AzTrials
AzTrials

Relapsed/Refractory Mantle Cell LymphomaPhase 2ZUMA-2NCT02601313

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

A Phase 2 study testing brexucabtagene autoleucel, Cyclophosphamide and Fludarabine in people with Relapsed/Refractory Mantle Cell Lymphoma, run by Kite, A Gilead Company at 32 sites in 4 countries.

Completed

Finished. The study has ended and is not enrolling. Results may be posted on the official record.

Official record
Search all trials

Trial summary

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). Read more about this study

Who is it for?
Ages 18 years and older
Conditions the study is for
Relapsed/Refractory Mantle Cell Lymphoma
What is being tested?
brexucabtagene autoleucel, Cyclophosphamide and Fludarabine
Type of treatment
Injection or infusion
Could I receive a placebo?
No, everyone receives an active treatment
How many people
105 participants
Where
32 sitesin 4 countries
Study dates
9 Nov 2015to 22 Sep 2023
Phase
Phase 2
Are there results?
Yes, posted in the registrySummary in the doctors' view

Key requirements

Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.

  • Ages 18 years and older
  • All sexes
  • No healthy volunteers
  • Adult, Older adult

Who may be able to join

  • 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
Show all 9Show fewer
  • 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.

Who cannot join

  • 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.

Trial locations and contacts

32 sites in 4 countries.

32 sites in 4 countries

United States24 sites
  • Winship Cancer Institute of Emory University

    Atlanta, Georgia, 30322

  • Dana-Farber Cancer Institute

    Boston, Massachusetts, 02215

  • University of Chicago

    Chicago, Illinois, 60637

  • Cleveland Clinic Foundation

    Cleveland, Ohio, 44195

  • Ohio State University

    Columbus, Ohio, 43210

  • Baylor Charles A. Sammons Cancer Center

    Dallas, Texas, 75246

  • Sarah Cannon

    Denver, Colorado, 80218

  • Barbara Ann Karmanos Cancer Institute

    Detroit, Michigan, 48201

  • City of Hope

    Duarte, California, 91010

  • Duke University Medical Center

    Durham, North Carolina, 27710

  • Banner MD Anderson

    Gilbert, Arizona, 85234

  • Hackensack University Medical Center

    Hackensack, New Jersey, 07601

  • University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center

    Houston, Texas, 77030

  • Loyola University Chicago

    Maywood, Illinois, 60153

  • University of Miami

    Miami, Florida, 33136

  • Sarah Cannon Research Institute

    Nashville, Tennessee, 37203

  • Vanderbilt University Medical Center

    Nashville, Tennessee, 37232

  • Fox Chase Cancer Center

    Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 19111

  • Robert W. Franz Cancer Research Center

    Portland, Oregon, 97213

  • University of Rochester Medical Center

    Rochester, New York, 14642

  • University California Los Angeles (UCLA)

    Santa Monica, California, 90404

  • Swedish Cancer Institute

    Seattle, Washington, 98104

  • Stanford University

    Stanford, California, 94305

  • H Lee Moffitt Cancer Center

    Tampa, Florida, 33612

Other trials in United States

France3 sites
  • Centre Hospitalier Universitaire (CHU)

    Bordeaux

  • Hospital Saint Louis

    Paris, 75010

  • Hopital Haut-Leveque

    Pessac, 44035

Other trials in France

Netherlands3 sites
  • Academisch Medisch Centrum

    Amsterdam

  • University Medical Center Groningen

    Groningen

  • Erasmus Medical Center

    Rotterdam

Other trials in Netherlands

Germany2 sites
  • Universitätsklinik Dresden

    Dresden, 01307

  • Universitaetsklinikum Wuerzburg

    Würzburg, 97080

Other trials in Germany

About this study

Official title: 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).

Read the 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

Being tested
brexucabtagene autoleucel, Cyclophosphamide, Fludarabine, Axicabtagene Ciloleucel
Medical subject headings
Lymphoma, Mantle-Cell

What participants receive

What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.

  • brexucabtagene autoleucelBiological

    Also called KTE-X19, TECARTUS™

    A single infusion of brexucabtagene autoleucel (KTE-X19) anti-CD 19 CAR T cells

  • CyclophosphamideDrug

    Administered intravenously

  • FludarabineDrug

    Administered intravenously

  • Axicabtagene CiloleucelDrug

    A single infusion of axicabtagene ciloleucel anti-CD 19 CAR T cells

Study groups in NCT02601313
Study groupRoleWhat they receive
Axicabtagene ciloleucel/brexucabtagene autoleucel (KTE-X19)ExperimentalParticipants 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.
Receives: Biological: brexucabtagene autoleucel; Drug: Cyclophosphamide; Drug: Fludarabine; Drug: Axicabtagene Ciloleucel

What is being measured

The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.

  1. 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.

    Measured: Up to 7.8 years

  2. 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.

    Measured: Up to 7.8 years

Secondary outcomes (26)
  1. 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.

    Measured: Up to 7.8 years

  2. 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.

    Measured: Up to 7.8 years

  3. 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.

    Measured: Up to 7.8 years

  4. 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.

    Measured: Up to 7.8 years

  5. 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.

    Measured: Up to 7.8 years

  6. 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.

    Measured: Up to 7.8 years

  7. 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.

    Measured: Up to 7.8 years

  8. 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.

    Measured: Up to 7.8 years

  9. 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.

    Measured: Up to 7.8 years

  10. 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.

    Measured: Up to 7.8 years

  11. 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.

    Measured: Up to 5 years

  12. Percentage of Participants With Decrease in Post-brexucabtagene Autoleucel Infusion Hematology Toxicity Values by Worst Toxicity Grade

    Measured: Up to 5 years

  13. Percentage of Participants With Increase in Post-brexucabtagene Autoleucel Infusion Hematology Toxicity Values by Worst Toxicity Grade

    Measured: Up to 5 years

  14. Percentage of Participants With Decrease in Post-brexucabtagene Autoleucel Infusion Chemistry Toxicity Values by Worst Toxicity Grade

    Measured: Up to 5 years

  15. Percentage of Participants With Increase in Post-brexucabtagene Autoleucel Infusion Chemistry Toxicity Values by Worst Toxicity Grade

    Measured: Up to 5 years

  16. Percentage of Participants With Anti-CD19 CAR Antibodies

    Measured: Baseline up to Month 3

  17. Maximum Number of CAR T Cells Measured Post-infusion

    Measured: Up to Month 24

  18. Peak Serum Levels of C-Reactive Protein (CRP) in Blood

    Peak was defined as the maximum post-baseline level of the cytokine.

    Measured: Baseline up to Week 4

  19. 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.

    Measured: Baseline up to Week 4

  20. 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.

    Measured: Baseline up to Week 4

  21. 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.

    Measured: Baseline, Week 4, Month 3, and Month 6

  22. 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.

    Measured: Baseline, Week 4, Month 3, and Month 6

  23. 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.

    Measured: Baseline, Week 4, Month 3, and Month 6

  24. 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.

    Measured: Baseline, Week 4, Month 3, and Month 6

  25. 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.

    Measured: Baseline, Week 4, Month 3, and Month 6

  26. 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.

    Measured: Baseline, Week 4, Month 3, and Month 6

Timeline

From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.

  1. First posted10 Nov 2015 (estimated)
  2. Study start9 Nov 2015
  3. Primary completion22 Sep 2023
  4. Study completion22 Sep 2023

Resources

More details

For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.

Study design
Study type
Interventional
Phase
Phase 2
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Not applicable
Intervention model
Single group
Masking
None (open label)
Enrolment
105 participants (actual)
IDs, dates and publications
ClinicalTrials.gov ID
NCT02601313
Sponsor's protocol ID
KTE-C19-102
Other IDs
2015-005008-27, 2023-506641-35, 2023, 2015
Acronym
ZUMA-2
Status last verified
Mar 2026
First submitted
6 Nov 2015
Last updated
18 Mar 2026
Data monitoring committee
Yes
FDA-regulated drug
Yes
FDA-regulated device
No
Individual data sharing
Yes: Qualified external researchers may request IPD for this study. For more information, please visit our website at https://www.gileadclinicaltrials.com/transparency-policy#Commitment

Publications

  • 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.

    PubMed 25712454
  • 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.

    PubMed 25113753
  • 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.

    PubMed 26673811
  • 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.

    PubMed 28066928
  • 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.

    PubMed 17001068
  • 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.

    PubMed 24002500
  • 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.

    PubMed 30175400
  • 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.

    PubMed 15470219
  • 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.

    PubMed 24876563
  • 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.

    PubMed 30518502
  • 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.

    PubMed 26764355

Questions about this trial

What is this clinical trial studying?

A Phase 2 study testing brexucabtagene autoleucel, Cyclophosphamide and Fludarabine in people with Relapsed/Refractory Mantle Cell Lymphoma, run by Kite, A Gilead Company at 32 sites in 4 countries.

The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.

Who may be eligible to take part?

The sponsor lists 9 inclusion and 4 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.

Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?

The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 18 Mar 2026. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.

Where is the study taking place?

The record lists 32 sites in United States, France, Netherlands, Germany. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.

What are the possible benefits and risks?

They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.

What does this phase mean?

Phase 2 studies give the treatment to a larger group to see whether it has the intended effect and to keep checking safety.

Not every study follows the same path, and some studies (observational studies, device studies) have no phase.

Are results available for this study?

Yes. Results are posted in the registry (first posted 10 Sep 2020). A summary is in the For doctors view, and the full results are on ClinicalTrials.gov.

How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?

The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.

What does the primary outcome measure?

Percentage of Participants With Objective Response (OR) Per the Lugano Classification According to Independent Radiology Review Committee (IRRC) in Cohort 1 (time frame: Up to 7.8 years). The study lists 2 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.

Where can I read the original study information?

On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT02601313, which also lists 26 linked publications.

Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?

No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.

How often is this information updated?

AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 18 Mar 2026.

Free account

Log in to keep searching

You’ve used your 3 free searches. AzTrials is free: log in or create a free account to keep searching clinical trials and save the ones you want to follow.

Create a free accountLog in