决定异体 CAR T 细胞排斥与扩增的细胞和分子机制
Cellular and molecular mechanisms determining allogeneic CAR T cell rejection and expansion.
我们评估了11例接受单一批次cemacabtagene ansegedleucel(cema-cel)治疗的大B细胞淋巴瘤患者,cemacabtagene ansegedleucel是一种异体抗CD19 CAR T产品。
英文原题:Second Primary Malignancies after CAR T-Cell Therapy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of 5,517 Lymphoma and Myeloma Patients.
Second Primary Malignancies after CAR T-Cell Therapy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of 5,517 Lymphoma and Myeloma Patients.
这些数据提高了对 SPM 作为接受 CAR T 细胞治疗患者临床上相关长期不良事件的认识。然而,我们的研究结果并未表明 CAR-T 相比既往标准治疗策略的 SPM 发生率更高。
嵌合抗原受体(CAR)T细胞疗法是一种针对血液系统恶性肿瘤的有效免疫疗法,但患者可能出现长期不良事件,包括影响发病率和死亡率的第二原发恶性肿瘤(SPM)。为明确淋巴瘤和骨髓瘤患者接受CAR-T后SPM的发生频率和亚型,我们进行了一项系统综述和荟萃分析。
在 MEDLINE、Embase 和 Cochrane CENTRAL 数据库中进行了文献检索。在提取 SPM 病例并判定其恶性来源后,我们采用随机效应模型分析了 SPM 的点估计值。
我们在来自18项临床试验和7项真实世界研究的5,517例患者中识别出326例SPMs。中位随访21.7个月时,总体SPM点估计值为6.0%(95%置信区间,4.8%-7.4%)。SPM估计值与治疗场景(临床试验 > 真实世界研究)、随访持续时间和既往治疗线数相关,这些均在meta回归模型中被证实为SPM的独立研究水平危险因素。对随机分配至CAR-T与标准治疗的4项试验进行的亚组meta分析显示,两种治疗策略的SPM风险相似(P = 0.92)。在SPM亚型分布分析中,血液恶性肿瘤是最常见的类型(37%),其次为实体瘤(27%)和非黑色素瘤皮肤癌(16%)。T细胞恶性肿瘤仅占事件的一小部分(1.5%)。我们注意到SPM分布存在疾病和产品特异性差异。
PURPOSE: Chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy is a potent immunotherapy for hematologic malignancies, but patients can develop long-term adverse events, including second primary malignancies (SPM) that impact morbidity and mortality. To delineate the frequency and subtypes of SPMs following CAR-T in lymphoma and myeloma, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: A literature search was conducted in the MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane CENTRAL databases. Following the extraction of SPM cases and assignment of malignant origin, we analyzed SPM point estimates using random effects models. RESULTS: We identified 326 SPMs across 5,517 patients from 18 clinical trials and 7 real-world studies. With a median follow-up of 21.7 months, the overall SPM point estimate was 6.0% (95% confidence interval, 4.8%-7.4%). SPM estimates were associated with treatment setting (clinical trials > real-world studies), duration of follow-up, and number of prior treatment lines, which were each confirmed as independent study-level risk factors of SPM in a meta-regression model. A subgroup meta-analysis of the four trials that randomized CAR-T versus standard-of-care revealed a similar risk of SPM with either treatment strategy (P = 0.92). In a distribution analysis of SPM subtypes, hematologic malignancies were the most common entity (37%), followed by solid tumors (27%) and non-melanoma skin cancers (16%). T-cell malignancies represented a small minority of events (1.5%). We noted disease- and product-specific variations in SPM distribution. CONCLUSIONS: These data raise awareness of SPM as a clinically relevant long-term adverse event in patients receiving CAR T-cell therapy. However, our findings do not indicate that SPM frequency is higher with CAR-T versus previous standard-of-care strategies.
MEMBER ACCOUNT
登录成功会直接打开下一页。