← 返回

弥漫性大 B 细胞淋巴瘤患者接受 CAR-T 细胞治疗后的挽救方案评估

英文原题:Assessment of Salvage Regimens Post-Chimeric Antigen Receptor T Cell Therapy for Patients with Diffuse Large B Cell Lymphoma.

查看英文原题

Assessment of Salvage Regimens Post-Chimeric Antigen Receptor T Cell Therapy for Patients with Diffuse Large B Cell Lymphoma.

PubMed 2022/03/04(内容时间) Transplant Cell Ther Q1 · IF 4.7(JCR 2025)

分数与星级只用于站内排序 —— 不代表疗效、安全性或个人适用性。

中文摘要

抗CD19CAR-T 细胞疗法(CAR19)是复发/难治性(R/R)弥漫性大B细胞淋巴瘤(DLBCL)患者的关键治疗方式。

然而,大多数患者在CAR19后随后出现疾病进展,而评估这些患者最佳挽救方案的数据有限。本研究旨在评估CAR19后疾病进展的R/R DLBCL患者的结局,并评估预测挽救治疗反应的变量。

我们对2018年1月至2021年2月期间在本机构接受CAR19的所有DLBCL患者进行了回顾性分析,收集了人口学特征、疾病特征、CAR19最佳反应、复发或进展日期、首次挽救治疗及对挽救治疗反应的数据。

我们根据患者对CAR19是否有反应(有反应者)或无反应(无反应者)进行分析。挽救方案分为6组进行分析。主要终点包括总生存期(OS)和无进展生存期(PFS),使用Kaplan-Meier法计算。拟合Cox模型以评估预后因素的影响。在分析期间接受CAR19的120例患者中,有69例有反应者,其对CAR19达到完全或部分反应,以及51例无反应者,包括44例疾病稳定或进展和7例在评估前死亡。30例有反应者复发,26例接受了挽救治疗,24例无反应者接受了挽救治疗。主要挽救方案包括来那度胺为基础方案(n = 17;34%)、BTKi(n = 10;20%)、检查点抑制剂为基础方案(n = 7;14%)、化学免疫治疗(n = 5;10%)、异基因造血干细胞移植(n = 5;10%)及其他(n = 6;12%)。不同挽救方案之间OS无显著差异(P = .4545)。接受挽救治疗的缓解者OS显著长于未缓解者(中位OS未达到对10.9个月;P = .0187),且在校正其他变量后,对CAR19的缓解和挽救治疗时乳酸脱氢酶水平升高是仅有的两个统计学显著预后因素。对CAR19缓解者接受挽救治疗的结局显著优于对CAR19未缓解者。不同挽救方案之间结局无显著差异。未来需要研究评估CAR19失败后最佳挽救方案。

展开英文摘要原文

Anti-CD19 chimeric antigen receptor T cell therapy (CAR19) represents a critical treatment modality for patients with relapsed/refractory (R/R) diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL).

However, the majority of patients subsequently experience disease progression following CAR19, and data are limited on assessing the best salvage regimen for these patients.

This study aimed to evaluate outcomes in R/R DLBCL patients with progressive disease post-CAR19 and to assess variables that predict response to salvage therapy.

We performed a retrospective analysis of all patients with DLBCL who received CAR19 at our institution between January 2018 and February 2021, collecting data on demographic characteristics, disease characteristics, best response to CAR19, date of relapse or progression, and first salvage therapy and response to salvage.

We analyzed patients according to whether they responded to CAR19 (responders) or did not (nonresponders). Salvage regimens were classified into 6 groups for analysis. Primary endpoints included overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS), calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Cox models were fit to evaluate the effect of prognostic factors. Among the 120 patients who received CAR19 during the analysis period were 69 responders who achieved a complete or partial response to CAR19 and 51 nonresponders, including 44 with stable or progressive disease and 7 who died before assessment. Thirty responders relapsed and 26 received salvage therapy, and 24 nonresponders received salvage therapy.

The primary salvage regimens included lenalidomide-based regimens (n = 17; 34%), BTKi (n = 10; 20%), checkpoint inhibitor-based (n = 7; 14%), chemo-immunotherapy (n = 5; 10%), allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (n = 5; 10%), and others (n = 6; 12%). There was no significant difference in OS based on salvage regimen (P = . 4545). Responders who received salvage therapy had significantly longer OS than nonresponders (median OS not reached versus 10.

9 months; P = . 0187), and response to CAR19 and elevated lactate dehydrogenase level at time of salvage treatment were the only two statistically significant prognostic factors after accounting for other variables. Responders to CAR19 had significantly better outcomes with salvage therapy compared with nonresponders to CAR19. There was no significant difference in outcomes based on salvage regimen. Future research is needed to assess the best salvage regimen post-CAR19 failure.

论文信息

作者
Sigmund AM、Denlinger N、Huang Y、Bond D、Voorhees T、Bajwa A、Elder P、Brammer JE
第一作者单位
Division of Hematology, Department of Internal Medicine, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio.United States
通讯作者单位
Division of Hematology, Department of Internal Medicine, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio. Electronic address: Adam.Kittai@osumc.edu.United States
期刊
Transplantation and cellular therapy2022 Jun
原文标识
PubMed 35248778 · DOI 10.1016/j.jtct.2022.02.021