Muhammad Osama, Muhammad Haris Khan, Safeena Khan, Amna Hussain, Ammara Tahir, Mehran Ullah, Abdullah Afridi, Ubaid Ullah, Wajeeh Ur Rehman
{"title":"基于抗CD38单克隆抗体的疗法与标准疗法对新诊断多发性骨髓瘤患者的疗效和安全性对比:系统综述和荟萃分析。","authors":"Muhammad Osama, Muhammad Haris Khan, Safeena Khan, Amna Hussain, Ammara Tahir, Mehran Ullah, Abdullah Afridi, Ubaid Ullah, Wajeeh Ur Rehman","doi":"10.1177/20406207251314289","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Anti-CD38 monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) have significantly changed the multiple myeloma treatment landscape. This meta-analysis compared the efficacy and safety of anti-CD38 mAb-based therapy versus standard therapy in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) patients.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We performed a comprehensive literature search on PubMed, the Cochrane Database, and ClinicalTrials.gov. The primary outcomes were progression-free survival (PFS) and minimal residual disease (MRD) status. Dichotomous outcomes were pooled using risk ratio (RR) along with the 95% confidence interval (CI) in RevMan 5.4. Subgroup analysis and meta-regression analysis were performed. The RoB 2.0 tool was used to assess the risk of bias.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Our meta-analysis included 11 randomized controlled trials. There were 5270 patients; 3040 TEs and 2230 TIEs. Anti-CD38 mAbs significantly improved MRD negativity (RR 1.94, 95% CI: 1.59-2.37; <i>p</i> < 0.00001) and PFS (RR 0.51, 95% CI: 0.45-0.58; <i>p</i> < 0.00001). Subgroup analyses revealed better outcomes for both the TE (MRD: RR 1.52, 95% CI: 1.37-1.68; PFS: RR 0.43, 95% CI: 0.34-0.54) and TIE (MRD: RR 3.49, 95% CI: 2.65-4.61; PFS: RR 0.55, 95% CI: 0.47-0.64) populations. Meta-regression revealed that Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) score 0 significantly influenced MRD status (β = -0.015, <i>p</i> < 0.05), whereas ECOG scores 1 and 2 lacked statistical significance. Subgroup analysis revealed that PFS was significantly different between standard (RR 0.47) and high (RR 0.81) cytogenetic risk groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In NDMM patients, anti-CD38 mAb-based therapy significantly improved MRD status, and PFS compared with standard therapy alone, in both TE and TIE patients, suggesting a favorable benefit-risk profile.</p>","PeriodicalId":23048,"journal":{"name":"Therapeutic Advances in Hematology","volume":"16 ","pages":"20406207251314289"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11770704/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Efficacy and safety of anti-CD38 monoclonal antibodies-based therapy versus standard therapy in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Muhammad Osama, Muhammad Haris Khan, Safeena Khan, Amna Hussain, Ammara Tahir, Mehran Ullah, Abdullah Afridi, Ubaid Ullah, Wajeeh Ur Rehman\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/20406207251314289\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Anti-CD38 monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) have significantly changed the multiple myeloma treatment landscape. This meta-analysis compared the efficacy and safety of anti-CD38 mAb-based therapy versus standard therapy in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) patients.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We performed a comprehensive literature search on PubMed, the Cochrane Database, and ClinicalTrials.gov. The primary outcomes were progression-free survival (PFS) and minimal residual disease (MRD) status. Dichotomous outcomes were pooled using risk ratio (RR) along with the 95% confidence interval (CI) in RevMan 5.4. Subgroup analysis and meta-regression analysis were performed. The RoB 2.0 tool was used to assess the risk of bias.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Our meta-analysis included 11 randomized controlled trials. There were 5270 patients; 3040 TEs and 2230 TIEs. Anti-CD38 mAbs significantly improved MRD negativity (RR 1.94, 95% CI: 1.59-2.37; <i>p</i> < 0.00001) and PFS (RR 0.51, 95% CI: 0.45-0.58; <i>p</i> < 0.00001). Subgroup analyses revealed better outcomes for both the TE (MRD: RR 1.52, 95% CI: 1.37-1.68; PFS: RR 0.43, 95% CI: 0.34-0.54) and TIE (MRD: RR 3.49, 95% CI: 2.65-4.61; PFS: RR 0.55, 95% CI: 0.47-0.64) populations. Meta-regression revealed that Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) score 0 significantly influenced MRD status (β = -0.015, <i>p</i> < 0.05), whereas ECOG scores 1 and 2 lacked statistical significance. Subgroup analysis revealed that PFS was significantly different between standard (RR 0.47) and high (RR 0.81) cytogenetic risk groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In NDMM patients, anti-CD38 mAb-based therapy significantly improved MRD status, and PFS compared with standard therapy alone, in both TE and TIE patients, suggesting a favorable benefit-risk profile.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":23048,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Therapeutic Advances in Hematology\",\"volume\":\"16 \",\"pages\":\"20406207251314289\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11770704/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Therapeutic Advances in Hematology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/20406207251314289\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"HEMATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Therapeutic Advances in Hematology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/20406207251314289","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEMATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Efficacy and safety of anti-CD38 monoclonal antibodies-based therapy versus standard therapy in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Background: Anti-CD38 monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) have significantly changed the multiple myeloma treatment landscape. This meta-analysis compared the efficacy and safety of anti-CD38 mAb-based therapy versus standard therapy in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) patients.
Methods: We performed a comprehensive literature search on PubMed, the Cochrane Database, and ClinicalTrials.gov. The primary outcomes were progression-free survival (PFS) and minimal residual disease (MRD) status. Dichotomous outcomes were pooled using risk ratio (RR) along with the 95% confidence interval (CI) in RevMan 5.4. Subgroup analysis and meta-regression analysis were performed. The RoB 2.0 tool was used to assess the risk of bias.
Results: Our meta-analysis included 11 randomized controlled trials. There were 5270 patients; 3040 TEs and 2230 TIEs. Anti-CD38 mAbs significantly improved MRD negativity (RR 1.94, 95% CI: 1.59-2.37; p < 0.00001) and PFS (RR 0.51, 95% CI: 0.45-0.58; p < 0.00001). Subgroup analyses revealed better outcomes for both the TE (MRD: RR 1.52, 95% CI: 1.37-1.68; PFS: RR 0.43, 95% CI: 0.34-0.54) and TIE (MRD: RR 3.49, 95% CI: 2.65-4.61; PFS: RR 0.55, 95% CI: 0.47-0.64) populations. Meta-regression revealed that Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) score 0 significantly influenced MRD status (β = -0.015, p < 0.05), whereas ECOG scores 1 and 2 lacked statistical significance. Subgroup analysis revealed that PFS was significantly different between standard (RR 0.47) and high (RR 0.81) cytogenetic risk groups.
Conclusion: In NDMM patients, anti-CD38 mAb-based therapy significantly improved MRD status, and PFS compared with standard therapy alone, in both TE and TIE patients, suggesting a favorable benefit-risk profile.
期刊介绍:
Therapeutic Advances in Hematology delivers the highest quality peer-reviewed articles, reviews, and scholarly comment on pioneering efforts and innovative studies across all areas of hematology. The journal has a strong clinical and pharmacological focus and is aimed at clinicians and researchers in hematology, providing a forum in print and online for publishing the highest quality articles in this area.