← 返回

适合移植的复发/难治性弥漫大 B 细胞淋巴瘤患者二线挽救化疗后的临床结局:一项回顾性研究

英文原题:Clinical outcomes in transplant-eligible patients with relapsed or refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma after second-line salvage chemotherapy: A retrospective study.

查看英文原题

Clinical outcomes in transplant-eligible patients with relapsed or refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma after second-line salvage chemotherapy: A retrospective study.

PubMed 2023/08/28(内容时间) Cancer Med Q2 · IF 3.5(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。

研究概要

在本研究中,我们证明了无论给药时机如何,化疗敏感性仍然是预测 CAR-T 细胞治疗后生存结果的关键因素,并且在二线挽救性化疗有效后,ASCT 和 CAR-T 细胞治疗都是可接受的。

中文摘要

复发/难治性(R/R)弥漫性大 B 细胞淋巴瘤(DLBCL)患者预后较差。一线挽救化疗失败后,患者可接受二线挽救化疗,但此类患者的最佳治疗策略尚未确立。

本单中心回顾性研究纳入具有移植资格、接受二线挽救化疗且以治愈为目标的 R/R DLBCL 患者。

76 例 R/R DLBCL 患者接受二线挽救化疗,其中 18 例(23.7%)对一线挽救化疗有应答。总体缓解率为 39.5%;二线挽救化疗应答者的总生存期(OS)显著长于未应答者。41 例患者继续接受潜在根治性治疗(自体造血干细胞移植 [ASCT]、嵌合抗原受体 [CAR] T 细胞疗法或异基因造血干细胞移植),其预后优于未接受这些治疗者。在 46 例二线挽救方案未应答患者中,仅 18 例(39.1%)能够继续接受根治性治疗;而在 30 例二线挽救方案应答患者中,有 23 例(76.7%)接受了潜在根治性治疗。在接受 CAR-T 细胞治疗的 34 例患者中,CAR-T 治疗前紧接着的挽救化疗应答者,其 OS 显著长于未应答者。相较之下,既往化疗线数不是统计学显著的生存预后因素。二线挽救化疗应答后接受 ASCT 与接受 CAR-T 细胞治疗的患者,OS 无显著差异。讨论:本研究显示,无论 CAR-T 治疗在何时实施,化疗敏感性仍是预测 CAR-T 治疗后生存结局的关键因素;对二线挽救化疗应答后,ASCT 和 CAR-T 细胞治疗均为可接受的治疗选择。

展开英文摘要原文

The prognosis of patients with relapsed or refractory (R/R) diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) is poor. Although patients who fail first-line salvage chemotherapy are candidates for second-line salvage chemotherapy, the optimal treatment strategy for these patients has not yet been established.

The present, single-center, retrospective study included transplant-eligible patients with R/R DLBCL who received second-line salvage chemotherapy with curative intent.

Seventy-six patients with R/R DLBCL received second-line salvage chemotherapy. Eighteen (23.7%) patients were responders to the first-line salvage chemotherapy. The overall response rate was 39.5%, and overall survival (OS) was significantly longer in patients who responded to second-line salvage chemotherapy than those who did not. Forty-one patients who proceeded to potentially curative treatment (autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation [ASCT], chimeric antigen receptor [CAR] T-cell therapy, or allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation) had a better prognosis than those who did not. Among the 46 patients who failed to respond to the second-line salvage regimen, only 18 (39.1%) could proceed to the curative treatments. However, among the 30 patients who responded to the second-line salvage regimen, 23 (76.7%) received one of the potentially curative treatments. Among 34 patients who received CAR T-cell therapy, OS was significantly longer in those who responded to salvage chemotherapy immediately prior to CAR T-cell therapy than in those who did not respond. In contrast, the number of prior lines of chemotherapy was not identified as a statistically significant prognostic factor of survival. No significant difference was detected in OS between patients receiving ASCT and those receiving CAR T-cell therapy after the response to second-line salvage chemotherapy. DISCUSSION: In this study, we demonstrated that chemosensitivity remained a crucial factor in predicting survival outcomes following CAR T-cell therapy irrespective of the administration timing, and that both ASCT and CAR T-cell therapy were acceptable after the response to second-line salvage chemotherapy.

论文信息

作者
Yagi Y、Kanemasa Y、Sasaki Y、Sei M、Matsuo T、Ishimine K、Hayashi Y、Mino M
单位
Department of Medical Oncology, Tokyo Metropolitan Cancer and Infectious Diseases Center, Komagome Hospital, Tokyo, Japan.Japan
期刊
Cancer medicine2023 Sep
原文标识
PubMed 37635630 · DOI 10.1002/cam4.6412