The ORR of 87% and CR rate of 65% with epcoritamab plus R-ICE in this trial is impressive, particularly given that many patients progressed rapidly after frontline treatment. How does this compare with historical benchmarks for salvage regimens in transplant-eligible R/R DLBCL?

Roughly 65% of patients proceeded to ASCT. Do these results suggest this combination could increase transplant eligibility, and how might it reshape the clinical approach to bridging high-risk patients to transplant?

At six months, 81% of responses were ongoing and 74% of patients remained progression-free. What do these short-term durability metrics tell us, and what would you look for in long-term follow-up to assess curative potential?

Cytokine release syndrome (CRS) occurred in over half the patients, but all cases were low grade and resolved. How manageable is CRS in this setting, especially when layered onto a cytotoxic regimen like R-ICE, and are there any concerns in transplant-prep patients?

Patients relapsing within 12 months had an 85% ORR vs 91% for those relapsing later. How significant is this consistency across relapse timing and prior lines of therapy for broader applicability in practice?

Only one case of low-grade ICANS was observed. In your experience, does this low incidence suggest a favorable neurotoxicity profile for epcoritamab in aggressive B-NHL when combined with chemotherapy?

Given the depth of response and safety data, do you envision a role for this epcoritamab-R-ICE regimen earlier in treatment algorithms, or is its value primarily as a second-line bridge-to-transplant option for now?

What type of confirmatory evidence or Phase 3 design would be needed to support potential approval of this combination? Is there a plausible regulatory path forward in transplant-eligible R/R DLBCL?