PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
May 29, 2026Journal of Clinical Oncology0 citations

Mosunetuzumab plus polatuzumab vedotin (Mosun-Pola) versus rituximab, gemcitabine and oxaliplatin (R-GemOx) in patients with relapsed/refractory large B-cell lymphoma (R/R LBCL): Updated efficacy and safety from the phase 3 SUNMO study including in second-line (2L) versus third-line plus (3L+) patient subgroups.

View Full Paper
WKWonseog KimSamsung Medical CenterJWJason WestinThe University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer CenterDMDai MaruyamaJapanese Foundation For Cancer Research

Key Points

  • The aim is to evaluate the efficacy and safety of Mosunetuzumab plus Polatuzumab Vedotin versus R-GemOx in patients with relapsed/refractory large B-cell lymphoma.
  • Randomized 2:1 trial of Mosun-Pola versus R-GemOx
  • Participants eligible for ASCT were assessed for progression-free survival and objective response rate
  • Safety assessments included cytokine release syndrome occurrences
  • Mosun-Pola showed superior median progression-free survival (PFS) of 11.6 months versus 3.8 months for R-GemOx (HR 0.41; 95% CI: 0.28–0.60)
  • In 2L patients, Mosun-Pola had a 2-year PFS rate of 40.3% compared to 20.1% for R-GemOx
  • Grade ≥2 cytokine release syndrome occurred in 4% of Mosun-Pola patients with no reported grade ≥3 events

Abstract

7007 Background: At the primary analysis, Mosun-Pola demonstrated superior efficacy versus R-GemOx, with infrequent cytokine release syndrome (CRS) events and manageable safety in patients (pts) with R/R LBCL in the Phase 3 SUNMO trial (NCT05171647; Budde et al. 2025). We report updated efficacy and safety, including in the 2L setting. Methods: Pts with R/R LBCL ineligible for autologous stem-cell transplant (ASCT) were randomized 2:1 to Mosun (subcutaneous)-Pola or R-GemOx. Dual primary endpoints were IRC-assessed progression-free survival (PFS) and objective response rate (ORR); secondary endpoints included complete response (CR) rate, duration of response (DOR), duration of CR (DOCR), and safety. Overall survival (OS) was not assessed as the data cut-off was prior to the pre-defined final OS analysis. Results: At data cut-off (August 8, 2025), 138 and 70 pts were assigned to Mosun-Pola or R-GemOx, respectively. Overall, 91 pts had 1 prior line of therapy (LOT; 2L; Mosun-Pola, n=61; R-GemOx, n=30) and 117 had ≥2 prior LOT (3L+; Mosun-Pola, n=77; R-GemOx, n=40). With a median follow-up of 28.3 months (mos), Mosun-Pola continued to demonstrate superior PFS benefits over R-GemOx (HR, 0.41; 95% CI: 0.28–0.60; Table). ORRs with Mosun-Pola were 70.3% vs 40.0% with R-GemOx. The observed PFS benefit of Mosun-Pola over R-GemOx was similar in 2L (HR, 0.38; 95% CI: 0.22–0.67) and 3L+ (HR, 0.48; 95% CI: 0.29–0.81) subgroups. With Mosun-Pola vs R-GemOx in 2L, the 2-year PFS rates were 40.3% vs 20.1%, and the 2-year DOCR estimates were 60.8% vs 37.5%, respectively. Median DOCR was not reached with Mosun-Pola in 2L and 3L+ subgroups. ORRs with Mosun-Pola vs R-GemOx were 75.4% vs 36.7% in 2L pts, and 66.2% vs 42.5% in 3L+ pts, respectively. The safety profile was unchanged since the primary analysis. Grade (Gr) ≥2 CRS occurred in 4% of Mosun-Pola-treated pts and no ICANS events occurred. The safety profile was consistent in 2L pts: Gr 2 CRS occurred in 3% of Mosun-Pola-treated pts, with no Gr ≥3 CRS events. Conclusions: Mosun-Pola continues to show notable efficacy with manageable safety in pts with ASCT-ineligible R/R LBCL, particularly in the 2L setting. Clinical trial information: NCT05171647 . Mos (95% CI), unless stated Mosun-Pola (n=138) R-GemOx (n=70) 2L Mosun-Pola (n=61) 2L R-GemOx (n=30) 3L+ Mosun-Pola (n=77) 3L+ R-GemOx (n=40) Median PFS 11.6 (5.6–17.6) 3.8 (2.9–4.1) 17.6 (5.6–NE) 3.6 (2.1–5.3) 8.6 (4.0–16.2) 3.9 (2.1–5.6) Median DOR 18.8 (11.5–NE) 6.0 (3.7–23.9) 18.8 (11.3–NE) 6.0 (3.9–NE) 21.5 (9.5–NE) 5.4 (2.3–18.3) CR, % (95% CI) 51.4 (42.8–60.0) 24.3 (14.8–36.0) 60.7 (47.3–72.9) 20.0 (7.7–38.6) 44.2 (32.8–55.9) 27.5 (14.6–43.9) Median DOCR NE 18.3 (3.9–NE) NE (15.6–NE) 21.4 (3.9–NE) NE (21.5–NE) 7.5 (2.3–NE) NE, not estimable.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Kim et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a192f1bfab5b468c441881ahttps://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2026.44.16_suppl.7007
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper