Study of Brexucabtagene Autoleucel (KTE-X19) in Participants With Relapsed/Refractory Mantle Cell Lymphoma (Cohort 1 and Cohort 2) (ZUMA-2)

A Phase 2 Multicenter Study Evaluating the Efficacy of KTE-X19 in Subjects With Relapsed/Refractory Mantle Cell Lymphoma

The goal of this clinical study is to test how well the study drug, brexucabtagene autoleucel (KTE-X19), works in participants with relapsed/refractory (r/r) mantle cell lymphoma (MCL).

Study Overview

• Status: Completed
• Conditions: Relapsed/Refractory Mantle Cell Lymphoma
• Intervention / Treatment: Drug: Cyclophosphamide; Drug: Fludarabine; Biological: brexucabtagene autoleucel; Drug: Axicabtagene Ciloleucel

Detailed Description

Study KTE-C19-102 enrolled participants with r/r MCL who have been treated with up to 5 prior regimens including a Bruton's tyrosine kinase inhibitor (BTKi) in Cohort 1 and Cohort 2. However, to fulfill FDA Postmarketing Requirement, Cohort 3 is added to the study. It will include participants with r/r MCL who have been treated with up to 5 prior regimens but have not received prior therapy with a BTKi.

The primary analysis in Cohort 1 and Cohort 2 is already completed. Data for Cohort 3 will be analyzed separately. Therefore, details for Cohort 3 were registered separately (NCT04880434) on ClinicalTrials.gov as this cohort will not be part of the main study analysis.

After the end of KTE-C19-102, subjects who received an infusion of anti-CD19 CAR T cells will complete the remainder of the 15-year follow-up assessments in a separate long-term follow-up study, KT-US-982-5968

• Study Type: Interventional
• Enrollment (Actual): 105
• Phase: Phase 2

Contacts and Locations

Study Locations

• France
  • Bordeaux, France
    • Centre Hospitalier Universitaire (CHU)
  • Paris, France, 75010
    • Hospital Saint Louis
  • Pessac, France, 44035
    • Hôpital Haut-Lévêque
• Germany
  • Dresden, Germany, 01307
    • Universitatsklinik Dresden
  • Würzburg, Germany, 97080
    • Universitaetsklinikum Wuerzburg
• Netherlands
  • Amsterdam, Netherlands
    • Academisch Medisch Centrum
  • Groningen, Netherlands
    • University Medical Center Groningen
  • Rotterdam, Netherlands
    • Erasmus Medical Center
• United States
  • Arizona
    • Gilbert, Arizona, United States, 85234
      • Banner MD Anderson
  • California
    • Duarte, California, United States, 91010
      • City of Hope
    • Santa Monica, California, United States, 90404
      • University California Los Angeles (UCLA)
    • Stanford, California, United States, 94305
      • Stanford University
  • Colorado
    • Denver, Colorado, United States, 80218
      • Sarah Cannon
  • Florida
    • Miami, Florida, United States, 33136
      • University of Miami
    • Tampa, Florida, United States, 33612
      • H Lee Moffitt Cancer Center
  • Georgia
    • Atlanta, Georgia, United States, 30322
      • Winship Cancer Institute of Emory University
  • Illinois
    • Chicago, Illinois, United States, 60637
      • University of Chicago
    • Maywood, Illinois, United States, 60153
      • Loyola University Chicago
  • Massachusetts
    • Boston, Massachusetts, United States, 02215
      • Dana-Farber Cancer Institute
  • Michigan
    • Detroit, Michigan, United States, 48201
      • Barbara Ann Karmanos Cancer Institute
  • New Jersey
    • Hackensack, New Jersey, United States, 07601
      • Hackensack University Medical Center
  • New York
    • Rochester, New York, United States, 14642
      • University of Rochester Medical Center
  • North Carolina
    • Durham, North Carolina, United States, 27710
      • Duke University Medical Center
  • Ohio
    • Cleveland, Ohio, United States, 44195
      • Cleveland Clinic Foundation
    • Columbus, Ohio, United States, 43210
      • Ohio State University
  • Oregon
    • Portland, Oregon, United States, 97213
      • Robert W. Franz Cancer Research Center
  • Pennsylvania
    • Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States, 19111
      • Fox Chase Cancer Center
  • Tennessee
    • Nashville, Tennessee, United States, 37232
      • Vanderbilt University Medical Center
    • Nashville, Tennessee, United States, 37203
      • Sarah Cannon Research Institute
  • Texas
    • Dallas, Texas, United States, 75246
      • Baylor Charles A. Sammons Cancer Center
    • Houston, Texas, United States, 77030
      • University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center
  • Washington
    • Seattle, Washington, United States, 98104
      • Swedish Cancer Institute

Participation Criteria

Eligibility Criteria

• Ages Eligible for Study: 18 years and older (Adult, Older Adult)
• Accepts Healthy Volunteers: No

Description

Key Inclusion Criteria:

Up to 5 prior regimens for Mantle cell lymphoma. Prior therapy must have included:

• Anthracycline or bendamustine-containing chemotherapy and
• Anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody therapy and
• Ibrutinib or acalabrutinib

At least 1 measurable lesion

Platelet count ≥ 75,000/uL

Creatinine clearance (as estimated by Cockcroft Gault) > or = to 60 mL/min

Cardiac ejection fraction ≥ 50%, no evidence of pericardial effusion as determined by an echocardiogram (ECHO), and no clinically significant electrocardiogram (ECG) findings

Baseline oxygen saturation >92% on room air.

