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.
CAR-T(CAR-T)细胞在血液系统恶性肿瘤中的应用推动了这种免疫治疗形式的显著进展。
CELL INTELLIGENCE · 肿瘤细胞治疗研究
肿瘤细胞治疗研究
英文原题:Characterization of bridging therapies in clinical trials leading to FDA approval of CAR-T cell therapies.
Characterization of bridging therapies in clinical trials leading to FDA approval of CAR-T cell therapies.
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。
在CAR-T 细胞生产期间,常采用桥接治疗控制疾病。由于桥接治疗通常涉及全身治疗,可能诱导应答和/或不良事件。我们开展横断面研究,评估CAR-T 试验中使用的桥接治疗。
我们回顾FDA药品说明书和同行评议的注册试验报告(包括补充数据),评估CAR-T 疗法试验中桥接治疗的特征。我们考察了所用桥接治疗类型、是否联合多种疗法、缓解率及报告的不良事件。在11项CAR-T 疗法试验中,10项报告了所用桥接治疗。在报告桥接治疗类型的10项试验中,最常用的是地塞米松(10/10,100%)、利妥昔单抗(6/10,60%)、吉西他滨(5/10,50%)和依托泊苷(5/10,50%)。11项试验中仅1项(9%)明确报告患者对桥接治疗的应答,6项(55%)笼统报告应答,4项(36%)未报告或未提及桥接治疗的应答信息。尽管患者常对与桥接方案有较多重叠的一线疗法耐药,桥接治疗仍可能诱导应答。即便如此,桥接治疗组合、后续缓解率和不良事件率的报告差异很大。这些发现凸显了更透明报告桥接治疗的必要性,以便更可靠地评估CAR-T 疗法疗效。
During the time of chimeric antigen receptor T-cell (CAR-T) manufacturing, bridging therapy is often used to control disease. Because it often involves systemic treatment, the bridging therapies can induce responses and/or adverse events.
We sought to assess bridging therapies used in CAR-T trials in a cross-sectional study.
We reviewed FDA drug labels and peer-reviewed registration trial reports (including supplemental data) to evaluate the characteristics of bridging therapy used in trials testing CAR-T therapies.
We looked at which bridging therapies were used, whether multiple therapies were combined, the response rates, and the reported adverse events associated with bridging therapy. Of the 11 studies testing CAR-T therapies, 10 reported the bridging therapies that were used in the study. Of those that reported the types of bridging therapies (n = 10), the most commonly used bridging therapy was dexamethasone (10/10, 100%), rituximab (6/10, 60%), gemcitabine (5/10, 50%), and etoposide (5/10, 50%).
Of the trials, one of 11 (9%) clearly reported whether patients had responses to bridging therapy, six of 11 (55%) vaguely reported responses, and four of 11 (36%) trials did not report or mention any response information regarding bridging therapy.
Although patients are often refractory to first-line therapies, which share considerable overlap with bridging therapies, these therapies may induce responses. Despite this possibility, the reporting of bridging therapy combinations and their subsequent response rates and adverse event rates are highly variable.
These findings highlight the need for greater transparency in the reporting of bridging therapy to more reliably assess the efficacy of CAR-T therapies.
MEMBER ACCOUNT
登录成功会直接打开下一页。