. Methods We conducted a multicenter retrospective study of adults with R/R grade 1-3A FL who received standard-of-care CAR-T (axi-cel, tisa-cel, liso-cel) or BsAb (mosunetuzumab, epcoritamab) in the third-line or later setting before Jan 1, 2025. Time toxicity was defined as outpatient or inpatient days with physical health care system contact, counting multiple visits on the same day as only one day. All days after treatment initiation were counted, regardless of disease progression, therapy completion, or relation to FL therapy. Median contact days over 1-year time horizon were compared, stratified by CAR-T vs BsAb, prior lines of therapy (LOT, 2 vs 3+), and time intervals (0-1, 1-3, 3-6, 6-9, and 9-12 months). Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were calculated from day of CAR-T infusion or day 1, cycle 1 for BsAb. Cox regression and propensity matching (by age, ECOG, refractory to prior LOT, POD24) were used to assess predictors and survival associations with contact days. Results Among 209 patients from 15 U.S. academic centers, median age was 64, 37% were female, 61% received CAR-T (80% axi-cel, 7% liso-cel, 13% tisa-cel) and 39% BsAb (93% mosun, 7% epcor). Most had Grade 1-2 FL (72%), advanced stage (84%), and extranodal disease (51%). Median prior LOT was 3 (range 2-15), 41% were refractory to prior LOT, and 52% had POD24. Median number of BsAb doses was 10 (range 1-36). Patients receiving BsAb were significantly older (p<.01) and had higher CIRS comorbidity scores (p<.02) in both 2 and 3+ prior LOT cohorts, and had higher ECOG scores (p=.01) and were less likely to be refractory to prior LOT (p=.029) in 3+ LOT cohort. There were no differences in POD24 rates between CAR-T and BsAb. Median PFS for the entire cohort was 3.6 yrs; median OS was not reached. In the 2 prior LOT cohort (N=75), 60% received CAR-T and 40% BsAb. With median follow-up of 1.5 years, median PFS was not reached for CAR-T and 1.6 yrs for BsAb (p<.0001). In the 3+ prior LOT cohort (N=134), 62% received CAR-T and 38% BsAb. With median follow-up of 2 yrs, median PFS was 3.6 yrs for CAR-T and 1.6 yrs for BsAb (p=.0044). In propensity matched analysis, PFS was shorter for BsAb in both 2 LOT (HR 9.0, 95% CI 1.14-71.04, p=.037) and 3+ LOT (HR 3.25, 95% CI 1.06-9.97, p=.039) cohorts as compared to CAR-T. There were no significant differences in OS between CAR-T and BsAb. Median contact days were significantly higher for CAR-T vs BsAb in the 0-1 month interval: 19 vs 8 days in 2 LOT (p<.0001) and 18 vs 7 days in 3+ LOT (p<.0001) cohorts. There were no differences in contact days between CAR-T vs BsAb in subsequent time intervals. Over 1 year, CAR-T had significantly more time toxicity than BsAb: median 51 vs 36 contact days in 2 LOT (p<.0001) and 64 vs 38 days in 3L+ LOT (p<.0001) cohorts; these remained significant in the matched analysis. B symptoms (p=.04) and Grade ≥3 cytopenias (p=.007) were associated with higher contact days in 3+ LOT cohort in univariable analysis. Higher contact days were associated with inferior PFS (HR 1.01, 95% CI 1.00-1.02, p=.032) and OS (HR 1.01, 95% CI 1.00-1.02, p=.038) in 3+ LOT cohort regardless of treatment type. Discussion In this large real-world cohort of patients with R/R FL, CAR-T therapy resulted in better PFS but more time toxicity over the first year as compared to BsAb therapy. Excess time toxicity from CAR-T was driven by more contact days in the first month of treatment. This study provides benchmark data for counseling patients about expected time burden of CAR-T (51-64 days) and BsAb (36-38 days) over the first year of these therapies. Further, with superior PFS of CAR-T in this study and minimal impact of time toxicity on survival outcomes, these data can be used to better support shared decision-making in R/R FL by addressing patient preferences regarding both contact days as well as duration of disease control.
Article Details
Authors (30)
Ajay Major
Diana Abbott
1University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, United States
Jordan Snyder
Department of Science and Environment, Centre for Mathematical Modeling - Human Health and Disease, IMFUFA, Roskilde University
Nausheen Ahmed
5University of Kansas Health System, Division of Hematological Malignancy and Cellular Therapeutics, Kansas City, United States
Alline Amorim
4Mayo Clinic Rochester, Rochester, United States
Jose Villasboas Bisneto
1Mayo Clinic, Rochester, United States
John Sharp
17Division of Hematology, Ohio State University, Columbus, OH
Timothy Voorhees
1The Ohio State University, James Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, United States
Samin Houshyar
6University of Rochester Wilmot Cancer Institute, Rochester, United States
Danielle Wallace
BIDMC, Boston, Massachusetts, United States
Arjab Adhikari
7Washington University in St. Louis Siteman Cancer Center, St. Louis, United States
Dilan Patel
9Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis, Division of Oncology, St. Louis, United States
Christopher Wanjiku
4University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, United States
Charlotte Wagner
Allison Bock
4Division of Hematology and Hematologic Malignancies, Huntsman Cancer Institute, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, United States
Taylor Brooks
1Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Department of Hematology and Medical Oncology, Cleveland, United States
Haya Al Any
11Mayo Clinic Arizona, Scottsdale, United States
Mazie Tsang
2Mayo Clinic Comprehensive Cancer Center, Phoenix, United States
Mohamed Rajab
12Mayo Clinic Jacksonville, Jacksonville, United States
Madiha Iqbal
Nidhi Desai
13University of Minnesota Masonic Cancer Center, Minneapolis, United States
Supriya Gupta
2University of Minnesota, Division of Hematology, Oncology and Transplantation, Minneapolis, United States
Nicole Altomare
2Robert H Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medicine, Chicago, United States
Reem Karmali
2Robert H Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medicine, Chicago, United States
Daniel Trotier
9University of Wisconsin, Carbone Cancer, Division of Hematology, Medical Oncology and Palliative Care, Madison, United States
Priyanka Pophali
9University of Wisconsin, Carbone Cancer, Division of Hematology, Medical Oncology and Palliative Care, Madison, United States
Edd Ricker
16Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, United States
Hua-Jay Cherng
16Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, United States
Arjun Gupta
13University of Minnesota Masonic Cancer Center, Minneapolis, United States
Brian Hill
1Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Department of Hematology and Medical Oncology, Cleveland, United States