Key Exclusion Criteria:

• Known history of infection with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) or hepatitis B (HBsAG positive) or hepatitis C virus (anti-HCV positive). A history of hepatitis B or hepatitis C is permitted if the viral load is undetectable per standard serological and genetic testing
• History of a seizure disorder, cerebrovascular ischemia/hemorrhage, dementia, cerebellar disease, cerebral edema, posterior reversible encephalopathy syndrome, or any autoimmune disease with central nervous system (CNS) involvement
• Presence of fungal, bacterial, viral, or other infection that is uncontrolled or requiring IV antimicrobials for management.

Note: Other protocol defined Inclusion/Exclusion criteria may apply.

Study Plan

How is the study designed?

Design Details

• Primary Purpose: Treatment
• Allocation: N/A
• Interventional Model: Single Group Assignment
• Masking: None (Open Label)

Number of Arms

1

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm

Intervention / Treatment

Experimental: Axicabtagene ciloleucel/brexucabtagene autoleucel (KTE-X19); Participants with relapsed/refractory mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) will receive conditioning chemotherapy (CTE) consisting of fludarabine 30 mg/m^2/day and cyclophosphamide 500 mg/m^2/day intravenous (IV) infusion for 3 days followed by a single infusion of axicabtagene ciloleucel at a targeted dose of 2 x 10^6 anti-CD19 chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cells/kg on Day 0 or brexucabtagene autoleucel (KTE-X19) at a targeted dose of 2 x 10^6 CAR T cells/kg, with a maximum dose of 2 x 10^8 anti-CD19 CAR T cells for participants ≥ 100 kg on Day 0 in Cohort 1 or brexucabtagene autoleucel at a targeted dose of 0.5 x 10^6 anti-CD19 CAR T cells/kg, with a maximum dose of 0.5 x 10^8 anti-CD19 CAR T cells for participants ≥ 100 kg on Day 0 in Cohort 2.

Drug: Cyclophosphamide; Administered intravenously; Drug: Fludarabine; Administered intravenously; Biological: brexucabtagene autoleucel; A single infusion of brexucabtagene autoleucel (KTE-X19) anti-CD 19 CAR T cells; Other Names: KTE-X19, TECARTUS™; Drug: Axicabtagene Ciloleucel; A single infusion of axicabtagene ciloleucel anti-CD 19 CAR T cells

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure	Measure Description	Time Frame
Percentage of Participants With Objective Response (OR) Per the Lugano Classification According to Independent Radiology Review Committee (IRRC) in Cohort 1	OR: complete metabolic response(CMR),complete radiological response(CRR),partial MR response(PMR),partial RR(PRR).CMR:score 1(no uptake above background)/2(uptake ≤ mediastinum)/3(uptake > mediastinum but ≤ liver)with/without a residual mass on positron emission tomography 5-point scale;no new lesions.CRR:target nodes/nodal masses regressed to ≤ 1.5 cm in longest transverse diameter of lesion(LDi);no extralymphatic sites of disease;absent non-measured lesion(NMLs);organ enlargement regress to normal;no new sites;bone marrow normal by morphology. PMR:score 4(uptake moderately > liver)/5(uptake markedly > liver, new lesions)with reduced uptake compared with baseline and residual mass;no new lesions;responding disease at interim/residual disease at end of treatment (EOT).PRR: ≥ 50% decrease in sum of the product of the diameters(SPD)of up to 6 target measurable nodes and extra-nodal sites;absent/normal, regressed, but no increase of NMLs;spleen regressed by > 50% in length beyond normal.	Up to 7.8 years
Percentage of Participants With Objective Response (OR) Per the Lugano Classification According to Independent Radiology Review Committee (IRRC) in Cohort 2	OR: CMR, CRR, PMR, PRR. CMR: score 1(no uptake above background) / 2(uptake ≤ mediastinum) / 3(uptake > mediastinum but ≤ liver) with/without a residual mass on positron emission tomography 5-point scale; no new lesions. CRR: target nodes/nodal masses regressed to ≤ 1.5 cm in LDi; no extralymphatic sites of disease;absent non-measured lesion NMLs; organ enlargement regress to normal; no new sites; bone marrow normal by morphology. PMR: score 4(uptake moderately > liver) /5 (uptake markedly > liver, new lesions) with reduced uptake compared with baseline and residual mass; no new lesions; responding disease at interim/residual disease at EOT. PRR: ≥ 50% decrease in SPD of up to 6 target measurable nodes and extra-nodal sites; absent/normal, regressed, but no increase of NMLs; spleen regressed by > 50% in length beyond normal. Percentages were rounded off.	Up to 7.8 years

