← 返回

axicabtagene ciloleucel 与 tisagenlecleucel CAR-T 细胞治疗复发/难治性滤泡性淋巴瘤的疗效、安全性及成本最小化分析

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.

查看英文原题

Efficacy, safety, and cost-minimization analysis of axicabtagene ciloleucel and tisagenlecleucel CAR T-Cell therapies for treatment of relapsed or refractory follicular lymphoma.

PubMed 2023/08/12(内容时间) Invest New Drugs Q2 · IF 3.4(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

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。

展开英文摘要原文

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.

论文信息

作者
Ghanem B
单位
Department of Pharmaceutical Economics and Policy, School of Pharmacy, Chapman University, Irvine, CA, USA. bghanem@chapman.edu.United States
期刊
Investigational new drugs2023 Oct
原文标识
PubMed 37572232 · DOI 10.1007/s10637-023-01389-w