西他tagene autoeucel与标准治疗对既往治疗过的复发或难治性多发性骨髓瘤患者的比较疗效:一项匹配调整的间接比较

IF 3.4 3区 医学 Q2 MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL
Noemi Puig, Joris Diels, Suzy van Sanden, João Mendes, Heather Burnett, Allie Cichewicz, Seina Lee, Teresa Hernando, Jordan M Schecter, Nikoletta Lendvai, Nitin Patel, José María Sanchez-Pina, Serena Rocchi, Roberto Mina, Paolo Corradini, Michele Cavo, Jesús San Miguel, Leyla Shune, Abdullah M Khan, Surbhi Sidana, Xavier Leleu, Salomon Manier, Brea Lipe, Katja Weisel, Joaquin Martinez-Lopez
{"title":"西他tagene autoeucel与标准治疗对既往治疗过的复发或难治性多发性骨髓瘤患者的比较疗效:一项匹配调整的间接比较","authors":"Noemi Puig, Joris Diels, Suzy van Sanden, João Mendes, Heather Burnett, Allie Cichewicz, Seina Lee, Teresa Hernando, Jordan M Schecter, Nikoletta Lendvai, Nitin Patel, José María Sanchez-Pina, Serena Rocchi, Roberto Mina, Paolo Corradini, Michele Cavo, Jesús San Miguel, Leyla Shune, Abdullah M Khan, Surbhi Sidana, Xavier Leleu, Salomon Manier, Brea Lipe, Katja Weisel, Joaquin Martinez-Lopez","doi":"10.1007/s12325-025-03205-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Matching adjusted indirect comparisons (MAICs) were performed to compare the efficacy of cilta-cel versus elotuzumab + pomalidomide + dexamethasone (EloPd), isatuximab + carfilzomib + dexamethasone (IsaKd), isatuximab + pomalidomide + dexamethasone (IsaPd), and selinexor + bortezomib + dexamethasone (SVd) in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) who have received at least one prior therapy and are lenalidomide-refractory.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Unanchored MAICs were performed using individual patient-level data (IPD) for all apheresed patients randomized to the cilta-cel arm of CARTITUDE-4 (n = 208) and published arm-level data for EloPd from ELOQUENT-3 (n = 60), IsaKd from IKEMA (lenalidomide-refractory subgroup, n = 57), IsaPd from ICARIA-MM (n = 154), and SVd from BOSTON (lenalidomide-refractory subgroup, n = 53). Eligibility criteria from each comparator trial were applied to the cilta-cel arm IPD, and further imbalances in patient characteristics were adjusted by weighting the cilta-cel patient data to match the reported baseline characteristics of the comparator trials. Comparative efficacy was estimated for overall response rate, very good partial response or better (≥ VGPR) rate, complete response or better (≥ CR) rate, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>After adjustment, cilta-cel patients were significantly more likely to achieve an overall response versus EloPd, IsaPd, and SVd, and were significantly more likely to achieve ≥ VGPR and ≥ CR versus all comparators. Cilta-cel patients also had significant reductions in the risk of disease progression or death (PFS) versus all comparators: 64% versus EloPd, 49% versus IsaKd, 69% versus IsaPd, and 62% versus SVd. Similarly, cilta-cel patients had significant improvements in OS for all feasible comparisons: 52% versus EloPd, 58% versus IsaPd, and 60% versus SVd.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Cilta-cel patients demonstrated clinically meaningful benefits over EloPd, IsaKd, IsaPd, and SVd for response and survival outcomes, highlighting its superiority over alternative treatment options for patients with RRMM who have received at least one prior therapy and are refractory to lenalidomide.</p>","PeriodicalId":7482,"journal":{"name":"Advances in Therapy","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparative Efficacy of Ciltacabtagene Autoleucel Versus Standard-of-Care Treatments for Patients with Previously Treated Relapsed or Refractory Multiple Myeloma: A Matching-Adjusted Indirect Comparison.\",\"authors\":\"Noemi Puig, Joris Diels, Suzy van Sanden, João Mendes, Heather Burnett, Allie Cichewicz, Seina Lee, Teresa Hernando, Jordan M Schecter, Nikoletta Lendvai, Nitin Patel, José María Sanchez-Pina, Serena Rocchi, Roberto Mina, Paolo Corradini, Michele Cavo, Jesús San Miguel, Leyla Shune, Abdullah M Khan, Surbhi Sidana, Xavier Leleu, Salomon Manier, Brea Lipe, Katja Weisel, Joaquin Martinez-Lopez\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s12325-025-03205-8\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Matching adjusted indirect comparisons (MAICs) were performed to compare the efficacy of cilta-cel versus elotuzumab + pomalidomide + dexamethasone (EloPd), isatuximab + carfilzomib + dexamethasone (IsaKd), isatuximab + pomalidomide + dexamethasone (IsaPd), and selinexor + bortezomib + dexamethasone (SVd) in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) who have received at least one prior therapy and are lenalidomide-refractory.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Unanchored MAICs were performed using individual patient-level data (IPD) for all apheresed patients randomized to the cilta-cel arm of CARTITUDE-4 (n = 208) and published arm-level data for EloPd from ELOQUENT-3 (n = 60), IsaKd from IKEMA (lenalidomide-refractory subgroup, n = 57), IsaPd from ICARIA-MM (n = 154), and SVd from BOSTON (lenalidomide-refractory subgroup, n = 53). Eligibility criteria from each comparator trial were applied to the cilta-cel arm IPD, and further imbalances in patient characteristics were adjusted by weighting the cilta-cel patient data to match the reported baseline characteristics of the comparator trials. Comparative efficacy was estimated for overall response rate, very good partial response or better (≥ VGPR) rate, complete response or better (≥ CR) rate, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>After adjustment, cilta-cel patients were significantly more likely to achieve an overall response versus EloPd, IsaPd, and SVd, and were significantly more likely to achieve ≥ VGPR and ≥ CR versus all comparators. Cilta-cel patients also had significant reductions in the risk of disease progression or death (PFS) versus all comparators: 64% versus EloPd, 49% versus IsaKd, 69% versus IsaPd, and 62% versus SVd. Similarly, cilta-cel patients had significant improvements in OS for all feasible comparisons: 52% versus EloPd, 58% versus IsaPd, and 60% versus SVd.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Cilta-cel patients demonstrated clinically meaningful benefits over EloPd, IsaKd, IsaPd, and SVd for response and survival outcomes, highlighting its superiority over alternative treatment options for patients with RRMM who have received at least one prior therapy and are refractory to lenalidomide.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":7482,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Advances in Therapy\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Advances in Therapy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12325-025-03205-8\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Advances in Therapy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12325-025-03205-8","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