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure	Measure Description	Time Frame
Change Over Time in EQ-5D Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) Score	EQ-5D is a standardized participant completed questionnaire that measures health-related quality of life and translates that score into an index value or utility score. EQ-5D-consists of two components: a health state profile and an optional visual analogue scale (VAS). The EQ5D-VAS records the participant's self-rated health on a vertical visual analogue scale, where the endpoints are labelled 'The best health you can imagine' and 'The worst health you can imagine'. EQ-5D-VAS: range 0 to 100. A higher score indicates better self-reported health status. A positive change indicates an improvement.	Baseline, Week 4, Month 3, and Month 6
Duration of Response (DOR) in Cohort 1 as Per Investigator Response	DOR: time from the first OR to progressive disease (PD)/death. It is determined using Kaplan-Meier (KM) estimates. PD: score 4 (uptake moderately > liver)/ 5 (uptake markedly >liver and/or new lesions) with an increase in intensity of uptake from baseline; new fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG)-avid foci consistent with lymphoma at interim/EOT assessment; new FDG-avid foci consistent with lymphoma rather than another etiology; new/recurrent FDG-avid foci in bone marrow; an individual node/lesion must be abnormal with: LDi > 1.5 cm, increase by ≥ 50% from cross-product of LDi and perpendicular diameter (PPD) nadir, increase in LDi or shortest axis perpendicular to the LDi from nadir, the splenic length must increase by > 50% of the extent of its prior increase beyond baseline. If no prior splenomegaly, the increase must be ≥ 2 cm from baseline; new/recurrent splenomegaly; new or clear progression of pre-existing NMLs; new lesion; new/recurrent bone marrow involvement.	Up to 7.8 years
Duration of Response (DOR) in Cohort 2 as Per Investigator Response	DOR: time from the first OR to PD/death. It is determined using KM estimates. PD: score 4 (uptake moderately > liver)/5 (uptake markedly >liver and/or new lesions) with an increase in intensity of uptake from baseline; new FDG-avid foci consistent with lymphoma at interim/EOT assessment; new FDG-avid foci consistent with lymphoma rather than another etiology; new/recurrent FDG-avid foci in bone marrow; an individual node/lesion must be abnormal with: LDi > 1.5 cm, increase by ≥ 50% from cross-product of LDi and PPD nadir, increase in LDi or shortest axis perpendicular to the LDi from nadir, the splenic length must increase by > 50% of the extent of its prior increase beyond baseline. If no prior splenomegaly, the increase must be ≥ 2 cm from baseline; new/recurrent splenomegaly; new or clear progression of pre-existing NMLs; new lesion; new/recurrent bone marrow involvement.	Up to 7.8 years
Percentage of Participants With Best Objective Response (BOR) as Per Investigator Assessment Determined by International Working Group (IWG) 2007 Criteria in Cohort 1	BOR consists of (Complete response [CR], Partial response [PR], stable disease [SD], progressive disease [PD] and unknown). CR: disappearance of all detectable clinical evidence; PR: 50% decrease in the sum of the product of diameters (SPD) of up to 6 largest dominant nodal masses and >= 50% decrease in SPD of spleen/liver nodules; PD: appearance of any new lesions or >= 50% increase in SPD of more than one node or >= 50% increase in longest diameter of a previously identified node or >50% increase from nadir in the SPD of any previous lesions; SD: failure to attain CR/PR or PD. Percentages were rounded off.	Up to 7.8 years
Percentage of Participants With Best Objective Response (BOR) as Per Investigator Assessment Determined by Lugano Classification in Cohort 2	BOR consists of CR (CMR/CRR), PR (PMR/PRR), SD, PD and not done. CMR/CRR and PMR/PRR are defined in Outcome Measure (OM) 1. PD is defined in OM 3. SD/no metabolic response (NMR): a score 4 (uptake moderately greater than [>] liver) or 5 (uptake markedly >liver and/ or new lesions) with no significant change in FDG uptake compared to baseline (screening), at an interim time point or end of treatment; no new sites of disease should be observed. Not done: no assessment at the time of analysis. Percentages were rounded off. Only categories with data are reported.	Up to 7.8 years
Percentage of Participants With Objective Response (OR) as Per Investigator Assessment Determined by International Working Group (IWG) 2007 Criteria in Cohort 1	OR: CR or PR. CR: disappearance of all detectable clinical evidence; typically FDG-avid lymphoma (a post-treatment residual mass of any size is permitted if it is PET negative); variably FDG-avid lymphomas/FDG avidity unknown (all lymph nodes and nodal masses must have regressed to normal size); spleen and/or liver should be normal size and not be palpable; bone marrow aspirate and biopsy must show no evidence of disease. PR: 50% decrease in the SPD of up to 6 largest dominant nodal masses and ≥ 50% decrease in SPD of spleen/liver nodules; no increase in size of nodes, liver, or spleen and no new sites of disease; splenic and hepatic nodules must regress by ≥ 50% in the SPD; if participant has persistent bone marrow involvement and otherwise meets criteria for CR, will then be considered a PR; typically FDG-avid lymphoma (the post-treatment PET scan should be positive in at least 1 previously involved site. Percentages were rounded off.	Up to 7.8 years
