Several studies have demonstrated the antitumor activity of first-generation somatostatin analogs (SSAs), primarily targeting somatostatin receptor (sstr) subtypes 2 and 5, in neuroendocrine tumors ...(NET). Pasireotide, a second-generation SSA, targets multiple sstr subtypes. We compared the efficacy and safety of pasireotide plus everolimus to everolimus alone in patients with advanced, well-differentiated, progressive pancreatic NET.
Patients were randomized 1 : 1 to receive a combination of everolimus (10 mg/day, orally) and pasireotide long-acting release (60 mg/28 days, intramuscularly) or everolimus alone (10 mg/day, orally); stratified by prior SSA use, and baseline serum chromogranin A and neuron-specific enolase. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary end points included overall survival, objective response rate, disease control rate, and safety. Biomarker response was evaluated in an exploratory analysis.
Of 160 patients enrolled, 79 were randomized to the combination arm and 81 to the everolimus arm. Baseline demographics and disease characteristics were similar between the treatment arms. No significant difference was observed in PFS: 16.8 months in combination arm versus 16.6 months in everolimus arm (hazard ratio, 0.99; 95% confidence interval, 0.64–1.54). Partial responses were observed in 20.3% versus 6.2% of patients in combination arm versus everolimus arm; however, overall disease control rate was similar (77.2% versus 82.7%, respectively). No significant improvement was observed in median overall survival. Adverse events were consistent with the known safety profile of both the drugs; grade 3 or 4 fasting hyperglycemia was seen in 37% versus 11% of patients, respectively.
The addition of pasireotide to everolimus was not associated with the improvement in PFS compared with everolimus alone in this study. Further studies to delineate mechanisms by which SSAs slow tumor growth in NET are warranted.
Abstract
Background: Several candidate BMs have been explored in randomized trials of BEV across tumor types with the aim of identifying patients (pts) deriving the most substantial benefit from BEV ...therapy. In phase III trials, baseline pVEGF-A and pVEGFR-2 showed potential predictive value in metastatic BC (AVADO, AVEREL), pancreatic cancer (AViTA), and gastric cancer (AVAGAST; VEGF-A only). The randomized phase III BEATRICE trial, evaluating the addition of BEV to adjuvant chemotherapy in pts with triple-negative early BC, includes a comprehensive program to identify potential BMs predicting efficacy and toxicity of BEV therapy. We report results for baseline pVEGF-A and pVEGFR-2.
Methods: After selection of chemotherapy (anthracycline and/or taxane), pts with T1a-T3 operable BC were randomized 1:1 to receive ≥4 cycles of chemotherapy either alone or with 1 year of BEV 5 mg/kg/wk equivalent. The primary endpoint is invasive disease-free survival (IDFS). pEDTA samples were collected from consenting pts at baseline (before treatment, after surgery), during study treatment, and at relapse. Pts were dichotomized using the median baseline concentration of each marker as the cut-off between high and low cohorts; further exploratory analyses were also performed by quartile.
Results: Between Dec 2007 and Mar 2010, 2591 pts were enrolled. Of these, 1273 (49%) consented to the BM study and 1178 (45%) were included in the BM-evaluable population (BEP). Overall, the BEP was representative of the ITT population except for lower proportions of Asian pts (12% vs 24%). IDFS was similar in the BEP and ITT populations. Baseline characteristics were balanced between arms in the BEP. Baseline pVEGF-A showed neither prognostic nor predictive value using the median as the cut-off, although with a third quartile (Q3) cut-off there was a more pronounced but non-significant differentiation between treatments (HR 0.92 low vs 0.64 high). High baseline pVEGFR-2 showed potential predictive value for BEV efficacy (HR 1.24 low vs 0.61 high; p=0.029).
Conclusions: Unlike trials in metastatic BC (AVADO, AVEREL), in the adjuvant setting, baseline pVEGF-A concentration did not show predictive value for BEV efficacy with a median cut-off. However, analyses using the Q3 cut-off suggest a trend toward predictive value. High baseline pVEGFR-2 was associated with greater BEV treatment effect, consistent with previous results in AVADO and AVEREL. The impact of differing biology in the adjuvant setting, lower median VEGF-A concentration than in the metastatic setting (77.0 vs 125.0–129.1 pg/mL), and the possible influence of surgery immediately before treatment require further investigation. Additional exploratory analyses are ongoing to provide better understanding of the BEATRICE dataset and the complex biology of angiogenesis, including additional markers, changes over time, and combination signatures.
