All content on this site is intended for healthcare professionals only. By acknowledging this message and accessing the information on this website you are confirming that you are a Healthcare Professional. If you are a patient or carer, please visit the Lymphoma Coalition.

The Lymphoma Hub uses cookies on this website. They help us give you the best online experience. By continuing to use our website without changing your cookie settings, you agree to our use of cookies in accordance with our updated Cookie Policy

Introducing

Now you can personalise
your Lymphoma Hub experience!

Bookmark content to read later

Select your specific areas of interest

View content recommended for you

Find out more
  TRANSLATE

The Lymphoma Hub website uses a third-party service provided by Google that dynamically translates web content. Translations are machine generated, so may not be an exact or complete translation, and the Lymphoma Hub cannot guarantee the accuracy of translated content. The Lymphoma Hub and its employees will not be liable for any direct, indirect, or consequential damages (even if foreseeable) resulting from use of the Google Translate feature. For further support with Google Translate, visit Google Translate Help.

Steering CommitteeAbout UsNewsletterContact
LOADING
You're logged in! Click here any time to manage your account or log out.
LOADING
You're logged in! Click here any time to manage your account or log out.
2020-06-05T14:10:43.000Z

Primary analysis of phase I/II of the ZUMA-6 trial – axicabtagene ciloleucel plus atezolizumab for patients with refractory DLBCL

Jun 5, 2020
Share:

Bookmark this article

The anti-CD19 chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy, axicabtagene ciloleucel (axi-cel), was approved in the US and Europe for the treatment of adult patients with relapsed/refractory (R/R) large B-cell lymphoma (LBCL) following two or more prior lines of therapy.1 The approvals were based on the results from the ZUMA-1 study, and the long-term results can be found on the Lymphoma Hub here.

The programmed death receptor 1 (PD-1) and its ligand (PD-L1) immune checkpoint axis is imperative for physiological immune regulation but is dysregulated in a number of cancers, resulting in decreased immune-mediated tumor destruction.2 Upregulation of PD-1 on CAR T-cells and PD-L1 on tumor cells has been observed following CAR T-cell infusion, which may jeopardize treatment effectiveness.3

The phase I/II of the ZUMA-6 (NCT02926833) study is currently investigating the safety and efficacy of axi-cel in combination with the humanized, anti-PD-L1 monoclonal antibody, atezolizumab (atezo), for the treatment of adult patients with R/R diffuse LBCL (DLBCL). The study aims to evaluate the hypothesis that immune checkpoint blockade may augment CAR T-cell activity.3

At the 2020 American Association for Cancer Research (AACR) virtual annual meeting, Caron Jacobson presented the results from the phase II portion of the ZUMA-6 study – below is a summary.3

 ZUMA-6

  • Data cutoff: February 21, 2019
  • Median follow-up: 10.2 months
  • Primary endpoints: Dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs; phase I) and complete response rate (phase II)

Patient eligibility

  • R/R disease was defined as no response to the last chemotherapy or relapse ≤ 12 months following autologous stem cell transplant (auto-SCT)
  • Prior therapy must have included an anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody and anthracycline
  • Patients with DLBCL were screened, and those that met the inclusion criteria were enrolled at the time of T-cell collection

Phase I

  • The phase I (n = 12) portion was a 3 × 3 design dose schedule finding study (Figure 1)
  • Each patient received four fixed doses of atezo, one every 21 days, which differed by the time of the first atezo dose, with respect to axi-cel infusion
  • No DLTs were observed in the first three patients in Cohorts 1 and 2
  • One DLT was observed in the first three patients of Cohort 3 due to prolonged cytopenia
    • Three more patients were enrolled, and no DLTs were observed

Phase II

  • The dosing schedule employed in the Cohort 3 of phase I (Figure 1) was taken forward to the phase II dose schedule expansion, which enrolled a further 22 patients
  • The total number of patients receiving the recommended phase II dosing schedule: 28

Figure 1. Study design for phase I/II portions of the ZUMA-6 study3


Atezo, atezolizumab; axi-cel, axicabtagene ciloleucel; Cy, cyclophosphamide; DLT, dose limiting toxicity; flu, fludarabine

Results

Results presented represent the phase I Cohort 3 and phase II portions of this study, unless stated otherwise.

