Multinational retrospective analysis of bridging therapy prior to chimeric antigen receptor t cells for relapsed/refractory acute lymphoblastic leukemia in children and young adults

IF 29.5 1区 医学 Q1 HEMATOLOGY
Maike Breidenbach, Peter Bader, Andishe Attarbaschi, Claudia Rossig, Roland Meisel, Markus Metzler, Marion Subklewe, Fabian Mueller, Paul-Gerhardt Schlegel, Irene Teichert von Lüttichau, Jean-Pierre Bourquin, Gabriele Escherich, Gunnar Cario, Peter Lang, Ramona Coffey, Arend von Stackelberg, Semjon Willier, Brigitte Strahm, Christina Peters, Tobias Feuchtinger
{"title":"Multinational retrospective analysis of bridging therapy prior to chimeric antigen receptor t cells for relapsed/refractory acute lymphoblastic leukemia in children and young adults","authors":"Maike Breidenbach, Peter Bader, Andishe Attarbaschi, Claudia Rossig, Roland Meisel, Markus Metzler, Marion Subklewe, Fabian Mueller, Paul-Gerhardt Schlegel, Irene Teichert von Lüttichau, Jean-Pierre Bourquin, Gabriele Escherich, Gunnar Cario, Peter Lang, Ramona Coffey, Arend von Stackelberg, Semjon Willier, Brigitte Strahm, Christina Peters, Tobias Feuchtinger","doi":"10.1186/s13045-024-01659-x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Anti-CD19 chimeric antigen receptor T cells (CAR) are a well-established treatment option for children and young adults suffering from relapsed/refractory B-lineage acute lymphoblastic leukemia. Bridging therapy is used to control disease prior to start of lymphodepletion before CAR infusion and thereby improve efficacy of CAR therapy. However, the effect of different bridging strategies on outcome, side effects and response to CAR therapy is still poorly understood. In this retrospective, multinational study, real-world data were collected from 14 different sites in Germany, Austria and Switzerland on 88 patients receiving 93 2nd-generation CAR therapies. Bridging therapy was classified into the categories 1) no systemic therapy (15/93 treatments), 2) low-intensity therapy (38/93 treatments) and 3) high-intensity therapy (39/93 treatments). We analyzed the impact of bridging regimens on clinical outcome. Patients receiving a high-intensity bridging therapy had a significantly higher tumor burden at time of eligibility compared to patients treated with a low-intensity or no systemic bridging therapy. They suffered significantly more from bacterial adverse events and mucositis. Overall survival was significantly better for patients who did not receive any bridging therapy in comparison to patients who had been treated with a low- or high-intensity bridging regimen. In conclusion, in this retrospective cohort, high-intensity bridging therapy has not improved the outcome in terms of overall and progression-free survival in comparison to a low-intensity therapy. Yet, high-intensity bridging therapy was associated with more adverse events. Our study suggests that a low-intensity bridging regimen may be preferred whenever tumor burden and disease kinetics allow this treatment strategy.","PeriodicalId":16023,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Hematology & Oncology","volume":"37 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":29.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Hematology & Oncology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13045-024-01659-x","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEMATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Anti-CD19 chimeric antigen receptor T cells (CAR) are a well-established treatment option for children and young adults suffering from relapsed/refractory B-lineage acute lymphoblastic leukemia. Bridging therapy is used to control disease prior to start of lymphodepletion before CAR infusion and thereby improve efficacy of CAR therapy. However, the effect of different bridging strategies on outcome, side effects and response to CAR therapy is still poorly understood. In this retrospective, multinational study, real-world data were collected from 14 different sites in Germany, Austria and Switzerland on 88 patients receiving 93 2nd-generation CAR therapies. Bridging therapy was classified into the categories 1) no systemic therapy (15/93 treatments), 2) low-intensity therapy (38/93 treatments) and 3) high-intensity therapy (39/93 treatments). We analyzed the impact of bridging regimens on clinical outcome. Patients receiving a high-intensity bridging therapy had a significantly higher tumor burden at time of eligibility compared to patients treated with a low-intensity or no systemic bridging therapy. They suffered significantly more from bacterial adverse events and mucositis. Overall survival was significantly better for patients who did not receive any bridging therapy in comparison to patients who had been treated with a low- or high-intensity bridging regimen. In conclusion, in this retrospective cohort, high-intensity bridging therapy has not improved the outcome in terms of overall and progression-free survival in comparison to a low-intensity therapy. Yet, high-intensity bridging therapy was associated with more adverse events. Our study suggests that a low-intensity bridging regimen may be preferred whenever tumor burden and disease kinetics allow this treatment strategy.
儿童和青少年复发/难治性急性淋巴细胞白血病的嵌合抗原受体t细胞治疗前桥接治疗的多国回顾性分析
抗cd19嵌合抗原受体T细胞(CAR)是治疗复发/难治性b系急性淋巴细胞白血病的儿童和年轻人的一种成熟的治疗选择。桥接疗法用于在CAR输注前开始淋巴细胞清除之前控制疾病,从而提高CAR治疗的疗效。然而,不同的桥接策略对CAR治疗的结果、副作用和反应的影响仍然知之甚少。在这项回顾性的跨国研究中,从德国、奥地利和瑞士的14个不同地点收集了88名接受93种第二代CAR疗法的患者的真实数据。桥接治疗分为1)无系统治疗(15/93)、2)低强度治疗(38/93)和3)高强度治疗(39/93)。我们分析了桥接方案对临床结果的影响。接受高强度桥接治疗的患者在符合条件时的肿瘤负担明显高于接受低强度或无系统桥接治疗的患者。他们明显遭受更多的细菌不良事件和粘膜炎。与接受低或高强度桥接方案治疗的患者相比,未接受任何桥接治疗的患者的总生存率显着提高。总之,在这个回顾性队列中,与低强度治疗相比,高强度桥接治疗并没有改善总生存率和无进展生存率。然而,高强度桥接治疗与更多不良事件相关。我们的研究表明,当肿瘤负荷和疾病动力学允许这种治疗策略时,低强度桥接方案可能是首选。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
48.10
自引率
2.10%
发文量
169
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Hematology & Oncology, an open-access journal, publishes high-quality research covering all aspects of hematology and oncology, including reviews and research highlights on "hot topics" by leading experts. Given the close relationship and rapid evolution of hematology and oncology, the journal aims to meet the demand for a dedicated platform for publishing discoveries from both fields. It serves as an international platform for sharing laboratory and clinical findings among laboratory scientists, physician scientists, hematologists, and oncologists in an open-access format. With a rapid turnaround time from submission to publication, the journal facilitates real-time sharing of knowledge and new successes.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信