Citation Information: Cancer Res 2012;72(24 Suppl):Abstract nr P3-06-34.
Abstract
Background: Bevacizumab (BEV), an anti-VEGF antibody, significantly enhanced progression-free survival in metastatic breast cancer (BC) (E2100, AVADO, RIBBON-1, RIBBON-2) and pathologic ...complete response rates in the neoadjuvant setting (GeparQuinto, NSABP B-40) when combined with chemotherapy (CT). The dependence of micro-metastases on angiogenesis Holmgren 1995 suggests that patients might benefit from anti-angiogenic strategies applied in the adjuvant setting. The BEATRICE trial was designed to test this hypothesis in patients with triple-negative BC, who have a poor prognosis and lack targeted options for treatment.
Methods: In this open-label randomized multinational phase III trial, patients with centrally confirmed triple-negative operable primary invasive BC (pT1a-pT3) were randomized 1:1 after definitive surgery to receive ≥4 cycles of either CT alone or the same CT + 1 year of BEV 5 mg/kg/wk equivalent. CT was anthracycline anth and/or taxane-based. Patients were stratified by nodal status (0 vs 1–3 vs ≥4 involved nodes), CT backbone (anth vs anth + taxane vs taxane), hormone receptor status (negative vs low), and surgery (breast-conserving vs mastectomy). The primary objective is to compare invasive disease-free survival (IDFS) Hudis 2007 with adjuvant CT ± 1 year of BEV. Secondary outcome measures are overall survival (OS), breast cancer-free interval, disease-free survival (DFS), distant DFS, and safety (NCI CTCAE v3.0). The sample size was calculated to provide 80% power for a HR=0.75 at α=0.05 assuming 5-year IDFS of 72.0% with CT vs 78.2% with CT + BEV with 388 events. BEATRICE also includes evaluation of potential predictive and prognostic biomarkers.
Results: Between Dec 2007 and Mar 2010, 2591 patients were randomized. At data cut-off (Feb 29, 2012), median follow-up was 32 months.
The mean CT exposure was balanced between treatment arms. Median BEV duration was 11.7 months. BEV was associated with an increased incidence of grade ≥3 congestive heart failure/left ventricular dysfunction (3% vs <1% with CT), grade ≥3 hypertension (12% vs <1%), and treatment discontinuation (BEV and/or CT: 20% vs 2%) but no increase in the risk of fatal adverse events (0.3% vs 0.2%). No new safety signals were observed.
Conclusion: There was no statistically significant improvement in IDFS with the addition of 1 year's BEV to adjuvant CT for triple-negative BC. Further follow-up is required to assess the impact of BEV on OS. The safety profile was consistent with previous reports in metastatic BC with a low incidence of fatal adverse events. Protocol-specified biomarker analyses are ongoing. Updated OS results are expected in 2013.
Citation Information: Cancer Res 2012;72(24 Suppl):Abstract nr S6-5.
Abstract
Background: Following infusion of tisagenlecleucel, quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) can be used to measure in vivo kinetics of CAR transgene. The utility of qPCR to inform ...individual pt treatment decisions and measure functional persistence is an active area of research. Objective: To determine if CAR transgene detection by qPCR can be used to inform treatment decisions.
Methods: Transgene levels in blood measured by qPCR from pivotal phase II studies in pts with relapsed/refractory pediatric and young adult acute lymphoblastic leukemia (pALL; ELIANA NCT02435849, N=75 and ENSIGN NCT02228096, N=29) and adult diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL; JULIET NCT02445248, N=93) were used to investigate the relationship between transgene persistence and clinical response.
