Lisocabtagene maraleucel in chronic lymphocytic leukaemia and small lymphocytic lymphoma (TRANSCEND CLL 004): a multicentre, open-label, single-arm, phase 1–2 study

Tanya Siddiqi, David G. Maloney, Saad S. Kenderian, Danielle M. Brander, Kathleen Dorritie, Jacob Soumerai, Peter A. Riedell, Nirav N. Shah, Rajneesh Nath, Bita Fakhri, Deborah M. Stephens, Shuo Ma, Tatyana Feldman, Scott R. Solomon, Stephen J. Schuster, Serena K. Perna, Sherilyn A. Tuazon, San San Ou, Eniko Papp, Leanne PeiserYizhe Chen, William G. Wierda

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

21 Scopus citations

Abstract

Background: Patients with relapsed or refractory chronic lymphocytic leukaemia or small lymphocytic lymphoma for whom treatment has failed with both Bruton tyrosine kinase (BTK) inhibitor and venetoclax have few treatment options and poor outcomes. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of lisocabtagene maraleucel (liso-cel) at the recommended phase 2 dose in patients with relapsed or refractory chronic lymphocytic leukaemia or small lymphocytic lymphoma. Methods: We report the primary analysis of TRANSCEND CLL 004, an open-label, single-arm, phase 1–2 study conducted in the USA. Patients aged 18 years or older with relapsed or refractory chronic lymphocytic leukaemia or small lymphocytic lymphoma and at least two previous lines of therapy, including a BTK inhibitor, received an intravenous infusion of liso-cel at one of two target dose levels: 50 × 106 (dose level 1) or 100 × 106 (dose level 2, DL2) chimeric antigen receptor-positive T cells. The primary endpoint was complete response or remission (including with incomplete marrow recovery), assessed by independent review according to the 2018 International Workshop on Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia criteria, in efficacy-evaluable patients with previous BTK inhibitor progression and venetoclax failure (the primary efficacy analysis set) at DL2 (null hypothesis of ≤5%). This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03331198. Findings: Between Jan 2, 2018, and June 16, 2022, 137 enrolled patients underwent leukapheresis at 27 sites in the USA. 117 patients received liso-cel (median age 65 years [IQR 59–70]; 37 [32%] female and 80 [68%] male; 99 [85%] White, five [4%] Black or African American, two [2%] other races, and 11 [9%] unknown race; median of five previous lines of therapy [IQR 3–7]); all 117 participants had received and had treatment failure on a previous BTK inhibitor. A subset of patients had also experienced venetoclax failure (n=70). In the primary efficacy analysis set at DL2 (n=49), the rate of complete response or remission (including with incomplete marrow recovery) was statistically significant at 18% (n=9; 95% CI 9–32; p=0·0006). In patients treated with liso-cel, grade 3 cytokine release syndrome was reported in ten (9%) of 117 (with no grade 4 or 5 events) and grade 3 neurological events were reported in 21 (18%; one [1%] grade 4, no grade 5 events). Among 51 deaths on the study, 43 occurred after liso-cel infusion, of which five were due to treatment-emergent adverse events (within 90 days of liso-cel infusion). One death was related to liso-cel (macrophage activation syndrome-haemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis). Interpretation: A single infusion of liso-cel was shown to induce complete response or remission (including with incomplete marrow recovery) in patients with relapsed or refractory chronic lymphocytic leukaemia or small lymphocytic lymphoma, including patients who had experienced disease progression on a previous BTK inhibitor and venetoclax failure. The safety profile was manageable. Funding: Juno Therapeutics, a Bristol-Myers Squibb Company.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)641-654
Number of pages14
JournalThe Lancet
Volume402
Issue number10402
DOIs
StatePublished - Aug 19 2023

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • General Medicine

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Lisocabtagene maraleucel in chronic lymphocytic leukaemia and small lymphocytic lymphoma (TRANSCEND CLL 004): a multicentre, open-label, single-arm, phase 1–2 study'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this