← 返回

商业使用 axicabtagene ciloleucel 与 lisocabtagene maraleucel 治疗大 B 细胞淋巴瘤的真实世界比较

英文原题:A real-world comparison of commercial-use axicabtagene ciloleucel and lisocabtagene maraleucel in large B-cell lymphoma.

查看英文原题

A real-world comparison of commercial-use axicabtagene ciloleucel and lisocabtagene maraleucel in large B-cell lymphoma.

PubMed 2025/02/11(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

利基迈仑赛(liso-cel)和阿基仑赛(axi-cel)是获批用于治疗复发/难治性大B细胞淋巴瘤(LBCL)的抗CD19嵌合抗原受体(CAR)T细胞疗法;然而,目前尚无临床试验以外liso-cel的已发表数据,也没有这两种疗法的直接比较数据。在这项回顾性分析中,我们回顾了单中心三线治疗环境下接受liso-cel或axi-cel的LBCL患者。2021年6月至2022年9月,共50例患者接受axi-cel治疗,37例接受liso-cel治疗。除liso-cel组患者年龄较大外,两组基线特征相似。从白细胞单采到CAR-T 细胞输注的中位时间,liso-cel组(41天)显著长于axi-cel组(30天)。axi-cel组和liso-cel组完全缓解率无显著差异,分别为72%和62%。中位随访11个月时,两组PFS也无显著差异,12个月PFS率分别为59%和44%。

然而,倾向评分分析显示liso-cel组PFS较差(风险比2.95;95%置信区间1.14–7.60)。axi-cel组CRS、ICANS和长期中性粒细胞减少发生率高于liso-cel组。

总体而言,直接比较axi-cel和liso-cel队列发现,缓解率和PFS等关键结局相似;但liso-cel等待时间较长,可能导致患者选择偏倚,使liso-cel组纳入的患者特征更有利。校正这些较高风险特征后,观察到liso-cel组PFS不及axi-cel组。这些发现值得在多中心环境中进一步评估。

展开英文摘要原文

Lisocabtagene maraleucel (liso-cel) and axicabtagene ciloleucel (axi-cel) are anti-CD19 chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapies approved for relapsed and refractory large B-cell lymphoma (LBCL); however, there is currently no published data on liso-cel outside of clinical trials nor any data comparing these therapies. In this retrospective analysis, we reviewed patients with LBCL receiving liso-cel or axi-cel at a single institution in the third-line setting. From June 2021 to September 2022, a total of 50 patients received axi-cel and 37 liso-cel.

Baseline patient characteristics were similar, aside from older age in liso-cel recipients. The median time from leukapheresis to CAR T-cell infusion was significantly longer for liso-cel (41 days) than axi-cel (30 days). Complete response rates were not significantly different between axi-cel (72%) and liso-cel (62%). At a median follow-up of 11 months, progression-free survival (PFS) was not significantly different between axi-cel and liso-cel cohorts, with 12-month PFS of 59% and 44%, respectively.

However, on a propensity score analysis, an inferior PFS was observed with liso-cel (hazard ratio, 2. 95; 95% confidence interval , 1. 14-7. 60). The rates of cytokine release syndrome, immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome, and prolonged neutropenia were higher with axi-cel than liso-cel.

Overall, direct comparison of axi-cel and liso-cel cohorts shows similar key outcomes including response rate and PFS, but prolonged wait times for liso-cel may have resulted in biased selection of patients with more favorable characteristics for liso-cel. When accounting for these higher-risk characteristics, an inferior PFS is observed with liso-cel compared with axi-cel.

These findings warrant further evaluation in a multicenter setting.

论文信息

作者
Looka A、Qualls DA、Matthews D、Redd RA、Sakellis C、Duffy C、Dela Cruz J、Saucier A
单位
Division of Lymphoma, Department of Medicine, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA.United States
文献类型
对照研究
期刊
Blood advances2025 Feb 11
原文标识
PubMed 39546746 · DOI 10.1182/bloodadvances.2024012992