Preliminary data on epcoritamab and glofitamab as bridging therapy prior to CAR T-cell treatment in Relapsed/Refractory large B cell lymphoma

Abstract Introduction: CAR T-cell therapies are currently approved as a second-line (2L) treatment for early relapsed or refractory large B-cell lymphoma (R/R LBCL). In France, due to a particularly long vein-to-vein time, most patients receive bridging therapy between leukapheresis and CAR T-cell infusion. In a recent study, bridging responses were evaluated in 514 patients intended to be treated with Axicabtagene Ciloleucel (Axi-cel) following various types of bridging therapy (mainly chemotherapy), with an overall response rate (ORR) of 44.9%, including 14.5% complete response (CR) and 29.9% partial response (PR). A good response to bridging was associated with better Axi-cel efficacy (Capes et al., ICML 2025). To date, the optimal bridging strategy remains a matter of debate, and no published data are available on the use of bispecific CD3xCD20 antibodies in this context. However, in pivotal trials bispecific in 3rd line (3L) achieve 60% ORR with improved overall survival (OS). These treatments are available in France as a 3L option for R/R LBCL. The aim of our study is to report real-world safety and efficacy data on the use of bispecific antibodies, Epcoritamab and Glofitamab, as bridging therapy prior to CAR T-cell infusion. Patients and Methods: We conducted a retrospective study using electronic medical records of patients over 18 years old with R/R LBCL who received bridging therapy with Glofitamab or Epcoritamab prior to CAR T-cell therapy at one center in Marseille and one center in Nice. Results: From September 2023 to April 2025, 17 patients treated with bispecifics as bridging before CAR T-cell therapy were identified (6 with Epcoritamab and 11 with Glofitamab). The median age at initiation of treatment was 68 years (range: 31–80), 11 patients (64.7%) were male, and 10 patients (58.8%) had primary refractory disease. Before bridging with bispecific antibodies, the median number of prior lines was two, and 15 patients (88.2%) were refractory to their last line of treatment. A total of 10 patients (58.8%) had advanced-stage disease (stage III–IV). Most patients received CAR T-cell therapy as second-line treatment (11 patients, 64%), with 3 as third-line (18%), 2 as fourth-line (12%), and 1 as fifth-line (6%). Bridging with Epcoritamab or Glofitamab was initiated as first-line bridging therapy in 6 patients (35%), or after failure of a first bridging strategy with chemotherapy in the remaining 11 patients (65%) who were treated with CAR T-cells as second-line therapy. Patients received 1 to 4 cycles of bispecific antibodies (median: 3 cycles). Regarding safety, 11 patients (64.7%) experienced grade 1–2 cytokine release syndrome (CRS), and 1 patient had grade 1 immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome (ICANS). No grade ≥3 adverse events were reported. Before CAR T-cell infusion, 7 patients (41.2%) achieved a complete response (3 with Epcoritamab and 4 with Glofitamab), 7 (41.2%) were in partial response (PR), and 3 (17.7%) had progressive disease (PD), 2 of whom died from progression before infusion. The median follow-up, calculated from the first cycle of bispecific antibodies, was 5.09 months. Among the 15 patients infused with CAR T-cell, 13 patients achieved CR, corresponding to 76% in the intention-to-treat (ITT) population and 87% in the per-protocol (PP) population. Among these patients who achieved CR, only one relapsed three months after CAR T-cell therapy; notably, this patient had progressive disease prior to infusion. The two patients who did not achieve a response after CAR T-cell therapy were in partial response before infusion. Conclusion: These preliminary data show that the use of Epcoritamab and Glofitamab as bridging therapy prior to CAR T-cell infusion appears to be safe and feasible, with acceptable toxicity and no grade ≥3 adverse events following bispecific antibody administration. In our cohort of 17 patients, more than 80% achieved a response before CAR T-cell infusion. Among the 15 patients who ultimately received CAR T-cells, 13 achieved a CR (87%).Although our median follow-up is still short and the patient cohort is small, these initial data suggest that bispecific antibodies have the potential to improve pre–CAR T-cell remission rates in patients with chemo-refractory disease. Updated results, including additional patients and post–CAR T-cell toxicity data, will be presented at the meeting.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Blood
Published
2025-11-03
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1182/blood-2025-2770
Primary Topic
CAR-T cell therapy research
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Preliminary data on epcoritamab and glofitamab as bridging therapy prior to CAR T-cell treatment in Relapsed/Refractory large B cell lymphoma

Michael L. Loschi, Faézeh Legrand, Gabriel Brisou, Jean‐Marc Schiano de Colella et al.
Blood
CAR-T cell therapy research
article