Results: In both pALL and DLBCL, there were detectable CAR transgene levels by qPCR in both responders and nonresponders. The geometric mean maximal expansion (Cmax) was similar between responding and nonresponding DLBCL pts, while a 1.7-fold difference was observed in pALL pts. For both DLBCL and pALL, high inter-individual variability in transgene levels was noted. Similarly, higher CAR-T cell expansion from flow cytometry data pooled from responding pALL and pediatric chronic lymphocytic leukemia pts was observed vs nonresponding pts (Mueller KT, et al. Blood 2017), while the levels in DLBCL pts were comparatively lower in blood, likely due to partitioning of functional CAR-T cells to target sites including lymph nodes. The median time to maximal transgene level (Tmax) ranged from 9-10 days in DLBCL responders and nonresponders and pALL responders, while nonresponding pALL pts showed delayed expansion with median Tmax of 20 days. The median time corresponding to last quantifiable transgene level (Tlast) and the half-life estimated from the terminal slope of the cellular kinetic profile, two indicators of persistence, were higher in responding vs nonresponding pts with DLBCL and pALL. Despite this general trend, in some cases, transgene levels were not detectable at later time points in pts with continued response. Although the majority of responding pts show persistent transgene levels, some pts maintained a favorable clinical response despite a decline in transgene levels to below the level of quantification.
Conclusion: In both pALL and DLBCL, CAR transgene is initially detected at high levels with high variability in both responders and nonresponders. While the majority of responding pts tend to have persistent transgene levels, some pts maintain favorable clinical responses despite a lack of quantifiable transgene. These results indicate that transgene levels in peripheral blood are not definitive to guide clinical decisions in pALL and DLBCL. Further analysis is needed to understand how CAR transgene levels relate to disease burden and duration of response.
Citation Format: Rakesh Awasthi, Karen Thudium Mueller, Gregory A. Yanik, Constantine S. Tam, Susana Rives, Joseph P. McGuirk, Michael A. Pulsipher, Michael W. Boyer, Ulrich Jaeger, Andre Baruchel, Gary D. Myers, Peter Borchmann, Stephen J. Schuster, Heather Stefanski, Michael Bishop, Edward R. Waldron, Ozlem Anak, Abhijit Chakraborty, Eric Bleickardt, Stephane Wong, Lida Bubuteishvili Pacaud, Edmund K. Waller, Shannon L. Maude. Evaluation of in vivo chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) transgene levels in patients (pts) treated with tisagenlecleucel abstract. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2019; 2019 Mar 29-Apr 3; Atlanta, GA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2019;79(13 Suppl):Abstract nr CT237.
Background: Follicular lymphoma (FL) remains an incurable disease for most patients (pts), characterized by a relapsing and remitting pattern. For pts with relapsed/refractory (r/r) FL, treatment ...outcomes typically worsen with each subsequent line of therapy, highlighting an unmet need. Tisagenlecleucel (tisa-cel) has demonstrated clinical benefits and manageable safety in pediatric and young adult pts with r/r B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia and adult pts with r/r diffuse large B-cell lymphoma. In a prior phase (Ph) 2a study of 14 pts with r/r FL, 71% achieved durable complete remission with tisa-cel (Chong et al. ICML 2019). Here we present a planned interim analysis of ELARA, a Ph 2, international trial of tisa-cel in adults with r/r FL.
Methods: Adults with histologically confirmed FL (grades Gr 1-3A) being r/r within 6 mo after second-/later-line therapy (including an anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody with an alkylating agent) or relapsed after autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplant (autoHSCT), and with ECOG performance score of 0-1 were eligible. Pts with histologic transformation, prior allogeneic HSCT, or active CNS involvement were excluded. All pts received lymphodepleting chemotherapy followed by tisa-cel infusion of 0.6-6×108 CAR-T cells (bridging therapy prior to infusion was permitted). Disease was reassessed prior to infusion for all pts who received bridging therapy to establish a new baseline. After infusion, disease assessments were performed every 3 mo. The primary endpoint was complete response rate (CRR) based on best response by central review (Lugano 2014 criteria). Pts evaluable for efficacy had measurable disease at infusion and ≥6 mo follow-up from infusion or discontinued early. Secondary endpoints included overall response rate (ORR), duration of response (DOR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and safety.
