PURPOSE: Approximately 30%-40% of patients with relapsed/refractory (R/R) large B-cell lymphoma (LBCL) infused with CD19-targeted chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cells achieve durable responses. Consensus guidelines suggest avoiding bendamustine before apheresis, but specific data in this setting are lacking. We report distinct outcomes after CAR T-cell therapy according to previous bendamustine exposure. METHODS: The study included CAR T-cell recipients from seven European sites. Safety, efficacy, and CAR T-cell expansion kinetics were analyzed according to preapheresis bendamustine exposure. Additional studies on the impact of the washout period and bendamustine dose were performed. Inverse probability treatment weighting (IPTW) and propensity score matching (PSM) analyses were carried out for all efficacy comparisons between bendamustine-exposed and bendamustine-naïve patients. RESULTS: The study included 439 patients with R/R LBCL infused with CD19-targeted commercial CAR T cells, of whom 80 had received bendamustine before apheresis. Exposed patients had significantly lower CD3⁺ cells and platelets at apheresis. These patients had a lower overall response rate (ORR, 53% v 72%; P < .01), a shorter progression-free survival (PFS, 3.1 v 6.2 months; P = .04), and overall survival (OS, 10.3 v 23.5 months; P = .01) in comparison with the bendamustine-naïve group. Following adjustment methods for baseline variables, these differences were mitigated. Focusing on the impact of bendamustine washout before apheresis, those with recent (<9 months) exposure (N = 42) displayed a lower ORR (40% v 72%; P < .01), shorter PFS (1.3 v 6.2 months; P < .01), and OS (4.6 v 23.5 months; P < .01) in comparison with bendamustine-naïve patients. These differences remained significant after IPTW and PSM analysis. Conversely, the cumulative dose of bendamustine before apheresis did not affect CAR-T efficacy outcomes. CONCLUSION: Recent bendamustine exposure before apheresis was associated with negative treatment outcomes after CD19-targeted CAR T-cell therapy and should be therefore avoided in CAR T-cell candidates.

Patients with cancer are poorly represented in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) series, and heterogeneous series concerning hematology patients have been published. This study aimed to analyze the impact of COVID-19 in patients with lymphoma. We present a multicenter retrospective study from 19 centers in Madrid, Spain, evaluating risk factors for mortality in adult patients with COVID-19 and lymphoma. About 177 patients (55.9% male) were included with a median follow-up of 27 days and a median age of 70 years. At the time of COVID-19 diagnosis, 49.7% of patients were on active treatment. The overall mortality rate was 34.5%. Age >70 years, confusion, urea concentration, respiratory rate, blood pressure, and age >65 score ≥2, heart disease, and chronic kidney disease were associated with higher mortality risk (P < 0.05). Active disease significantly increased the risk of death (hazard ratio, 2.43; 95% confidence interval, 1.23-4.77; P = 0.01). However, active treatment did not modify mortality risk and no differences were found between the different therapeutic regimens. The persistence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2-positive polymerase chain reaction after week 6 was significantly associated with mortality (54.5% versus 1.4%; P < 0.001). We confirm an increased mortality compared with the general population. In view of our results, any interruption or delay in the start of treatment should be questioned given that active treatment has not been demonstrated to increase mortality risk and that achieving disease remission could lead to better outcomes.

Real-world evidence comparing the efficacy of chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy against that of the previous standard of care (SOC) for refractory large B-cell lymphoma (LBCL) is scarce. We retrospectively collected data from patients with LBCL according to SCHOLAR-1 criteria treated with commercial CAR T-cell therapy in Spain (204 patients included and 192 treated, 101 with axicabtagene ciloleucel [axi-cel], and 91 with tisagenlecleucel [tisa-cel]) and compared the results with a historical refractory population of patients (n = 81) obtained from the GELTAMO-IPI study. We observed superior efficacy for CAR-T therapy (for both axi-cel and tisa-cel) over pSOC, with longer progression-free survival (PFS) (median of 5.6 vs. 4–6 months, p ≤ 0.001) and overall survival (OS) (median of 15 vs. 8 months, p < 0.001), independently of other prognostic factors (HR: 0.59 (95% CI: 0.44–0.80); p < 0.001] for PFS, and 0.45 [(95% CI: 0.31–0.64)] for OS). Within the CAR-T cohort, axi-cel showed longer PFS (median of 7.3 versus 2.8 months, respectively, p = 0.027) and OS (58% versus 42% at 12 months, respectively, p = 0.048) than tisa-cel. These differences were maintained in the multivariable analysis. On the other hand, axi-cel was independently associated with a higher risk of severe cytokine release syndrome and neurotoxicity. Our results suggest that the efficacy of CAR-T cell therapy is superior to pSOC in the real-world setting. Furthermore, axi-cel could be superior in efficacy to tisa-cel, although more toxic, in this group of refractory patients according to SCHOLAR-1 criteria.

Chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cell–related HLH/MAS is an unusual manifestation of severe cytokine release syndrome (CRS) with poor prognosis and a challenging diagnosis. The establishment of specific diagnosis criteria is essential, and the combination of several techniques for CAR T‐cell follow‐up, allows a more precise management of this complication.