← 返回

适合与不适合移植的复发/难治性大 B 细胞淋巴瘤全身治疗疗效与安全性的比较:贝叶斯网络荟萃分析

英文原题:Comparative efficacy and safety of systemic therapies in transplant-eligible and ineligible relapsed/refractory large B-cell lymphoma: a Bayesian network meta-analysis.

查看英文原题

Comparative efficacy and safety of systemic therapies in transplant-eligible and ineligible relapsed/refractory large B-cell lymphoma: a Bayesian network meta-analysis.

PubMed 2026/04/30(内容时间) Transl Cancer Res Q3 · IF 2.1(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

本 NMA 对 R/R LBCL 的全身治疗策略在疗效与安全性方面进行了全面比较。

中文摘要

嵌合抗原受体(CAR)T细胞、双特异性抗体(BsAb)和抗体-药物偶联物(ADC)等新疗法显著改善了复发/难治性大B细胞淋巴瘤(R/R LBCL)的临床结局。然而,缺少R/R LBCL全身治疗方案疗效和安全性的直接比较,增加了临床决策难度。

系统检索PubMed、Embase和Cochrane Library,筛选符合条件的随机对照试验(RCT)。采用贝叶斯网状荟萃分析(NMA),评估适合移植及不适合移植的R/R LBCL患者所用全身治疗。主要终点为无进展生存期(PFS);次要终点包括无事件生存期(EFS)、总生存期(OS)、客观缓解率(ORR)及3级治疗期间出现的不良事件(TEAE)。

分析纳入14项RCT,共3329例患者。在适合移植队列(评估7种方案)中,CAR-T 疗法的疾病控制效果最好;利基仑赛(liso-cel)的PFS(HR=0.42;95%可信区间[CrI]:0.28–0.64)和EFS(HR=0.37;95% CrI:0.26–0.54)排名最高,而阿基仑赛(axi-cel)3级TEAE发生率最高(风险比[RR]=2.09;95% CrI:1.08–4.19)。在不适合移植队列(评估9种方案)中,格菲妥单抗联合吉西他滨和奥沙利铂(Glofit-GemOx)的PFS排名最高(HR=0.32;95% CrI:0.23–0.45);泊洛妥珠单抗维多汀联合苯达莫司汀和利妥昔单抗(Pola-BR)在OS(HR=0.42;95% CrI:0.24–0.73)及ORR(比值比[OR]=5.21;95% CrI:2.01–14.3)方面获益最大。两种方案毒性较高,但总体仍可管理。

本NMA全面比较了R/R LBCL全身治疗策略的疗效和安全性特征。

展开英文摘要原文

The advent of novel therapies including chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cells, bispecific antibodies (BsAbs), and antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs), has markedly improved clinical outcomes for relapsed or refractory large B-cell lymphoma (R/R LBCL). However, direct comparisons of efficacy and safety among systemic treatments for R/R LBCL are lacking, complicating clinical decision-making.

A systematic literature search was conducted across PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library to identify eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs). A Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA) was performed to evaluate the systemic therapies across transplant-eligible and transplant-ineligible patients with R/R LBCL. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS), secondary endpoints included event-free survival (EFS), overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR) and grade 3 treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs).

The analysis included 14 RCTs comprising a total of 3,329 patients. Among the transplant-eligible cohort (7 evaluated regimens), CAR-T therapies maximized disease control; lisocabtagene maraleucel (liso-cel) ranked highest for PFS [hazard ratio (HR) =0.42; 95% credible intervals (CrI): 0.28-0.64] and EFS (HR =0.37, 95% CrI: 0.26-0.54), whereas axicabtagene ciloleucel (axi-cel) was associated with the highest incidence of grade 3 TEAEs [risk ratio (RR) =2.09; 95% CrI: 1.08-4.19]. In the transplant-ineligible cohort (9 evaluated regimens), glofitamab plus gemcitabine and oxaliplatin (Glofit-GemOx) ranked highest for PFS (HR =0.32; 95% CrI: 0.23-0.45), while polatuzumab vedotin plus bendamustine and rituximab (Pola-BR) yielded the maximum benefit for OS (HR =0.42; 95% CrI: 0.24-0.73) and ORR [odds ratio (OR) =5.21; 95% CrI: 2.01-14.3]. Both regimens were associated with higher toxicities, but remained overall manageable.

This NMA provides a comprehensive comparison of systemic treatment strategies for R/R LBCL regarding efficacy and safety profiles.

论文信息

作者
Huang L、Chen K、Wang M、Guo C、Li Y、Yu Q、Liu Z、Li Z
单位
Department of Hematology, China-Japan Friendship Hospital, Beijing, China.China
期刊
Translational cancer research2026 May 30
原文标识
PubMed 42305450 · DOI 10.21037/tcr-2026-0678