Percentage of Participants With Objective Response (OR) as Per Investigator Assessment Determined by Lugano Classification in Cohort 2	OR: CMR, CRR, PMR, PRR. CMR: score 1(no uptake above background) / 2(uptake ≤ mediastinum) / 3(uptake > mediastinum but ≤ liver) with/without a residual mass on positron emission tomography 5-point scale; no new lesions. CRR: target nodes/nodal masses regressed to ≤ 1.5 cm in LDi ;no extralymphatic sites of disease;absent NMLs; organ enlargement regress to normal; no new sites;bone marrow normal by morphology. PMR: score 4 (uptake moderately > liver) /5 (uptake markedly > liver, new lesions) with reduced uptake compared with baseline and residual mass; no new lesions; responding disease at interim/residual disease at EOT. PRR: ≥ 50% decrease in SPD of up to 6 target measurable nodes and extra-nodal sites;absent/normal, regressed, but no increase of NMLs; spleen regressed by > 50% in length beyond normal. Percentages were rounded off.	Up to 7.8 years
Progression Free Survival (PFS) in Cohort 1 as Per Investigator Response.	PFS was defined as the time from the brexucabtagene autoleucel infusion date to the date of PD or death from any cause. PD: a score 4 (uptake moderately > liver) or 5 (uptake markedly >liver and/or new lesions) with an increase in intensity of uptake from baseline; new FDG-avid foci consistent with lymphoma at interim or end of treatment assessment; new FDG-avid foci consistent with lymphoma rather than another etiology (eg, infection, inflammation); new or recurrent FDG-avid foci in bone marrow. PFS was determined using the KM estimates.	Up to 7.8 years
Progression Free Survival (PFS) in Cohort 2 as Per Investigator Response.	PFS was defined as the time from the brexucabtagene autoleucel infusion date to the date of PD or death from any cause. PD: a score 4 (uptake moderately > liver) or 5 (uptake markedly >liver and/or new lesions) with an increase in intensity of uptake from baseline; new FDG-avid foci consistent with lymphoma at interim or end of treatment assessment; new FDG-avid foci consistent with lymphoma rather than another etiology (eg, infection, inflammation); new or recurrent FDG-avid foci in bone marrow. PFS was determined using the KM estimates.	Up to 7.8 years
Overall Survival in Cohort 1	Overall survival was defined as the time from brexucabtagene autoleucel infusion to the date of death from any cause. Overall survival was determined using the KM estimates.	Up to 7.8 years
Overall Survival in Cohort 2	Overall survival was defined as the time from brexucabtagene autoleucel infusion to the date of death from any cause. Overall survival was determined using the KM estimates.	Up to 7.8 years
Percentage of Participants Experiencing Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (TEAE)	An adverse event (AE) was defined as any untoward medical occurrence in a clinical trial participants. The event did not necessarily have a relationship with study treatment. AE included worsening of a pre-existing medical condition. Worsening indicated that the pre-existing medical condition had increased in severity, frequency, and/or duration or had an association with a worse outcome. A pre-existing condition that had not worsened during the study or involved an intervention such as elective cosmetic surgery or a medical procedure while on study, was not considered an AE. TEAE was defined as any AE with onset on or after the start of treatment.	Up to 5 years
Percentage of Participants With Decrease in Post-brexucabtagene Autoleucel Infusion Hematology Toxicity Values by Worst Toxicity Grade		Up to 5 years
Percentage of Participants With Increase in Post-brexucabtagene Autoleucel Infusion Hematology Toxicity Values by Worst Toxicity Grade		Up to 5 years
Percentage of Participants With Decrease in Post-brexucabtagene Autoleucel Infusion Chemistry Toxicity Values by Worst Toxicity Grade		Up to 5 years
Percentage of Participants With Increase in Post-brexucabtagene Autoleucel Infusion Chemistry Toxicity Values by Worst Toxicity Grade		Up to 5 years
Percentage of Participants With Anti-CD19 CAR Antibodies		Baseline up to Month 3
Maximum Number of CAR T Cells Measured Post-infusion		Up to Month 24
Peak Serum Levels of C-Reactive Protein (CRP) in Blood	Peak was defined as the maximum post-baseline level of the cytokine.	Baseline up to Week 4
Peak Serum Levels of C-X-C Motif Chemokine 10 (CXCL10), Granzyme B, Interferon-Gamma (IFN-γ), Interleukin-1 Receptor Antagonist (IL-1RA), Interleukin (IL)-2, IL-6, IL-7, IL-8,IL-10, IL-15, and Tumor Necrosis Factor-Alpha (TNF-α) in Blood	Peak was defined as the maximum post-baseline level of the cytokine.	Baseline up to Week 4
Peak Serum Levels of Ferritin, Interleukin-2 Receptor Alpha (IL-2Rα), Intercellular Adhesion Molecule-1 (ICAM-1), Perforin, Vascular Cell Adhesion Molecule-1 (VCAM-1) in Blood	Peak was defined as the maximum post-baseline level of the cytokine.	Baseline up to Week 4
Percentage of Participants With Change Over Time in European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions(EQ-5D) Mobility Scale Score	The European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions Health Questionnaire (EQ-5D) is a participant-answered questionnaire scoring 5 dimensions of health: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression. For each dimension the participant is asked for a three-level assessment of their health on the current day: "no problems" (1), "some problems" (2), "extreme problems" (3). EQ-5D health states, defined by the EQ-5D descriptive system, are converted into a single summary index by applying a formula that attaches values (also called QOL weights or QOL utilities) to each of the levels in each dimension. EQ-5D Summary Index values range from -0.11 (worst health state) to 1.00 (perfect health state). Positive numbers indicate improvement from baseline. The percentage of participants with each level of problem are reported. Percentages were rounded off.	Baseline, Week 4, Month 3, and Month 6
Percentage of Participants With Change Over Time in European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions(EQ-5D) Self-Care Scale Score	The European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions Health Questionnaire (EQ-5D) is a participant-answered questionnaire scoring 5 dimensions of health: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression. For each dimension the participant is asked for a three-level assessment of their health on the current day: "no problems" (1), "some problems" (2), "extreme problems" (3). EQ-5D health states, defined by the EQ-5D descriptive system, are converted into a single summary index by applying a formula that attaches values (also called QOL weights or QOL utilities) to each of the levels in each dimension. EQ-5D Summary Index values range from -0.11 (worst health state) to 1.00 (perfect health state). Positive numbers indicate improvement from baseline. The percentage of participants with each level of problem are reported. Percentages were rounded off.	Baseline, Week 4, Month 3, and Month 6
Percentage of Participants With Change Over Time in European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions(EQ-5D) Usual Activity Scale Score	The European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions Health Questionnaire (EQ-5D) is a participant-answered questionnaire scoring 5 dimensions of health: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression. For each dimension the participant is asked for a three-level assessment of their health on the current day: "no problems" (1), "some problems" (2), "extreme problems" (3). EQ-5D health states, defined by the EQ-5D descriptive system, are converted into a single summary index by applying a formula that attaches values (also called QOL weights or QOL utilities) to each of the levels in each dimension. EQ-5D Summary Index values range from -0.11 (worst health state) to 1.00 (perfect health state). Positive numbers indicate improvement from baseline. The percentage of participants with each level of problem are reported. Percentages were rounded off.	Baseline, Week 4, Month 3, and Month 6
Percentage of Participants With Change Over Time in European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions(EQ-5D) Pain / Discomfort Activity Scale Score	The European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions Health Questionnaire (EQ-5D) is a participant-answered questionnaire scoring 5 dimensions of health: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression. For each dimension the participant is asked for a three-level assessment of their health on the current day: "no problems" (1), "some problems" (2), "extreme problems" (3). EQ-5D health states, defined by the EQ-5D descriptive system, are converted into a single summary index by applying a formula that attaches values (also called QOL weights or QOL utilities) to each of the levels in each dimension. EQ-5D Summary Index values range from -0.11 (worst health state) to 1.00 (perfect health state). Positive numbers indicate improvement from baseline. The percentage of participants with each level of problem are reported. Percentages were rounded off.	Baseline, Week 4, Month 3, and Month 6
Percentage of Participants With Change Over Time in European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions(EQ-5D) Anxiety / Depression Activity Scale Score	The European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions Health Questionnaire (EQ-5D) is a participant-answered questionnaire scoring 5 dimensions of health: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression. For each dimension the participant is asked for a three-level assessment of their health on the current day: "no problems" (1), "some problems" (2), "extreme problems" (3). EQ-5D health states, defined by the EQ-5D descriptive system, are converted into a single summary index by applying a formula that attaches values (also called QOL weights or QOL utilities) to each of the levels in each dimension. EQ-5D Summary Index values range from -0.11 (worst health state) to 1.00 (perfect health state). Positive numbers indicate improvement from baseline. The Percentage of participants with each level of problem are reported. Percentages were rounded off.	Baseline, Week 4, Month 3, and Month 6