Results: As of May 26, 2020, 122 pts were screened, 98 were enrolled, 97 received tisa-cel (median follow-up, 6.5 mo), and 52 were evaluable for efficacy (median follow-up, 9.9 mo). At study entry, median age among treated pts was 57 y (range, 29-73), 66% of pts were male, 84% had stage III-IV disease, and 60% had a FLIPI score ≥3. The median number of prior lines of therapy was 4 (range, 2-13), including prior autoHSCT in 36%; 77% were refractory to the last prior treatment (75% ≥2 prior regimens), and 60% had disease progression within 2 y of initial anti-CD20-containing treatment. Overall, 43% of pts received bridging therapy; 18% were treated as outpatient. Of the first 52 pts evaluable for efficacy, CRR was 65.4% (34/52; 99.5% CI, 45.1-82.4) in the intent-to-treat (ITT) population and 71.1% (33/46; 99.5% CI, 56.5-84.0) in the per-protocol (PP) population; ORR was 82.7% (43/52; 95% CI, 69.7-91.8) in the ITT population and 84.8% (39/46; 95% CI, 71.1-93.7) in the PP population. In pts with best response of CR, probability of response lasting ≥6 mo was 89.7% (84.4% for all responding pts CR+PR). CRR and ORR were consistent across key prognostic subgroups and per investigator assessment. Median DOR, PFS, OS, and time to next antilymphoma treatment were not reached. Of 97 pts evaluable for safety, 69% experienced Gr ≥3 adverse events, most commonly neutropenia (Gr 3, 13%; Gr 4, 15%); 48% of pts had cytokine release syndrome related to tisa-cel (CRS; Gr 1, 29%; Gr 2, 20%; Gr ≥3, 0%; per Lee scale). To treat CRS, 15% of pts required tocilizumab and 3% required steroids. Any grade serious neurologic events (NEs; per CTCAE v4.03) occurred in 10% of pts; 2% had Gr ≥3 and all recovered (1 pt developed Gr 4 immune-effector cell neurotoxicity syndrome related to tisa-cel concomitant with possible HHV6 encephalitis; 1 pt developed Gr 3 delirium unrelated to tisa-cel after progression of disease and start of salvage therapy). Median time to CRS and serious NEs onset were 4 and 8.5 d, respectively, with respective median time to resolution of 4 and 2 d. Three pts died from progressive disease; no deaths were treatment-related.
Conclusions: Preliminary data from ELARA suggest that tisa-cel is effective in extensively treated r/r FL, resulting in high CRRs and ORRs, including in high-risk pts. The overall safety profile is favorable, with no severe CRS and very low NE reported, requiring limited anticytokine therapy. Updated safety and efficacy results on 97 pts (including dose and cellular kinetics data) will be presented at the meeting.
Fowler:TG Therapeutics: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novartis: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding. Dickinson:Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Merck Sharp & Dohme: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Dreyling:Astra Zeneca: Consultancy; Abbvie: Research Funding; Roche: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Bayer: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Beigene: Consultancy; Gilead: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy. Martinez-Lopez:Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis: Consultancy; Janssen-cilag: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS: Consultancy, Research Funding; Incyte: Consultancy, Research Funding. Kolstad:Merck: Research Funding; Nordic Nanovector: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Popplewell:Pfizer: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding. Chavez:Genentech: Speakers Bureau; Epizyme: Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Consultancy; Verastem: Consultancy; AbbVie: Consultancy; Karyopharm: Consultancy; BeiGene: Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy; Kite, a Gilead Company: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Consultancy; AstraZeneca: Speakers Bureau; Morphosys: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Merck: Research Funding; Bayer: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy. Bachy:Beigene: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche, Celgene, Amgen, Janssen, Gilead, Novartis, Sanofi: Honoraria; Amgen: Research Funding; Roche, Gilead: Consultancy. Kato:AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Celgene, Chugai, Eisai, Janssen, and Novartis: Consultancy; hugai, Takeda, Kyowa-Kirin, Abbvie, Novartis, Eisai, Janssen, Celgene, Ono: Research Funding; Chugai, Takeda, MSD, Kyowa-Kirin, Janssen, Celgene, Ono, Mundi, Dainippon-Sumitomo, Novartis: Honoraria. Harigae:Novartis, Chugai, BMS: Honoraria. Kersten:BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES (paid by any for-profit health care company); Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES (paid by any for-profit health care company), Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES (paid by any for-profit health care company); Janssen/Cilag: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES (paid by any for-profit health care company); Miltenyi Biotech: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES (paid by any for-profit health care company); Takeda: Research Funding; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES (paid by any for-profit health care company), Research Funding; Kite/Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES (paid by any for-profit health care company); MSD: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES (paid by any for-profit health care company); Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES (paid by any for-profit health care company). Andreadis:Novartis: Research Funding; Gilead/Kite: Consultancy; Merck: Research Funding; Incyte: Consultancy; Karyopharm: Honoraria; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria; BMS/Celgene/Juno: Honoraria, Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Riedell:Bayer: Honoraria; Karyopharm Therapeutics: Honoraria; Morphosys: Research Funding; Celgene/Bristol-Myers Squibb Company: Honoraria, Research Funding; Verastem Oncology: Honoraria; Kite Pharmaceuticals/Gilead: Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Nastoupil:Karus Therapeutics: Research Funding; Gamida Cell: Honoraria; Gilead/KITE: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Pfizer: Honoraria, Research Funding; Bayer: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Honoraria, Research Funding; Genentech, Inc.: Honoraria, Research Funding. von Tresckow:Takeda: Honoraria, Other: Travel support, Research Funding; Amgen: Honoraria; Pfizer: Honoraria; Kite/Gilead: Honoraria; Roche: Honoraria; MSD Sharp & Dohme: Honoraria, Research Funding; Takeda: Honoraria, Other: Travel support, Research Funding; Novartis: Other: Travel support, Research Funding. Ferreri:Morphosys: Research Funding; Hutchinson: Research Funding; BMS: Research Funding; Gilead: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Teshima:Sharp & Dohme Corp: Consultancy, Honoraria; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria; Pfizer Japan Inc.: Honoraria; Kyowa Kirin Co., Ltd.: Honoraria, Research Funding; TEIJIN PHARMA LIMITED: Honoraria; The Center of Innovation Program from Japan Science and Technology Agency: Other; Fuji Pharma Co., Ltd.: Honoraria; NIPPON SHINYAKU CO., LTD.: Honoraria; Janssen Pharmaceutical K.K.: Other; Japan Society f
Background
Quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) is an analytical method that has been used to investigate the in vivo kinetics of chimeric receptor antigen (CAR) transgene following the ...infusion of tisagenlecleucel. B cell aplasia, likely an “on-target toxicity” of tisagenlecleucel, has been considered a measure of functional persistence. (Maude SL et al. Blood 2015;125(26):4017-4023) Although the CAR transgene can be detected in peripheral blood of tisagenlecleucel treated patients, it is unclear whether CAR transgene detection by qPCR could be reliably used to inform treatment decision in an individual patient.
Methods
Transgene levels in blood measured by qPCR from pivotal phase II studies in relapsed/refractory (r/r) pediatric and young adult acute lymphoblastic leukemia (B-ALL) patients (pts) (ELIANA NCT02435849, N=75; ENSIGN NCT02228096, N=29) and adult diffuse large B cell lymphoma (DLBCL) pts (JULIET NCT02445248, N=93) were used to investigate the relationship between transgene persistence and clinical response.
Results
To determine whether CAR qPCR measurements are associated with or predictive of response, CAR transgene levels and timing of peak levels were examined. In both ALL and DLBCL pts, there were detectable CAR transgene levels by qPCR in both responders and non-responders. The geometric mean maximal expansion (geo mean Cmax) was similar between responding and non-responding adult DLBCL pts, while 1.7 fold differences were observed in pediatric ALL pts (geo mean Cmax in copies/µg: responders, 32700, n=79; non-responders, 19500, n=10; Table 1). For both DLBCL and ALL pts, high inter-individual variability in transgene levels was noted. Similarly, higher CAR-T cell expansion from flow cytometry data pooled from responding pediatric ALL and chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) pts were observed relative to non-responding pts (Mueller KT et al. Blood 2017;130(21):2317-2325), while the levels in DLBCL pts were comparatively lower in blood, likely due to partitioning of functional CAR-T cells to the target sites including lymph nodes.
