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 Comparison of Axicabtagene Ciloleucel and Lisocabtagene Maraleucel in Relapsed/Refractory Large B-Cell Lymphoma: A Target Trial Emulation.
Real-World Comparison of Axicabtagene Ciloleucel and Lisocabtagene Maraleucel in Relapsed/Refractory Large B-Cell Lymphoma: A Target Trial Emulation.
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。
主要IPTW分析显示,axi-cel与liso-cel在OS和EFS方面无显著差异。
阿基仑赛(axi-cel)和利基迈仑赛(liso-cel)是获批用于复发/难治性大B细胞淋巴瘤(r/r LBCL)的嵌合抗原受体(CAR)T细胞疗法。然而,尚无头对头随机试验直接比较其有效性和安全性。
采用目标试验模拟,比较axi-cel与liso-cel在成人r/r LBCL中的真实世界有效性和安全性。
采用目标试验模拟框架,我们开展了一项回顾性研究,使用TriNetX美国协作网络的数据,比较axi-cel与liso-cel在成人r/r LBCL中的应用。时间零点定义为CAR-T 细胞输注日期,患者随访至结局发生、末次就诊或行政删失。
Axicabtagene ciloleucel (axi-cel) and lisocabtagene maraleucel (liso-cel) are approved chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapies for relapsed/refractory large B-cell lymphoma (r/r LBCL). However, no head-to-head randomized trials have directly compared their effectiveness and safety.
To compare the real-world effectiveness and safety of axi-cel and liso-cel in adults with r/r LBCL using a target trial emulation.
Using a target trial emulation framework, we conducted a retrospective study of data from the TriNetX US Collaborative Network to compare axi-cel and liso-cel in adults with r/r LBCL. Time zero was defined as the date of CAR T-cell infusion, and patients were followed until the occurrence of an outcome, last encounter, or administrative censoring. Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was used to balance baseline characteristics. Primary outcomes were overall survival (OS) and event-free survival (EFS). Safety outcomes included the cumulative incidence of cytokine release syndrome (CRS) and immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome (ICANS) at 30, 60, and 90 days.
Among 1,070 patients (709 axi-cel; 361 liso-cel), baseline characteristics were well balanced after IPTW. Median weighted OS was not reached for axi-cel and was 41.4 months for liso-cel (weighted hazard ratio [HR], 1.20; 95% CI, 0.87-1.66). Median weighted EFS was not reached for axi-cel and was 31.2 months for liso-cel (weighted HR, 1.22; 95% CI, 0.89-1.67). Secondary time-varying analyses suggested differences in mortality hazards during longer follow-up, with a higher relative hazard of death for liso-cel at 24 months (weighted HR: 1.76; 95% CI, 1.01-3.06). Liso-cel was associated with lower risks of CRS and ICANS across all time points (CRS at 30 days: weighted RR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.56-0.83). Severe CRS was rare and similar across groups, whereas severe ICANS was more frequent with axi-cel (10.9% vs 5.8%).
Primary IPTW analyses showed no significant difference in OS and EFS between axi-cel and liso-cel. Secondary time-varying analyses suggested differences in OS hazards during longer follow-up, favoring axi-cel. Liso-cel demonstrated a more favorable safety profile, with lower risk of CRS and ICANS compared with axi-cel. These findings should be interpreted cautiously given differential follow-up between treatment groups and the potential for residual confounding.
MEMBER ACCOUNT
登录成功会直接打开下一页。