← 返回

复发性/难治性弥漫大 B 细胞淋巴瘤 CART-19 治疗中淋巴细胞清除方案的比较分析

英文原题:Comparative Analysis of Lymphodepletion Regimens in CART-19 Treatment for Relapsed/Refractory Diffuse Large B Cell Lymphoma.

查看英文原题

Comparative Analysis of Lymphodepletion Regimens in CART-19 Treatment for Relapsed/Refractory Diffuse Large B Cell Lymphoma.

PubMed 2025/11/01(内容时间) Transplant Cell Ther Q1 · IF 4.7(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

复发/难治性(r/r)弥漫大B细胞淋巴瘤(DLBCL)患者接受靶向CD19的CAR-T 细胞疗法(CART-19)时,需在输注前接受淋巴细胞清除(LD),最常用的是氟达拉滨/环磷酰胺(flu/cy)。在氟达拉滨短缺期间,苯达莫司汀被用作替代方案。关于flu/cy与苯达莫司汀LD的结局比较,目前数据有限。

我们旨在比较r/r DLBCL患者在接受CART-19治疗前使用flu/cy或苯达莫司汀进行淋巴细胞清除的结局和毒性特征。

我们开展了一项回顾性单中心研究,比较在接受flu/cy或苯达莫司汀LD后接受axicabtagene ciloleucel(axi-cel;74.4%)或lisocabtagene maraleucel(liso-cel;25.6%)的DLBCL患者。

我们创建了一个倾向评分匹配数据集,以平衡LD组之间的基线协变量(每组45例患者)。纳入的协变量包括年龄、分期、桥接治疗、既往治疗线数、CART-19产品以及LD前C反应蛋白(CRP)和乳酸脱氢酶(LDH)。评估的结局包括缓解率、总生存期(OS)、无进展生存期(PFS)、细胞因子释放综合征(CRS)、免疫效应细胞神经毒性综合征(ICANS)和血液学毒性。flu/cy组(64.4%和60%)与苯达莫司汀组(64.4%和51.1%;ORR:P = 1;CR:P = .40)的3个月总缓解率和完全缓解率(ORR;CR)相似。在6个月时,PFS(flu/cy 62.2% vs 苯达莫司汀 58.2%;P = .37)或OS(flu/cy 86.7% vs 苯达莫司汀 79.9%;P = .83)均无差异。flu/cy组(CRS,79.1%;ICANS,42.2%)与苯达莫司汀组(CRS,71.1%;ICANS 28.9%;所有P > .05)的CRS和ICANS发生率相当。

然而,flu/cy 组达到 CRS 峰值的中位时间(3 天 vs 5 天;P = .002)和 ICANS 峰值的中位时间(6 天 vs 9 天;P = .034)更早。flu/cy 组的中性粒细胞绝对值、血小板和血红蛋白中位最低值也更低(所有 P ≤ .001)。

此外,flu/cy 与更高的重度(G ≥ 3)中性粒细胞减少(100% vs 73%;P < .001)、贫血(54.5% vs 24.4%;P = .012)和血小板减少(57.5% vs 29.7%;P = .019)发生率相关。在本研究样本量的局限性和回顾性性质的限制下,flu/cy 和苯达莫司汀 LD 产生了相似的 ORR、PFS 和 OS;然而,苯达莫司汀的血液学毒性更小。苯达莫司汀可作为 DLBCL 的 CART-19 治疗中可行的替代 LD 药物,尤其是在体能状态受损的患者中。

展开英文摘要原文

Patients with relapsed/refractory (r/r) diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) undergoing chimeric antigen receptor T cell therapy targeting CD19 (CART-19) receive preinfusion lymphodepletion (LD), most commonly with fludarabine/cyclophosphamide (flu/cy). During the fludarabine shortage, bendamustine was used as an alternative. There are only limited data on how outcomes with flu/cy and bendamustine LD compare.

We aimed to compare outcomes and toxicity profiles in r/r DLBCL patients lymphodepleted with flu/cy or bendamustine prior to CART-19 therapy.

We conducted a retrospective single-center study comparing DLBCL patients who received axicabtagene ciloleucel (axi-cel; 74. 4%) or lisocabtagene maraleucel (liso-cel; 25. 6%) following flu/cy or bendamustine LD. A propensity score-matched data set was created to balance baseline covariates between the LD groups (45 patients per LD group). Covariates addressed included age, stage, bridging therapy, number of prior therapies, CART-19 product, and pre-LD C-reactive protein (CRP) and lactate dehydrogenase (LDH).

Outcomes, including response rates, overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), cytokine release syndrome (CRS), immune effector cell neurotoxicity syndrome (ICANS), and hematologic toxicities, were evaluated. The 3-month overall and complete response rates (ORR; CR) were similar in the flu/cy (64. 4% and 60%) and bendamustine groups (64.

4% and 51. 1%; ORR: P = 1; CR: P = . 40). At 6 months, no differences in PFS (flu/cy 62. 2% vs bendamustine 58. 2%; P = . 37) or OS (flu/cy 86. 7% vs bendamustine 79. 9%; P = . 83) were noted. Incidences of CRS and ICANS were comparable in the flu/cy (CRS, 79. 1%; ICANS, 42. 2%) and bendamustine cohorts (CRS, 71. 1%; ICANS 28. 9%; all P > . 05).

However, the median time to peak CRS (3 vs 5 days; P = . 002) and ICANS (6 vs 9 days; P = . 034) occurred earlier in the flu/cy cohort. The flu/cy cohort also had lower median absolute neutrophil, platelet and hemoglobin nadirs (all P ≤ . 001).

Moreover, flu/cy was associated with higher rates of severe (G ≥ 3) neutropenia (100% vs 73%; P < . 001), anemia (54. 5% vs 24. 4%; P = . 012), and thrombocytopenia (57. 5% vs 29. 7%; P = . 019). Within the limitations of the size of our study and its retrospective nature, flu/cy and bendamustine LD resulted in similar ORR, PFS and OS; however, bendamustine had less hematologic toxicity. Bendamustine can be a viable alternative LD agent for CART-19 therapy for DLBCL, especially in patients with a compromised performance status.

论文信息

作者
Christodoulou I、Cooper K、Gao V、McFarquhar A、Dorritie K、Shlomchik WD
第一作者单位
Department of Medicine, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.United States
通讯作者单位
Department of Medicine, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania; Biostatistics Facility, UPMC Hillman Cancer Center, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania; University of Pittsburgh, Starzl Transplant Institute, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania; Department of Immunology, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. Electronic address: warrens@pitt.edu.United States
文献类型
对照研究
期刊
Transplantation and cellular therapy2026 Feb
原文标识
PubMed 41183747 · DOI 10.1016/j.jtct.2025.10.032