对复发或难治性多发性骨髓瘤(RRMM)患者进行匹配调整间接比较(MAICs),比较cilta- cell与elotuzumab + pomalidomide +地塞米松(EloPd)、isatuximab + carfilzomib +地塞米松(IsaKd)、isatuximab + pomalidomide +地塞米松(IsaPd)、selinexor +硼替佐米+地塞米松(SVd)的疗效,这些患者既往至少接受过一次治疗且来那度胺难治。方法:使用个体患者水平数据(IPD)对随机分配到CARTITUDE-4 cilta- cell组(n = 208)的所有aphered患者进行无锚定MAICs,并公布了来自ELOQUENT-3的EloPd (n = 60),来自IKEMA的IsaKd(来那度胺难治亚组,n = 57),来自ICARIA-MM的IsaPd (n = 154)和来自BOSTON的SVd(来那度胺难治亚组,n = 53)的臂水平数据。将每个比较试验的资格标准应用于cilta- cell组IPD,并通过对cilta- cell患者数据进行加权来调整患者特征的进一步不平衡,以匹配比较试验报告的基线特征。比较疗效评估包括总缓解率、非常好的部分缓解或更好(≥VGPR)率、完全缓解或更好(≥CR)率、无进展生存期(PFS)和总生存期(OS)。结果:调整后,与EloPd、IsaPd和SVd相比,cilta- cell患者更有可能达到总体缓解,与所有比较组相比,cilta- cell患者更有可能达到≥VGPR和≥CR。与所有比较组相比,cilta - cell患者的疾病进展或死亡风险(PFS)也显著降低:与EloPd相比降低64%,与IsaKd相比降低49%,与IsaPd相比降低69%,与SVd相比降低62%。同样,在所有可行的比较中,cilta- cell患者的OS均有显著改善:与EloPd相比,OS改善52%,与IsaPd相比,OS改善58%,与SVd相比,OS改善60%。结论:cilta - cell患者在缓解和生存结果方面比EloPd、IsaKd、IsaPd和SVd有临床意义的益处,对于至少接受过一种既往治疗且来那度胺难治的RRMM患者,突出了其优于替代治疗方案的优势。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparative Efficacy of Ciltacabtagene Autoleucel Versus Standard-of-Care Treatments for Patients with Previously Treated Relapsed or Refractory Multiple Myeloma: A Matching-Adjusted Indirect Comparison.

