← 返回

axicabtagene ciloleucel 与 tisagenlecleucel 治疗侵袭性 B 细胞淋巴瘤的比较

英文原题:Axicabtagene ciloleucel compared to tisagenlecleucel for the treatment of aggressive B-cell lymphoma.

查看英文原题

Axicabtagene ciloleucel compared to tisagenlecleucel for the treatment of aggressive B-cell lymphoma.

PubMed 2023/01/01(内容时间) Haematologica Q1 · IF 8.2(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

阿基仑赛(axi-cel)和替沙仑赛(tisa-cel)是靶向CD19的嵌合抗原受体(CAR)T细胞,已获批用于复发/难治性(R/R)大B细胞淋巴瘤(LBCL)。

本研究开展回顾性分析,评估临床试验外使用axi-cel和tisa-cel的安全性和疗效。研究收集西班牙12个中心连续接受axi-cel或tisa-cel单采的R/R LBCL患者资料。2018年11月至2021年8月,共307人接受单采,其中axi-cel组152人、tisa-cel组155人;261人(85%)接受CAR-T 输注,两组输注比例分别为88%和82%。单采至输注的中位时间,axi-cel组为41天,tisa-cel组为52天(P=0.006)。两队列基线特征均无显著差异。axi-cel组细胞因子释放综合征(CRS)和神经系统事件更常见,分别为88%比73%(P=0.003)和42%比16%(P<0.001)。

输注后6个月内感染在axi-cel组也更常见(38%比25%,P=0.033)。axi-cel与tisa-cel组非复发死亡率无显著差异(分别为7%和4%,P=0.298)。中位随访9.2个月时,axi-cel和tisa-cel组中位PFS分别为5.9个月和3个月,中位OS分别为13.9个月和11.2个月。两组12个月PFS分别为41%和33%(P=0.195),OS分别为51%和47%(P=0.191)。多变量分析中,与OS较差相关的因素包括乳酸脱氢酶升高、ECOG评分2及淋巴清除前疾病进展。真实世界安全性和疗效与关键试验报告相近。axi-cel患者毒性较多,但非复发死亡率与tisa-cel相似,两种产品疗效无显著差异。

展开英文摘要原文

Axicabtagene ciloleucel (axi-cel) and tisagenlecleucel (tisa-cel) are CD19-targeted chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cells approved for relapsed/refractory (R/R) large B-cell lymphoma (LBCL).

We performed a retrospective study to evaluate safety and efficacy of axi-cel and tisa-cel outside the setting of a clinical trial. Data from consecutive patients with R/R LBCL who underwent apheresis for axi-cel or tisa-cel were retrospectively collected from 12 Spanish centers. A total of 307 patients underwent apheresis for axi-cel (n=152) and tisa-cel (n=155) from November 2018 to August 2021, of which 261 (85%) received a CAR T infusion (88% and 82%, respectively). Median time from apheresis to infusion was 41 days for axi-cel and 52 days for tisa-cel (P=0. 006). None of the baseline characteristics were significantly different between both cohorts. Both cytokine release syndrome and neurologic events (NE) were more frequent in the axi-cel group (88% vs. 73%, P=0. 003, and 42% vs. 16%, P<0. 001, respectively). Infections in the first 6 months post-infusion were also more common in patients treated with axi-cel (38% vs.

25%, P=0. 033). Non-relapse mortality was not significantly different between the axi-cel and tisa-cel groups (7% and 4%, respectively, P=0. 298). With a median follow-up of 9. 2 months, median PFS and OS were 5. 9 and 3 months, and 13. 9 and 11. 2 months for axi-cel and tisa-cel, respectively. The 12-month PFS and OS for axi-cel and tisa-cel were 41% and 33% (P=0. 195), 51% and 47% (P=0. 191), respectively.

Factors associated with lower OS in the multivariate analysis were increased lactate dehydrogenase, ECOG 2 and progressive disease before lymphodepletion. Safety and efficacy results in our real-world experience were comparable with those reported in the pivotal trials. Patients treated with axi-cel experienced more toxicity but similar non-relapse mortality compared with those receiving tisa-cel. Efficacy was not significantly different between both products.

论文信息

作者
Kwon M、Iacoboni G、Reguera JL、Corral LL、Morales RH、Ortiz-Maldonado V、Guerreiro M、Caballero AC
单位
Department of Hematology, Hospital General Universitario Gregorio Mara&#xf1;&#xf3;n, Madrid, Spain; Instituto de Investigaci&#xf3;n Sanitaria Gregorio Mara&#xf1;&#xf3;n, Madrid. mi.kwon@salud.madrid.org.Spain
文献类型
非美国政府资助研究
期刊
Haematologica2023 Jan 1
原文标识
PubMed 35770532 · DOI 10.3324/haematol.2022.280805