The pivotal SEQUOIA study (NCT03336333) is a multi-centre, randomised, open-label, Phase 3 study comparing BRUKINSA with bendamustine-rituximab (BR) in patients with treatment-naïve CLL or SLL.³

• Primary endpoint (Cohort 1): PFS per IRC
• Secondary endpoints included: PFS for Cohort 2, ORR, OS, DOR, safety, PFS by investigator

BRUKINSA demonstrated superior efficacy vs BR in TN CLL patients^3,4

Cohort 1 – patients without del(17p) (n=479):

• PFS (primary endpoint): 58% relative risk reduction with BRUKINSA vs BR; IRC-assessed; HR=0.42 (95% CI: 0.28, 0.63); two-sided p<0.0001 (median follow-up for PFS: 25.0 months)^1,3
• Median PFS was not reached with BRUKINSA vs 44.1 months with BR at 61.2 months median follow-up⁴

Cohort 2 – patients with del(17p) (n=111):

• Cohort 2 was a separate single-arm exploratory cohort for patients known to respond poorly to CIT³
• This cohort is one of the largest prospective datasets in this population³

Nearly three-quarters of patients (74%) without del(17p) remained progression free at 72 months⁵

Patients with del(17p) achieved PFS comparable to those without high-risk features⁵

• SEQUOIA 6-year PFS: 64% with del(17p)⁵

BRUKINSA demonstrated sustained PFS regardless of IGHV status⁵

• Similar PFS was observed in patients with mutated and unmutated IGHV treated with BRUKINSA⁵

Data cut-off: 30 April 2025.⁵

A well-tolerated treatment for patients with CLL, associated with low rates of discontinuation and dose reduction^4,5

At ~6 years median follow-up:

• 59% of patients without del(17p) remained on BRUKINSA (n=142/240)
• 55% of patients with del(17p) remained on BRUKINSA (n=61/111)

Patients treated with BRUKINSA reported better health-related QoL outcomes and fewer GI symptoms vs CIT⁶

• Patient-reported outcomes were better with BRUKINSA vs BR at Week 24⁶
• Fewer GI symptoms were reported with BRUKINSA vs BR at Week 24⁶