Introduction: Matching adjusted indirect comparisons (MAICs) were performed to compare the efficacy of cilta-cel versus elotuzumab + pomalidomide + dexamethasone (EloPd), isatuximab + carfilzomib + dexamethasone (IsaKd), isatuximab + pomalidomide + dexamethasone (IsaPd), and selinexor + bortezomib + dexamethasone (SVd) in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) who have received at least one prior therapy and are lenalidomide-refractory.

Methods: Unanchored MAICs were performed using individual patient-level data (IPD) for all apheresed patients randomized to the cilta-cel arm of CARTITUDE-4 (n = 208) and published arm-level data for EloPd from ELOQUENT-3 (n = 60), IsaKd from IKEMA (lenalidomide-refractory subgroup, n = 57), IsaPd from ICARIA-MM (n = 154), and SVd from BOSTON (lenalidomide-refractory subgroup, n = 53). Eligibility criteria from each comparator trial were applied to the cilta-cel arm IPD, and further imbalances in patient characteristics were adjusted by weighting the cilta-cel patient data to match the reported baseline characteristics of the comparator trials. Comparative efficacy was estimated for overall response rate, very good partial response or better (≥ VGPR) rate, complete response or better (≥ CR) rate, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS).

Results: After adjustment, cilta-cel patients were significantly more likely to achieve an overall response versus EloPd, IsaPd, and SVd, and were significantly more likely to achieve ≥ VGPR and ≥ CR versus all comparators. Cilta-cel patients also had significant reductions in the risk of disease progression or death (PFS) versus all comparators: 64% versus EloPd, 49% versus IsaKd, 69% versus IsaPd, and 62% versus SVd. Similarly, cilta-cel patients had significant improvements in OS for all feasible comparisons: 52% versus EloPd, 58% versus IsaPd, and 60% versus SVd.

Conclusion: Cilta-cel patients demonstrated clinically meaningful benefits over EloPd, IsaKd, IsaPd, and SVd for response and survival outcomes, highlighting its superiority over alternative treatment options for patients with RRMM who have received at least one prior therapy and are refractory to lenalidomide.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Advances in Therapy
Advances in Therapy 医学-药学
CiteScore
7.20
自引率
2.60%
发文量
353
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Advances in Therapy is an international, peer reviewed, rapid-publication (peer review in 2 weeks, published 3–4 weeks from acceptance) journal dedicated to the publication of high-quality clinical (all phases), observational, real-world, and health outcomes research around the discovery, development, and use of therapeutics and interventions (including devices) across all therapeutic areas. Studies relating to diagnostics and diagnosis, pharmacoeconomics, public health, epidemiology, quality of life, and patient care, management, and education are also encouraged. The journal is of interest to a broad audience of healthcare professionals and publishes original research, reviews, communications and letters. The journal is read by a global audience and receives submissions from all over the world. Advances in Therapy will consider all scientifically sound research be it positive, confirmatory or negative data. Submissions are welcomed whether they relate to an international and/or a country-specific audience, something that is crucially important when researchers are trying to target more specific patient populations. This inclusive approach allows the journal to assist in the dissemination of all scientifically and ethically sound research.
×
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