Figure 1.
Study design andschedule ofassessments. ∗Patients may have received a protocol-defined SOC regimen to stabilize their disease during liso-cel manufacturing. †Only for patients who received bridging therapy. ‡Randomization stratification factors included response to first therapy (stable disease, progressive disease, PR, or CR with relapse before 3 months vs CR with relapse on or after 3 months) and sAAIPI (0/1 vs 2/3). §SOC was defined as physician’s choice of R-DHAP, R-ICE, or R-GDP. IRC, independent review committee; LDC, lymphodepleting chemotherapy; LOT, line of therapy; ORR, objective response rate; OS, overall survival; PET, positron emission tomography; PFS, progression-free survival; PRO, patient-reported outcome; R-DHAP, rituximab, dexamethasone, cytarabine, and cisplatin; R-GDP, rituximab, gemcitabine, dexamethasone, and cisplatin; R-ICE, rituximab, ifosfamide, carboplatin, and etoposide; sAAIPI, secondary age-adjusted International Prognostic Index.

Study design andschedule ofassessments. ∗Patients may have received a protocol-defined SOC regimen to stabilize their disease during liso-cel manufacturing. Only for patients who received bridging therapy. Randomization stratification factors included response to first therapy (stable disease, progressive disease, PR, or CR with relapse before 3 months vs CR with relapse on or after 3 months) and sAAIPI (0/1 vs 2/3). §SOC was defined as physician’s choice of R-DHAP, R-ICE, or R-GDP. IRC, independent review committee; LDC, lymphodepleting chemotherapy; LOT, line of therapy; ORR, objective response rate; OS, overall survival; PET, positron emission tomography; PFS, progression-free survival; PRO, patient-reported outcome; R-DHAP, rituximab, dexamethasone, cytarabine, and cisplatin; R-GDP, rituximab, gemcitabine, dexamethasone, and cisplatin; R-ICE, rituximab, ifosfamide, carboplatin, and etoposide; sAAIPI, secondary age-adjusted International Prognostic Index.

Close Modal

or Create an Account

Close Modal
Close Modal