Collaborators and Investigators

• Sponsor: Kite, A Gilead Company
• Investigators: Study Director: Kite Study Director, Kite, A Gilead Company

Publications and helpful links

General Publications

• Cheson BD, Fisher RI, Barrington SF, Cavalli F, Schwartz LH, Zucca E, Lister TA; Alliance, Australasian Leukaemia and Lymphoma Group; Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group; European Mantle Cell Lymphoma Consortium; Italian Lymphoma Foundation; European Organisation for Research; Treatment of Cancer/Dutch Hemato-Oncology Group; Grupo Espanol de Medula Osea; German High-Grade Lymphoma Study Group; German Hodgkin's Study Group; Japanese Lymphorra Study Group; Lymphoma Study Association; NCIC Clinical Trials Group; Nordic Lymphoma Study Group; Southwest Oncology Group; United Kingdom National Cancer Research Institute. Recommendations for initial evaluation, staging, and response assessment of Hodgkin and non-Hodgkin lymphoma: the Lugano classification. J Clin Oncol. 2014 Sep 20;32(27):3059-68. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2013.54.8800.
• Fisher RI, Bernstein SH, Kahl BS, Djulbegovic B, Robertson MJ, de Vos S, Epner E, Krishnan A, Leonard JP, Lonial S, Stadtmauer EA, O'Connor OA, Shi H, Boral AL, Goy A. Multicenter phase II study of bortezomib in patients with relapsed or refractory mantle cell lymphoma. J Clin Oncol. 2006 Oct 20;24(30):4867-74. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2006.07.9665. Epub 2006 Sep 25.
• Wang ML, Rule S, Martin P, Goy A, Auer R, Kahl BS, Jurczak W, Advani RH, Romaguera JE, Williams ME, Barrientos JC, Chmielowska E, Radford J, Stilgenbauer S, Dreyling M, Jedrzejczak WW, Johnson P, Spurgeon SE, Li L, Zhang L, Newberry K, Ou Z, Cheng N, Fang B, McGreivy J, Clow F, Buggy JJ, Chang BY, Beaupre DM, Kunkel LA, Blum KA. Targeting BTK with ibrutinib in relapsed or refractory mantle-cell lymphoma. N Engl J Med. 2013 Aug 8;369(6):507-16. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1306220. Epub 2013 Jun 19.
• Wang M, Jain P, Chi TL, Chen SE, Heimberger A, Weathers SP, Zheng L, Rao AV, Rossi JM. Management of a patient with mantle cell lymphoma who developed severe neurotoxicity after chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy in ZUMA-2. J Immunother Cancer. 2020 Oct;8(2):e001114. doi: 10.1136/jitc-2020-001114.
• Goy A, Sinha R, Williams ME, Kalayoglu Besisik S, Drach J, Ramchandren R, Zhang L, Cicero S, Fu T, Witzig TE. Single-agent lenalidomide in patients with mantle-cell lymphoma who relapsed or progressed after or were refractory to bortezomib: phase II MCL-001 (EMERGE) study. J Clin Oncol. 2013 Oct 10;31(29):3688-95. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2013.49.2835. Epub 2013 Sep 3.
• Michael Wang,1 Javier Munoz,2 Andre Goy,3 Frederick L. Locke,4 Caron A. Jacobson,5 Brian T. Hill,6 John M. Timmerman,7 Houston Holmes,8 Samantha Jaglowski,9 Ian W. Flinn,10 Peter A. McSweeney,11 David B. Miklos,12 John M. Pagel,13 Marie José Kersten,14 Noel Milpied,15 Henry Fung,16 Max S. Topp,17 Roch Houot,18 Amer Beitinjaneh,19 Weimin Peng,20 Lianqing Zheng,20 John M. Rossi,20 Rajul K. Jain,20 Arati V. Rao,20 and Patrick M. Reagan21
• Wang M, Munoz J, Goy A, Locke FL, Jacobson CA, Hill BT, Timmerman JM, Holmes H, Jaglowski S, Flinn IW, McSweeney PA,Miklos DB, Pagel JM, Kersten MJ, Peng W,Zheng L,Rossi JM, Jain RK, Rao AV, Reagan PM
• Wang, Michael L., MD(1); Munoz, Javier, MD(2); Goy, Andre, MD(3); Locke, Frederick L., MD(4); Jacobson, Caron A., MD, MMSc(5); Hill, Brian T., MD(6); Timmerman, John M., MD(7); Holmes, Houston, MD(8); Jaglowski, Samantha, MD, MPH(9); Flinn, Ian W., MD, PhD(10); McSweeney, Peter A., MD(11); Miklos, David B., MD, PhD(12); Pagel, John M., MD, PhD, DSc(13); Jose Kersten, Marie, MD, PhD(14); Peng, Weimin, MS(15); Zheng, Lianqing, PhD(15); Rossi, John M., MS(15); Jain, Rajul K., MD(15); Rao, Arati V., MD(15); Reagan, Patrick M, MD(16)
• Wang, Michael; Lundry Locke, Frederick; Munoz, Javier; Goy, Andre; Eccleston Holmes, Houston; Siddiqi, Tanya; Flinn, Ian; McSweeney, Peter A; Michael Reagan, Patrick; Thomas Hill, Brian; Jacobson, Caron A.; Rizzieri, David A.; Heffner, Leonard T.; Mary Jaglowski, Samantha; Bernard Miklos, David; Shaughnessy, Paul; Unabia, Sherry; Rossi, John M.; Jiang, Yizhou; Jain, Rajul K.
• Cheah CY, Chihara D, Romaguera JE, Fowler NH, Seymour JF, Hagemeister FB, Champlin RE, Wang ML. Patients with mantle cell lymphoma failing ibrutinib are unlikely to respond to salvage chemotherapy and have poor outcomes. Ann Oncol. 2015 Jun;26(6):1175-1179. doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdv111. Epub 2015 Feb 23.
• Epperla N, Hamadani M, Cashen AF, Ahn KW, Oak E, Kanate AS, Calzada O, Cohen JB, Farmer L, Ghosh N, Tallarico M, Nabhan C, Costa LJ, Kenkre VP, Hari PN, Fenske TS. Predictive factors and outcomes for ibrutinib therapy in relapsed/refractory mantle cell lymphoma-a "real world" study. Hematol Oncol. 2017 Dec;35(4):528-535. doi: 10.1002/hon.2380. Epub 2017 Jan 8.
