CAR-T(CAR-T)细胞疗法在非肿瘤性疾病中的应用
Chimeric antigen receptor T (CAR-T) cell therapy in non-oncological diseases.
CAR-T(CAR-T)细胞在血液系统恶性肿瘤中的应用推动了这种免疫治疗形式的显著进展。
CELL INTELLIGENCE · 肿瘤细胞治疗研究
肿瘤细胞治疗研究
英文原题:Efficacy, safety, and cost-minimization analysis of axicabtagene ciloleucel and tisagenlecleucel CAR T-Cell therapies for treatment of relapsed or refractory follicular lymphoma.
Efficacy, safety, and cost-minimization analysis of axicabtagene ciloleucel and tisagenlecleucel CAR T-Cell therapies for treatment of relapsed or refractory follicular lymphoma.
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。
Axicabtagene ciloleucel(axi-cel)和 tisagenlecleucel(tisa-cel)是嵌合抗原受体(CAR)T 细胞疗法,用于治疗既往接受过两线或以上全身治疗的复发/难治性滤泡性淋巴瘤(rrFL)成人患者。由于缺乏头对头临床试验,本研究旨在比较 axi-cel 与 tisa-cel 治疗至少接受过两线治疗的 rrFL 的疗效、安全性和费用。采用报告比值比(ROR)及其 95% 置信区间(CI),在 p < 0.05 的标准下比较总缓解率(ORR)和安全性信号;采用 Kaplan–Meier 法及 log-rank 检验比较无进展生存期(PFS)、缓解持续时间(DoR)和总生存期(OS)。研究还计算了药物购置、给药、严重不良事件(AE)及复发后管理的费用和成本最小化分析。
费用数据取自 IBM-Micromedex Red Book、美国医疗保险和医疗补助服务中心以及既有文献。统计分析使用 Microsoft Excel 和 R 4.0.5 版。axi-cel 与 tisa-cel 在 ORR、DoR 和 OS 方面均未见统计学显著差异(p > 0.05);tisa-cel 的 PFS 显著更优(p < 0.05)。与 tisa-cel 相比,axi-cel 与更高的 CRS、神经系统事件及 3–4 级 AE 发生率显著相关(ROR > 1,p < 0.05)。axi-cel 和 tisa-cel 的每位患者费用分别为 512,021 美元和 450,885 美元,使用 tisa-cel 相较 axi-cel 可节省 61,136 美元。
总体而言,tisa-cel 似乎具有更好的安全性特征、较少的严重 AE、较低的死亡率和较低的费用。
Axicabtagene ciloleucel (axi-cel) and tisagenlecleucel (tisa-cel) are chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapies used to treat adult patients with relapsed or refractory follicular lymphoma (rrFL) after two or more lines of systemic therapy. In the absence of head-to-head clinical trials, this study aimed to compare the efficacy, safety, and cost of axi-cel and tisa-cel in the treatment of rrFL after at least two lines of treatment.
Overall response rate (ORR) and safety signals were compared using reporting odds ratios (RORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) at p < 0. 05. Progression-free survival (PFS), duration of response (DoR), and overall survival (OS) were compared using the Kaplan? Meier method with a log-rank test. Cost and cost-minimization analyses of drug acquisition, drug administration, serious adverse events (AEs), and relapsed management were calculated. Costs were extracted from the IBM-Micromedex Red Book, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, and existing literature. Statistical analyses were conducted using Microsoft Excel and R version 4.
0. 5. No statistically significant differences were observed between axi-cel and tisa-cel in terms of ORR, DoR, and OS (p > 0. 05). PFS was significantly better with tisa-cel (p < 0. 05). Axi-cel was significantly associated with higher incidences of CRS, neurologic events, and grade 3-4 AEs than tisa-cel (ROR > 1, p < 0.
05). Axi-cel and tisa-cel cost $512,021 and $450,885 per patient, respectively, resulting in savings of US$61,136 with tisa-cel over axi-cel. Tisa-cel appears to have a better safety profile, fewer serious AEs, lower mortality rate, and lower cost than axi-cel.
在 PubMed 查看 → 出版商原文(DOI) 全文 PDF(PMC)· 可下载 治疗专题与资料阅读指南 资料来源与翻译说明 报告译文或资料问题 →
MEMBER ACCOUNT
登录成功会直接打开下一页。