决定异体 CAR T 细胞排斥与扩增的细胞和分子机制
Cellular and molecular mechanisms determining allogeneic CAR T cell rejection and expansion.
我们评估了11例接受单一批次cemacabtagene ansegedleucel(cema-cel)治疗的大B细胞淋巴瘤患者,cemacabtagene ansegedleucel是一种异体抗CD19 CAR T产品。
英文原题:Real-world outcomes and toxicities of CAR-T in relapsed/refractory follicular lymphoma: a multicenter cohort study.
在136例患者中,100例(74%)接受了axi-cel,36例(26%)接受了tisa-cel。
CAR-T 细胞疗法已经彻底改变了复发/难治性(R/R)滤泡性淋巴瘤(FL)的治疗。由于临床试验人群往往不具有代表性,因此需要真实世界的疗效和毒性数据。为此,我们开展了一项多中心回顾性研究,纳入2021年至2024年间接受商业化axicabtagene ciloleucel(axi-cel)或tisagenlecleucel(tisa-cel)治疗的R/R FL患者。终点包括疗效指标(总缓解率[ORR]、完全缓解率[CRR]、无进展生存期[PFS]和总生存期[OS])以及毒性(细胞因子释放综合征[CRS]和免疫效应细胞相关神经毒性综合征[ICANS]的发生率)。在136例患者中,100例(74%)接受axi-cel,36例(26%)接受tisa-cel。axi-cel患者比tisa-cel患者更年轻(中位年龄,60岁 vs 68岁;P = .001),且接受苯达莫司汀淋巴细胞清除的比例更低(9% vs 33%;P< .001)。中位随访时间为14.4个月(范围,0.8-72.0个月)。在未加权分析中,与tisa-cel相比,axi-cel与更高的ORR(96% vs 80%;P = .007)、CRR(88% vs 71%;P = .024)以及更长的中位PFS(30.5个月 vs 11.9个月;P = .021)相关。两种产品的中位OS无显著差异(未达到 vs 23.6个月;P = .061)。CRS发生率相当(75% vs 75%;P = .99),而axi-cel的ICANS发生率高于tisa-cel(42% vs 17%;P = .008)。经逆概率治疗加权后,疗效结局基本相似,但axi-cel仍与显著更高的毒性相关。在真实世界环境中,axi-cel和tisa-cel均对R/R FL患者显示出疗效,尽管PFS劣于临床试验中报告的结果。
Chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy has revolutionized the treatment of relapsed/refractory (R/R) follicular lymphoma (FL). Real-world efficacy and toxicity data are needed because clinical trial populations are often unrepresentative. Therefore, we conducted a multicenter retrospective study of R/R FL patients undergoing commercial axicabtagene ciloleucel (axi-cel) or tisagenlecleucel (tisa-cel) between 2021 and 2024. End points included efficacy measures (overall response rate [ORR], complete response rate [CRR], progression-free survival [PFS], and overall survival [OS]) and toxicity (rates of cytokine release syndrome [CRS] and immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome [ICANS]). Among 136 patients, 100 (74%) received axi-cel and 36 (26%) received tisa-cel. Axi-cel patients were younger than tisa-cel patients (median age, 60 vs 68 years; P = .001) and received bendamustine lymphodepletion less often than them (9% vs 33%; P< .001). Median follow-up was 14.4 months (range, 0.8-72.0 months). In the unweighted analysis, compared with tisa-cel, axi-cel was associated with higher ORR (96% vs 80%; P = .007), CRR (88% vs 71%; P = .024), and longer median PFS (30.5 months vs 11.9 months; P = .021). Median OS did not differ significantly between the 2 products (not reached vs 23.6 months; P = .061). The rates of CRS were comparable (75% vs 75%; P = .99), whereas ICANS occurred more frequently with axi-cel than with tisa-cel (42% vs 17%; P = .008). After inverse probability of treatment weighting, efficacy outcomes were largely similar, but axi-cel remained associated with significantly higher toxicity. In real-world settings, both axi-cel and tisa-cel demonstrated efficacy in patients with R/R FL, although PFS was inferior to that reported in clinical trials.
MEMBER ACCOUNT
登录成功会直接打开下一页。