CAR-T(CAR-T)细胞疗法在非肿瘤性疾病中的应用
Chimeric antigen receptor T (CAR-T) cell therapy in non-oncological diseases.
CELL INTELLIGENCE · 肿瘤细胞治疗研究
肿瘤细胞治疗研究
英文原题:A real-world comparison of commercial-use axicabtagene ciloleucel and lisocabtagene maraleucel in large B-cell lymphoma.
A real-world comparison of commercial-use axicabtagene ciloleucel and lisocabtagene maraleucel in large B-cell lymphoma.
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。
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。
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.
在 PubMed 查看 → 出版商原文(DOI) 全文 PDF(PMC)· 可下载 治疗专题与资料阅读指南 资料来源与翻译说明 报告译文或资料问题 →
MEMBER ACCOUNT
登录成功会直接打开下一页。