← 返回

大 B 细胞淋巴瘤的 axicabtagene ciloleucel 桥接治疗:美国淋巴瘤 CAR-T 联盟结果

英文原题:Bridging therapy with axicabtagene ciloleucel for large B-cell lymphoma: results from the US Lymphoma CAR-T Consortium.

查看英文原题

Bridging therapy with axicabtagene ciloleucel for large B-cell lymphoma: results from the US Lymphoma CAR-T Consortium.

PubMed 2024/02/27(内容时间) Blood Adv Q1 · IF 7.7(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

在自体嵌合抗原受体(CAR)T细胞治疗的制备期间,患者可能因癌症进展而病情恶化。本研究调查桥接治疗(BT)对复发/难治性大B细胞淋巴瘤患者结局的影响,这些患者在白细胞单采与输注axicabtagene ciloleucel(axi-cel)之间接受了抗淋巴瘤治疗。分析采用美国多中心淋巴瘤CAR-T 联盟数据,中位随访33个月(范围4.3–42.1)。298例接受白细胞单采的患者中,275例接受axi-cel。接受BT的患者共143例(52%),其基线风险特征高于未接受BT者,且整体结局较差。

然而,对两组进行倾向评分匹配后,BT组与未接受BT组的总体缓解率(77%比87%;P=.13)、完全缓解率(58%比70%;P=.1)、无进展生存期(风险比〔HR〕1.25;P=.23)和总生存期(HR 1.39;P=.09)均无统计学显著差异。对所有接受白细胞单采患者进行分析、不论之后是否接受axi-cel(意向治疗分析),结果相似。放疗BT的结局与非放疗BT相近。研究结果提示,对需要在制备期间控制病情的患者,BT可能安全,且不会显著影响长期生存;此外,放疗BT相较非放疗BT并无明确优势。

展开英文摘要原文

During the manufacturing period of autologous chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy, patients may experience a decline in their condition due to cancer progression. In this study, we investigated the impact of bridging therapy (BT) on the outcome of patients with relapsed/refractory large B-cell lymphoma who received antilymphoma treatment between leukapheresis and axicabtagene ciloleucel (axi-cel) infusion.

We conducted our analysis using data from the multicenter US Lymphoma CAR-T Consortium, with a median follow-up of 33 months (range, 4. 3-42. 1). Out of the 298 patients who underwent leukapheresis, 275 patients received axi-cel. A total 52% of patients (n = 143) who received BT had a higher baseline risk profile than patients who did not receive BT, and these patients, as a group, had inferior outcomes compared with those who did not receive BT.

However, after propensity score matching between the 2 groups, there were no statistically significant differences in overall response rate (77% vs 87%; P = . 13), complete response rate (58% vs 70%; P = . 1), progression-free survival (hazard ratio [HR], 1. 25; P = . 23), and overall survival (HR, 1. 39; P=.

09) between the BT group and the no-BT group, respectively. Analyzing the effects of BT in the whole cohort that underwent leukapheresis regardless of receiving axi-cel (intention-to-treat analysis) showed similar results. Radiation BT resulted in outcomes similar to those observed with nonradiation BT.

Our findings suggest that BT may be safe without a significant impact on long-term survival for patients who require disease stabilization during the manufacturing period.

Moreover, our results suggest that there is no clear advantage to using radiation-based BT over nonradiation-based BT.

论文信息

作者
Jain MD、Jacobs MT、Gao F、Nastoupil LJ、Spiegel JY、Lin Y、Dahiya S、Lunning M
第一作者单位
Department of Blood and Marrow Transplant and Cellular Immunotherapy, Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, FL.United States
通讯作者单位
Division of Medical Oncology, Washington University School of Medicine and Siteman Cancer Center, St Louis, MO.United States
文献类型
多中心研究 · 非美国政府资助研究 · 美国 NIH 资助研究
期刊
Blood advances2024 Feb 27
原文标识
PubMed 38051550 · DOI 10.1182/bloodadvances.2023011489