• Jain P, Kanagal-Shamanna R, Zhang S, Ahmed M, Ghorab A, Zhang L, Ok CY, Li S, Hagemeister F, Zeng D, Gong T, Chen W, Badillo M, Nomie K, Fayad L, Medeiros LJ, Neelapu S, Fowler N, Romaguera J, Champlin R, Wang L, Wang ML. Long-term outcomes and mutation profiling of patients with mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) who discontinued ibrutinib. Br J Haematol. 2018 Nov;183(4):578-587. doi: 10.1111/bjh.15567. Epub 2018 Sep 2.
• Locke FL, Ghobadi A, Jacobson CA, Miklos DB, Lekakis LJ, Oluwole OO, Lin Y, Braunschweig I, Hill BT, Timmerman JM, Deol A, Reagan PM, Stiff P, Flinn IW, Farooq U, Goy A, McSweeney PA, Munoz J, Siddiqi T, Chavez JC, Herrera AF, Bartlett NL, Wiezorek JS, Navale L, Xue A, Jiang Y, Bot A, Rossi JM, Kim JJ, Go WY, Neelapu SS. Long-term safety and activity of axicabtagene ciloleucel in refractory large B-cell lymphoma (ZUMA-1): a single-arm, multicentre, phase 1-2 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2019 Jan;20(1):31-42. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(18)30864-7. Epub 2018 Dec 2.
• Martin P, Maddocks K, Leonard JP, Ruan J, Goy A, Wagner-Johnston N, Rule S, Advani R, Iberri D, Phillips T, Spurgeon S, Kozin E, Noto K, Chen Z, Jurczak W, Auer R, Chmielowska E, Stilgenbauer S, Bloehdorn J, Portell C, Williams ME, Dreyling M, Barr PM, Chen-Kiang S, DiLiberto M, Furman RR, Blum KA. Postibrutinib outcomes in patients with mantle cell lymphoma. Blood. 2016 Mar 24;127(12):1559-63. doi: 10.1182/blood-2015-10-673145. Epub 2016 Jan 13.
• Rule S, Dreyling M, Goy A, Hess G, Auer R, Kahl B, Cavazos N, Liu B, Yang S, Clow F, Goldberg JD, Beaupre D, Vermeulen J, Wildgust M, Wang M. Outcomes in 370 patients with mantle cell lymphoma treated with ibrutinib: a pooled analysis from three open-label studies. Br J Haematol. 2017 Nov;179(3):430-438. doi: 10.1111/bjh.14870. Epub 2017 Aug 18.
• Rule S, Dreyling M, Goy A, Hess G, Auer R, Kahl B, Hernandez-Rivas JA, Qi K, Deshpande S, Parisi L, Wang M. Ibrutinib for the treatment of relapsed/refractory mantle cell lymphoma: extended 3.5-year follow up from a pooled analysis. Haematologica. 2019 May;104(5):e211-e214. doi: 10.3324/haematol.2018.205229. Epub 2018 Nov 15. No abstract available.
• Wang M, Schuster SJ, Phillips T, Lossos IS, Goy A, Rule S, Hamadani M, Ghosh N, Reeder CB, Barnett E, Bravo MC, Martin P. Observational study of lenalidomide in patients with mantle cell lymphoma who relapsed/progressed after or were refractory/intolerant to ibrutinib (MCL-004). J Hematol Oncol. 2017 Nov 2;10(1):171. doi: 10.1186/s13045-017-0537-5.
• Wang M, Munoz J, Goy A, Locke FL, Jacobson CA, Hill BT, Timmerman JM, Holmes H, Jaglowski S, Flinn IW, McSweeney PA, Miklos DB, Pagel JM, Kersten MJ, Milpied N, Fung H, Topp MS, Houot R, Beitinjaneh A, Peng W, Zheng L, Rossi JM, Jain RK, Rao AV, Reagan PM. KTE-X19 CAR T-Cell Therapy in Relapsed or Refractory Mantle-Cell Lymphoma. N Engl J Med. 2020 Apr 2;382(14):1331-1342. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1914347.
• Topp MS, Gokbuget N, Stein AS, Zugmaier G, O'Brien S, Bargou RC, Dombret H, Fielding AK, Heffner L, Larson RA, Neumann S, Foa R, Litzow M, Ribera JM, Rambaldi A, Schiller G, Bruggemann M, Horst HA, Holland C, Jia C, Maniar T, Huber B, Nagorsen D, Forman SJ, Kantarjian HM. Safety and activity of blinatumomab for adult patients with relapsed or refractory B-precursor acute lymphoblastic leukaemia: a multicentre, single-arm, phase 2 study. Lancet Oncol. 2015 Jan;16(1):57-66. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(14)71170-2. Epub 2014 Dec 16.
• Lee DW, Gardner R, Porter DL, Louis CU, Ahmed N, Jensen M, Grupp SA, Mackall CL. Current concepts in the diagnosis and management of cytokine release syndrome. Blood. 2014 Jul 10;124(2):188-95. doi: 10.1182/blood-2014-05-552729. Epub 2014 May 29.
• Dreyling M, Jurczak W, Jerkeman M, Silva RS, Rusconi C, Trneny M, Offner F, Caballero D, Joao C, Witzens-Harig M, Hess G, Bence-Bruckler I, Cho SG, Bothos J, Goldberg JD, Enny C, Traina S, Balasubramanian S, Bandyopadhyay N, Sun S, Vermeulen J, Rizo A, Rule S. Ibrutinib versus temsirolimus in patients with relapsed or refractory mantle-cell lymphoma: an international, randomised, open-label, phase 3 study. Lancet. 2016 Feb 20;387(10020):770-8. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(15)00667-4. Epub 2015 Dec 7.
• Kratz A, Ferraro M, Sluss PM, Lewandrowski KB. Case records of the Massachusetts General Hospital. Weekly clinicopathological exercises. Laboratory reference values. N Engl J Med. 2004 Oct 7;351(15):1548-63. doi: 10.1056/NEJMcpc049016. No abstract available.
• Darnell EP, Gallagher KME, Kanska J, Scarfo I, Balderrama-Gutierrez G, Berger TR, Budka J, Bozym DJ, Huang T, Shen R, Leick MB, Maus MV. Ibrutinib exposure correlates with improved efficacy of CAR T cells in patients with mantle cell lymphoma. Blood Adv. 2026 Feb 24;10(4):1023-1034. doi: 10.1182/bloodadvances.2025018137.
• Wang M, Munoz J, Goy A, Locke FL, Jacobson CA, Hill BT, Timmerman JM, Holmes H, Jaglowski S, Flinn IW, McSweeney PA, Miklos DB, Pagel JM, Kersten MJ, Bouabdallah K, Khanal R, Topp MS, Houot R, Beitinjaneh A, Peng W, Fang X, Shen RR, Siddiqi R, Kloos I, Reagan PM. Three-Year Follow-Up of KTE-X19 in Patients With Relapsed/Refractory Mantle Cell Lymphoma, Including High-Risk Subgroups, in the ZUMA-2 Study. J Clin Oncol. 2023 Jan 20;41(3):555-567. doi: 10.1200/JCO.21.02370. Epub 2022 Jun 4.

