← 返回

Anbalcabtagene autoleucel 与 Tisagenlecleucel 在复发/难治性弥漫大 B 细胞淋巴瘤患者中的比较有效性

英文原题:Comparative Effectiveness of Anbalcabtagene Autoleucel versus Tisagenlecleucel in Patients with Relapsed/Refractory Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma.

查看英文原题

Comparative Effectiveness of Anbalcabtagene Autoleucel versus Tisagenlecleucel in Patients with Relapsed/Refractory Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma.

PubMed 2025/07/11(内容时间) Cancer Res Treat Q2 · IF 4.2(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。

研究概要

Anbal-cel 的疗效优于 tisa-cel,缓解率更高,生存结局更佳,即使在校正了试验入组时预后因素不平衡的影响后仍然如此。

研究思路结论见上方概要

Anbalcabtagene autoleucel(anbal-cel)是一种第二代靶向CD19的CAR-T 细胞疗法,通过下调程序性死亡受体1和T细胞免疫球蛋白及ITIM结构域受体来减轻T细胞耗竭。我们采用外部对照臂研究设计,比较了anbal-cel与tisagenlecleucel(tisa-cel)在复发/难治性弥漫大B细胞淋巴瘤中的疗效。

我们使用 CRC01-01(NCT#04836507)的个体患者数据和 JULIET 试验(NCT#02445248)的汇总数据进行了匹配调整间接比较(MAIC)。主要结局为总生存期(OS)和无进展生存期(PFS),采用加权 Cox 比例风险模型评估相应的风险比(HR)及 95% 置信区间(CI)。次要结局为客观缓解率(ORR)和完全缓解率(CRR),采用加权 logistic 回归模型评估相应的比值比(OR)及 95% CI。

CRC01-01 研究纳入 79 例患者,JULIET 试验纳入 115 例患者。在未调整比较中,anbal-cel 的中位 OS 未达到(95% CI,13.1 至不可估计),tisa-cel 为 11.1 个月(95% CI,6.6 至 23.9),对应 HR 为 0.54(95% CI,0.34 至 0.87)。中位 PFS 为 5.5 个月(95% CI,4.2 至 16.2)对 2.9 个月(95% CI,2.3 至 5.2),HR 为 0.73(95% CI,0.50 至 1.08)。ORR 为 73.4% 对 53.0%,OR 为 2.45(95% CI,1.32 至 4.54);CRR 为 64.6% 对 39.1%,OR 为 2.83(95% CI,1.56 至 5.13)。应用 MAIC 平衡两组间预后因素后,OS 的调整后 HR 为 0.47(95% CI,0.23 至 0.95),PFS 的调整后 HR 为 0.59(95% CI,0.36 至 0.96),ORR 的调整后 OR 为 2.60(95% CI,1.04 至 6.52),CRR 的调整后 OR 为 3.00(95% CI,1.30 至 6.92)。

展开英文摘要原文

Anbalcabtagene autoleucel (anbal-cel) is a second-generation CD19-targeted chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy reducing T-cell exhaustion through programmed death-1 and T cell immunoreceptor with Ig and ITIM domains downregulation. We compared efficacy of anbal-cel with tisagenlecleucel (tisa-cel) in relapsed/refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma using external control arm study design.

We performed a matching-adjusted indirect comparison (MAIC) using individual patient data from CRC01-01 (NCT#04836507) and aggregate data from JULIET trial (NCT#02445248). Primary outcomes were overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS), with corresponding hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) assessed using weighted Cox proportional hazard model. Secondary outcomes were objective response rate (ORR) and complete response rate (CRR), with corresponding odds ratio (OR) and 95% CI assessed using weighted logistic regression model.

We included 79 patients in CRC01-01 and 115 in JULIET trial. In na ve comparison, median OS was not reached (95% CI, 13.1 to not estimable) for anbal-cel versus 11.1 months (95% CI, 6.6 to 23.9) for tisa-cel, corresponding to HR of 0.54 (95% CI, 0.34 to 0.87). Median PFS was 5.5 months (95% CI, 4.2 to 16.2) versus 2.9 months (95% CI, 2.3 to 5.2) with HR of 0.73 (95% CI, 0.50 to 1.08). ORR was 73.4% versus 53.0% with OR of 2.45 (95% CI, 1.32 to 4.54), and CRR was 64.6% versus 39.1% with OR of 2.83 (95% CI, 1.56 to 5.13). After applying MAIC to balance prognostic factors between the groups, adjusted HRs or ORs were 0.47 (95% CI, 0.23 to 0.95) for OS, 0.59 (95% CI, 0.36 to 0.96) for PFS, 2.60 (95% CI, 1.04 to 6.52) for ORR, and 3.00 (95% CI, 1.30 to 6.92) for CRR.

Anbal-cel showed superior effectiveness over tisa-cel, with higher response rates and improved survival outcomes, even after accounting for imbalances in prognostic factors at trial enrollment.

论文信息

作者
Seo HJ、Yoo WH、Jung K、Kim JW、Shin JY、Kim JH、Kim WS
第一作者单位
Department of Biohealth Regulatory Science, Sungkyunkwan University, Suwon, Korea.South Korea
通讯作者单位
Division of Hematology-Oncology, Department of Medicine, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea. wskimsmc@gmail.com.South Korea
文献类型
对照研究
期刊
Cancer research and treatment2026 Jul
原文标识
PubMed 40665713 · DOI 10.4143/crt.2025.276