Patient characteristics

  • All patients enrolled across the study (N = 34) received axi-cel and ≥ one dose of atezo
  • Ten patients did not receive all four doses of atezo, for reasons including
    • disease progression (n = 3)
    • adverse events (AEs; n = 6)
    • death (n = 1)
  • Patient characteristics are presented in Table 1

Table1. Baseline patient characteristics and tumor PD-L1 expression3

ECOG, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group; IPI, International Prognostic Index

*H = intensity score multiplied by the % of cells that were positive for each level. Four patients had missing data; +1, +2, and +3 refer to weak, moderate, and strong staining for PD-L1 using the VENTANA PD-L1 assay. Four patients had missing data

Characteristic

Phase I Cohort 3 + phase II (n = 28)

Median age, years (range)

58 (42 – 71)

Male, %

57

ECOG performance status, %

0

1

 

61

39

Disease stage, %

II

III or IV

 

21

79

IPI score, %

0 – 2

3 – 4

 

54

46

Prior therapies, %

≥ 2

≥ 3

 

86

50

Primary refractory disease, %

14

PD-L1 expression

Median baseline tumor cell PD-L1 H score (range)*

PD-L1 immune infiltrate intensity score, %

   +1

   +2

   +3

 

40 (0 – 240)

  

25

25

39

 AEs

  • The most common Grade ≥ 3 treatment-emergent AEs (TEAEs) were cytopenias, electrolyte abnormalities and encephalopathy
  • Grade ≥ 3 AEs were associated with axi-cel, atezo or both in 39%, 14% and 25% of patients, respectively
  • One Grade 5 AE, not believed to be treatment-related, was observed on day +22 following axi-cel infusion, resulting in multiorgan failure and death
  • Cytokine release syndrome (CRS) was experienced in 96% of patients with Grade 3 CRS observed in 4% of patients. None of the patients experienced Grade 4 or 5 CRS
    • median time to onset of CRS was 2 days (1–13) with a median duration of 7 days (1–92)
    • all events were resolved by the data cutoff
  • Neurotoxicity was experienced in 68% of patients with Grade 3 or 4 neurotoxicity observed in 29% of patients. None of the patients experienced Grade 5 neurotoxicity
    • median time to onset of neurotoxicity was 6 days (1–23) with a median duration of 9 days (2–60)
    • two patients had ongoing events at the data cutoff: one patient with Grade 1 tremor and one patient with hypoesthesia

 Efficacy

  • Patient outcomes to axi-cel + atezo are presented in Figure 2 and Table 2
  • The median duration of response (DOR), progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were not reached (Table 2)
  • Four patients demonstrated late conversions as follows:
    • Partial response – complete response (n = 3)
    • Stable disease – complete response (n = 1)

 Figure 2. Patient response rates3

CR, complete response; ORR, overall response rate; PD, progressive disease; PR, partial response; SD, stable disease

Table 2. Patient outcomes3

CI, confidence interval; DOR, duration of response; NE, not evaluable; NR, not reached; OS, overall survival; PFS, progression-free survival

*February 21, 2019

 

Phase I Cohort 3 + phase II (n = 28)

Patients with ongoing response at cutoff*, %

46

DOR

Median, months

   95% CI

6-month estimate, %

 

NR

1.8 – NE

62

PFS

Median, months

   95% CI

6-month estimate, %

 

NR

3.1 – NE

50

OS

Median, months

   95% CI

6-month estimate, %

 

NR

12 – NE

71

 Conclusions

The administration of atezo following axi-cel demonstrated, with a manageable safety profile, that it was consistent with that reported in the ZUMA-1 study. Although there has been no statistical comparison between patient outcomes in the ZUMA-6 vs ZUMA-1 studies, the combination of axi-cel with atezo demonstrated similar clinical efficacy to axi-cel alone. Similarly, the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic profiles of axi-cel when administered with atezo were comparable to when the CAR T-cell therapy is administered alone. The timing of atezo administration with respect to CAR T-cell treatment is thought to impact CAR T-cell persistence and requires further investigation. A range of techniques are being employed to further define immune cell subsets and study the tumor microenvironment to better understand the anti-tumor immune response of axi-cel. Furthermore, enhanced knowledge of such parameters may prove prognostically valuable in deciding which patients could benefit from immune-checkpoint blockade alongside CAR T-cell therapy.

  1. Jacobson CA, Farooq U, Ghobadi A. Axicabtagene ciloleucel, an anti-CD19 chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy for relapsed or refractory large b-cell lymphoma: practical implications for the community oncologist. Oncologist. 2020;25(1):e138-e146. DOI: 10.1634/theoncologist.2019-0395
  2. Xu-Monette ZY, Zhou J, Young KH. PD-1 expression and clinical PD-1 blockade in B-cell lymphomas. Blood. 2018;131(1):68-83. DOI: 10.1182/blood-2017-07-740993
  3. Jacobson CA, Westin JR, Miklos DB, et al. Phase 1/2 primary analysis of ZUMA-6: axicabtagene ciloleucel in combination with atezolizumab for the treatment of patients with refractory diffuse large B cell lymphoma. Presentation #CT055. American Association for Cancer Research (AACR) annual meeting; April 28, 2020; virtual.

Understanding your specialty helps us to deliver the most relevant and engaging content.

Please spare a moment to share yours.

Please select or type your specialty

  Thank you

Newsletter

Subscribe to get the best content related to lymphoma & CLL delivered to your inbox