Preliminary data on epcoritamab and glofitamab as bridging therapy prior to CAR T-cell treatment in Relapsed/Refractory large B cell lymphoma

Michael L. Loschi, Faézeh Legrand, Gabriel Brisou, Jean‐Marc Schiano de Colella, Robin Noël, Edmond Chiche, Pauline Piazzola, Ferdinand Villetard, Anne Marie Stoppa, Anne Calleja, Pilar Dutari
article en

Abstract

Abstract Introduction: CAR T-cell therapies are currently approved as a second-line (2L) treatment for early relapsed or refractory large B-cell lymphoma (R/R LBCL). In France, due to a particularly long vein-to-vein time, most patients receive bridging therapy between leukapheresis and CAR T-cell infusion. In a recent study, bridging responses were evaluated in 514 patients intended to be treated with Axicabtagene Ciloleucel (Axi-cel) following various types of bridging therapy (mainly chemotherapy), with an overall response rate (ORR) of 44.9%, including 14.5% complete response (CR) and 29.9% partial response (PR). A good response to bridging was associated with better Axi-cel efficacy (Capes et al., ICML 2025). To date, the optimal bridging strategy remains a matter of debate, and no published data are available on the use of bispecific CD3xCD20 antibodies in this context. However, in pivotal trials bispecific in 3rd line (3L) achieve 60% ORR with improved overall survival (OS). These treatments are available in France as a 3L option for R/R LBCL. The aim of our study is to report real-world safety and efficacy data on the use of bispecific antibodies, Epcoritamab and Glofitamab, as bridging therapy prior to CAR T-cell infusion. Patients and Methods: We conducted a retrospective study using electronic medical records of patients over 18 years old with R/R LBCL who received bridging therapy with Glofitamab or Epcoritamab prior to CAR T-cell therapy at one center in Marseille and one center in Nice. Results: From September 2023 to April 2025, 17 patients treated with bispecifics as bridging before CAR T-cell therapy were identified (6 with Epcoritamab and 11 with Glofitamab). The median age at initiation of treatment was 68 years (range: 31–80), 11 patients (64.7%) were male, and 10 patients (58.8%) had primary refractory disease. Before bridging with bispecific antibodies, the median number of prior lines was two, and 15 patients (88.2%) were refractory to their last line of treatment. A total of 10 patients (58.8%) had advanced-stage disease (stage III–IV). Most patients received CAR T-cell therapy as second-line treatment (11 patients, 64%), with 3 as third-line (18%), 2 as fourth-line (12%), and 1 as fifth-line (6%). Bridging with Epcoritamab or Glofitamab was initiated as first-line bridging therapy in 6 patients (35%), or after failure of a first bridging strategy with chemotherapy in the remaining 11 patients (65%) who were treated with CAR T-cells as second-line therapy. Patients received 1 to 4 cycles of bispecific antibodies (median: 3 cycles). Regarding safety, 11 patients (64.7%) experienced grade 1–2 cytokine release syndrome (CRS), and 1 patient had grade 1 immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome (ICANS). No grade ≥3 adverse events were reported. Before CAR T-cell infusion, 7 patients (41.2%) achieved a complete response (3 with Epcoritamab and 4 with Glofitamab), 7 (41.2%) were in partial response (PR), and 3 (17.7%) had progressive disease (PD), 2 of whom died from progression before infusion. The median follow-up, calculated from the first cycle of bispecific antibodies, was 5.09 months. Among the 15 patients infused with CAR T-cell, 13 patients achieved CR, corresponding to 76% in the intention-to-treat (ITT) population and 87% in the per-protocol (PP) population. Among these patients who achieved CR, only one relapsed three months after CAR T-cell therapy; notably, this patient had progressive disease prior to infusion. The two patients who did not achieve a response after CAR T-cell therapy were in partial response before infusion. Conclusion: These preliminary data show that the use of Epcoritamab and Glofitamab as bridging therapy prior to CAR T-cell infusion appears to be safe and feasible, with acceptable toxicity and no grade ≥3 adverse events following bispecific antibody administration. In our cohort of 17 patients, more than 80% achieved a response before CAR T-cell infusion. Among the 15 patients who ultimately received CAR T-cells, 13 achieved a CR (87%).Although our median follow-up is still short and the patient cohort is small, these initial data suggest that bispecific antibodies have the potential to improve pre–CAR T-cell remission rates in patients with chemo-refractory disease. Updated results, including additional patients and post–CAR T-cell toxicity data, will be presented at the meeting.

BloodVol. 146(Supplement 1)
Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Nice (FR), Institut Paoli-Calmettes (FR)
Openalex Percentile: Top 47%
CAR-T cell therapy research
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.