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:Impact of fludarabine dosage on outcomes in large B-cell lymphoma patients treated with CAR T-cell therapy: a retrospective study of the CTIWP of the EBMT.
在这项大型EBMT分析中,氟达拉滨剂量递增并未改善tisa-cel在LBCL中的结局,而axi-cel则与更优的疗效相关。
氟达拉滨和环磷酰胺的清淋预处理(LD)对于确保CD19 CAR T细胞的最佳扩增和持久性至关重要。我们开展了一项回顾性EBMT注册研究,以评估LD中氟达拉滨剂量对LBCL结局的影响。在2019年至2023年间接受tisagenlecleucel(tisa-cel;n = 549)或axicabtagene ciloleucel(axi-cel;n = 949)治疗的1498例患者中,我们观察到tisa-cel的氟达拉滨剂量存在显著差异,而axi-cel则一致以标准剂量给药。在tisa-cel队列中,与标准剂量氟达拉滨(67.5-82.5 mg/m²)相比,较高氟达拉滨剂量(82.6-120 mg/m²)与较差的总生存期相关(HR 1.29;95% CI,1.02-1.64;p = 0.036)。我们接下来比较了包括axi-cel在内的三组。tisa-cel治疗后复发发生率较高,且使用高剂量氟达拉滨并未改善(标准剂量tisa-cel:HR 1.69;95% CI,1.39-2.06;p < 0.001;高剂量tisa-cel:HR 1.45;95% CI,1.09-1.94;p = 0.012)。与标准剂量tisa-cel相比,axi-cel实现了更优的PFS和OS:HR 1.21;95% CI,1.00-1.45;p = 0.049;与高剂量tisa-cel相比(HR 1.57;95% CI,1.26-1.95;p < 0.001),尽管ICANS更多。总之,在这项大型EBMT分析中,氟达拉滨剂量递增并未改善tisa-cel在LBCL中的结局,而axi-cel与更优的疗效相关。
Lymphodepleting conditioning (LD) with fludarabine and cyclophosphamide is critical to ensure optimal expansion and persistence of CD19 CAR T-cells. We conducted a retrospective EBMT registry study to assess the impact of fludarabine dosing in LD on outcomes in large B-cell lymphoma (LBCL). Among 1498 patients treated between 2019 and 2023 with tisagenlecleucel (tisa-cel; n = 549) or axicabtagene ciloleucel (axi-cel; n = 949), we observed marked variability in fludarabine dosing for tisa-cel, whereas axi-cel was consistently administered at standard doses. In the tisa-cel cohort, higher fludarabine dosing (82.6-120 mg/m 2 ) was associated with inferior overall survival (HR 1.29; 95% CI, 1.02-1.64; p = 0.036) compared with standard-dose fludarabine (67.5-82.5 mg/m 2 ). We next compared three groups including axi-cel. Relapse incidence was higher after tisa-cel treatment and not improved using higher-dose fludarabine (standard dose tisa-cel: HR 1.69; 95% CI, 1.39-2.06; p < 0.001; high-dose tisa-cel: HR 1.45; 95% CI, 1.09-1.94; p = 0.012). Axi-cel achieved superior PFS and OS vs standard-dose tisa-cel: HR 1.21; 95% CI, 1.00-1.45; p = 0.049; vs high-dose tisa-cel (HR 1.57; 95% CI, 1.26-1.95; p < 0.001), albeit with more ICANS. In conclusion, in this large EBMT analysis, fludarabine dose escalation did not improve outcomes with tisa-cel in LBCL, while axi-cel was associated with superior efficacy.
MEMBER ACCOUNT
登录成功会直接打开下一页。