The median time to maximal transgene level ranged from 9-10 days in DLBCL responders and non-responders and pediatric ALL responders, while non-responding pediatric ALL pts showed delayed expansion with median Tmax of 20 days. The median time corresponding to last quantifiable transgene level (Tlast), an indicator of persistence, was higher in responding pts compared to non-responding pts, indicating a trend for longer persistence in both DLBCL and ALL pts with continued response (Table 1). Similarly, the half-life estimated from the terminal slope of the cellular kinetic profile, an additional indicator of persistence, was higher in responding pts relative to non-responding pts for both DLBCL and ALL (Table 1). Despite this general trend, in some cases, transgene levels were not detectable at later time points in pts with continued response.
The swimmer plot for representative responder ALL (Figure 1a) and DLBCL pts (Figure 1b) with responses and transgene levels demonstrate that although the majority of responding pts show persistent transgene levels, some pts maintained a favorable clinical response despite a decline in transgene levels to below the level of quantification of 50 copies/µg.
Conclusion
In both ALL and DLBCL, CAR transgene is initially detected at high levels with high variability in both responders and non-responders. While the majority of responding pts tend to have persistent transgene levels, some pts maintain favorable clinical responses despite a lack of quantifiable transgene. These results indicate that qPCR testing for CAR transgene in blood of tisagenlecleucel treated pts should not be used for making treatment decisions for individual pts. In addition, the qPCR measurements in peripheral blood do not reflect on the trafficking of CAR positive cells to sites outside peripheral blood.
The assessment by flow cytometry remains an important assay to distinguish high expression in responding vs non-responding pts in ALL and CLL, and further evaluation of target tissue is needed in DLBCL to understand the utility of CAR expression as a means to distinguish responder and non-responders. Also, further data are needed to improve our understanding of how CAR transgene levels relate to disease burden and duration of response and whether this information is clinically useful.
Awasthi:Exelixis: Equity Ownership; Celgene: Equity Ownership; Novartis Institutes for Biomedical Research: Employment. Mueller:Novartis Institutes for Biomedical Research: Employment; Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Equity Ownership, Other: Patent pending. Tam:Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BeiGene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Rives:Amgen: Consultancy, Other: advisory board ; Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Consultancy, Other: Symposia, advisory boards ; Jazz Pharma: Consultancy, Other: Symposia, advisory boards ; Shire: Consultancy, Other: Symposia, advisory boards . McGuirk:Bellicum Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Fresenius Biotech: Research Funding; Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Honoraria, Other: speaker, Research Funding; Astellas Pharma: Research Funding; Gamida Cell: Research Funding; Kite Pharma: Honoraria, Other: travel accommodations, expenses, speaker ; Pluristem Ltd: Research Funding. Pulsipher:Adaptive Biotech: Consultancy, Research Funding; Amgen: Honoraria; CSL Behring: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Jaeger:Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Mundipharma: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda-Millenium: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda-Millenium: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; AOP Orphan: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bioverativ: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Infinity: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; GSK: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; MSD: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Baruchel:Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Shire: Research Funding; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel, accommodations or expenses; Amgen: Consultancy; Roche: Consultancy; Servier: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy. Myers:Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Balke-Want:Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Honoraria. Schuster:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Merck: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Dava Oncology: Consultancy, Honoraria; Nordic Nanovector: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Genentech: Honoraria, Research Funding. Stefanski:Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Bishop:Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Speakers Bureau; Juneau Therapeutics: Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; United Healthcare: Employment. Waldron:Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Anak:Novartis Pharma AG: Employment. Chakraborty:Novartis Institutes for Biomedical Research: Employment. Bleickardt:Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Employment. Wong:Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Bubuteishvili Pacaud:Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Waller:Kalytera: Consultancy; Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celldex: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Other: Travel Expenses, EHA, Research Funding; Cambium Medical Technologies: Consultancy, Equity Ownership. Maude:Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.
PDF