Helpful Links

• Gilead Clinical Trials Website

Study record dates

Study Major Dates

• Study Start (Actual): November 9, 2015
• Primary Completion (Actual): September 22, 2023
• Study Completion (Actual): September 22, 2023

Study Registration Dates

• First Submitted: November 6, 2015
• First Submitted That Met QC Criteria: November 6, 2015
• First Posted (Estimated): November 10, 2015

Study Record Updates

• Last Update Posted (Actual): March 18, 2026
• Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria: March 5, 2026
• Last Verified: March 1, 2026

More Information

Terms related to this study

• Additional Relevant MeSH Terms: Neoplasms; Immune System Diseases; Neoplasms by Histologic Type; Lymphatic Diseases; Lymphoproliferative Disorders; Immunoproliferative Disorders; Lymphoma, Non-Hodgkin; Lymphoma; Hemic and Lymphatic Diseases; Lymphoma, Mantle-Cell; Organic Chemicals; Hydrocarbons; Phosphoramide Mustards; Nitrogen Mustard Compounds; Mustard Compounds; Hydrocarbons, Halogenated; Phosphoramides; Organophosphorus Compounds; Cyclophosphamide; fludarabine; brexucabtagene autoleucel; axicabtagene ciloleucel
• Other Study ID Numbers: KTE-C19-102; 2015-005008-27 (EudraCT Number); 2023-506641-35 (Other Identifier: European Medicines Agency)

Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)

• Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?: YES
• IPD Plan Description: Qualified external researchers may request IPD for this study. For more information, please visit our website at https://www.gileadclinicaltrials.com/transparency-policy#Commitment
• IPD Sharing Time Frame: 18 months after study completion and at least 6 months after the FDA and EMA approval
• IPD Sharing Access Criteria: A secured external environment with username, password, and RSA code.
• IPD Sharing Supporting Information Type: STUDY_PROTOCOL; SAP

Drug and device information, study documents

• Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product: Yes
• Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product: No