← 返回

三线或更后线复发/难治性滤泡性淋巴瘤中 lisocabtagene maraleucel 对比 axicabtagene ciloleucel 和 tisagenlecleucel 的间接治疗比较

英文原题:Indirect Treatment Comparisons of Lisocabtagene Maraleucel Versus Axicabtagene Ciloleucel and Tisagenlecleucel in Third-Line or Later Relapsed or Refractory Follicular Lymphoma.

查看英文原题

Indirect Treatment Comparisons of Lisocabtagene Maraleucel Versus Axicabtagene Ciloleucel and Tisagenlecleucel in Third-Line or Later Relapsed or Refractory Follicular Lymphoma.

PubMed 2026/05/15(内容时间) Adv 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。

研究概要

在调整人群差异后,与 axi-cel 和 tisa-cel 相比,liso-cel 表现出更高的 CR 率及数值上更有利的生存趋势,安全性优于 axi-cel,安全性则与 tisa-cel 相似。

中文摘要

数据来源包括 TRANSCEND FL(NCT04245839)中 liso-cel 个体患者数据、ZUMA-5(NCT03105336)中 axi-cel 汇总数据,以及 ELARA(NCT03568461)中 tisa-cel 汇总数据。每项 MAIC 纳入符合相应对照研究纳入/排除标准的 TRANSCEND FL 患者。根据预先确定的临床相关预后因素进行调整,以尽量减少研究人群差异。

调整后,liso-cel 的完全缓解(CR)率高于 axi-cel(缓解率比 RR=1.24,95% CI:1.07–1.43)和 tisa-cel(RR=1.36,95% CI:1.11–1.68);其总缓解率(ORR)也高于 tisa-cel(RR=1.12,95% CI:1.01–1.24)。无进展生存期、缓解持续时间、总生存期和至下一次治疗时间的估计数值均倾向 liso-cel,但差异无统计学意义。与 axi-cel 相比,liso-cel 安全性更好,3 级 CRS(OR=0.07,95% CI:0.01–0.58)、CRS 使用托珠单抗(OR=0.20,95% CI:0.09–0.44)、任何级别神经事件(NE;OR=0.14,95% CI:0.05–0.38)和感染(OR=0.42,95% CI:0.19–0.93)的优势比均显著降低。整体而言,liso-cel 与 tisa-cel 安全性相似,但任何级别神经事件在 liso-cel 组显著较少(OR=0.19,95% CI:0.08–0.45)。

校正人群差异后,与 axi-cel 和 tisa-cel 相比,liso-cel 的 CR 率更高、生存结局呈数值上有利趋势;与 axi-cel 相比安全性更好,与 tisa-cel 相比安全性相近。这些结果提示 liso-cel 可能是 3L+ R/R FL 的优选 CAR-T 治疗之一。

展开英文摘要原文

Sources included individual patient data from TRANSCEND FL (NCT04245839) for liso-cel, summary-level data from ZUMA-5 (NCT03105336) for axi-cel, and summary-level data from ELARA (NCT03568461) for tisa-cel. For each MAIC, TRANSCEND FL patients who met inclusion/exclusion criteria for the comparator study were included. MAICs adjusted for clinically relevant prognostic factors identified a priori to minimize population differences between studies.

After adjustment, liso-cel had a higher complete response (CR) rate than axi-cel (response ratio [RR] 1.24, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.07 1.43) and tisa-cel (RR 1.36, 95% CI 1.11 1.68) and a higher overall response rate (ORR) than tisa-cel (RR 1.12, 95% CI 1.01 1.24). Estimates numerically favored liso-cel for progression-free survival, duration of response, overall survival, and time to next treatment, though were not statistically significant. Liso-cel demonstrated better safety than axi-cel, with significantly reduced odds ratios (ORs) of grade 3 cytokine release syndrome (CRS; OR 0.07, 95% CI 0.01 0.58), tocilizumab use for CRS (OR 0.20, 95% CI 0.09 0.44), any-grade neurological events (NEs; OR 0.14, 95% CI 0.05 0.38), and infections (OR 0.42, 95% CI 0.19 0.93). Liso-cel and tisa-cel had similar safety profiles overall, excluding any-grade NEs, which was significantly lower for liso-cel (OR 0.19, 95% CI 0.08 0.45).

After adjustment for population differences, liso-cel demonstrated a higher CR rate and numerically favorable trends of survival compared to axi-cel and tisa-cel with improved safety compared to axi-cel, and similar safety compared to tisa-cel. These findings underscore liso-cel as a potentially preferred CAR T cell therapy for 3L+ R/R FL. Graphical Abstract available for this article.

论文信息

作者
Boardman AP、Reguera Ortega JL、Wang P、Bar M、Kumar J、Farazi T、Martín García-Sancho A、Izutsu K
单位
Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 530 East 74th Street, New York, NY, 10021, USA. BoardmaA@mskcc.org.United States
文献类型
对照研究
期刊
Advances in therapy2026 Jul
原文标识
PubMed 42138782 · DOI 10.1007/s12325-026-03596-2