CAR-T细胞和双特异性抗体在髓外受累多发性骨髓瘤中的活性

IF 11.6 1区 医学 Q1 HEMATOLOGY
Maximilian J. Steinhardt, Christoph Schaefers, Lisa B. Leypoldt, Igor-Wolfgang Blau, Marie Harzer, Xiang Zhou, Christine Riedhammer, Abdulaziz Kamili, Ricardo Kosch, Laura S. Topp, Isabel Molwitz, Nils-Ole Gross-Fengels, Yasmin Fede Melzer, Jule Artzenroth, Maximilian Al-Bazaz, Winfried Alsdorf, Max S. Topp, Johannes Duell, Julia Mersi, Johannes Waldschmidt, Carsten Bokemeyer, Hermann Einsele, K. Martin Kortüm, Katja Weisel, Leo Rasche
{"title":"CAR-T细胞和双特异性抗体在髓外受累多发性骨髓瘤中的活性","authors":"Maximilian J. Steinhardt, Christoph Schaefers, Lisa B. Leypoldt, Igor-Wolfgang Blau, Marie Harzer, Xiang Zhou, Christine Riedhammer, Abdulaziz Kamili, Ricardo Kosch, Laura S. Topp, Isabel Molwitz, Nils-Ole Gross-Fengels, Yasmin Fede Melzer, Jule Artzenroth, Maximilian Al-Bazaz, Winfried Alsdorf, Max S. Topp, Johannes Duell, Julia Mersi, Johannes Waldschmidt, Carsten Bokemeyer, Hermann Einsele, K. Martin Kortüm, Katja Weisel, Leo Rasche","doi":"10.1038/s41408-025-01330-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Extramedullary multiple myeloma (EMD) is associated with low response rates, short progression-free survival, and poor prognosis. CAR T cells and bispecific antibodies (bsABs) have shown efficacy in relapsed myeloma, but it remains uncertain whether one T cell redirection strategy should be preferred. We retrospectively analyzed 80 patients with EMD not adjacent to the bone treated with ide-cel, cilta-cel, teclistamab, or talquetamab at three academic centers in Germany. All patients were heavily pretreated, and a high-risk cytogenetic profile was prevalent in &gt;41% of patients. All cohorts had a median of 5 to 7 prior lines of therapy. The vast majority of patients receiving cilta-cel, ide-cel, or teclistamab were BCMA-naive ( &gt;88%). Response rates after CAR T cell infusion were significantly higher (100% with cilta-cel, 82% with ide-cel) than with bsABs (29% for talquetamab, 36% for teclistamab). Complete resolution of EMD was more frequent after CAR T cell therapies (50% and 41%) than after bsABs (16% and 14%). With a median follow-up of 12.2 months, median (m)PFS was not reached in patients that had received cilta-cel; mPFS was 7.3 months after ide-cel and significantly longer for both CAR T products compared to talquetamab or teclistamab (mPFS 4.0 and 2.6 months). Effective debulking therapy prolonged remissions after CAR T cell infusion compared to no debulking or no response to debulking. Visceral and soft tissue manifestations responded significantly less frequently than EMD in other locations. With significantly higher response rates, deeper remissions, and longer mPFS, our retrospective data suggest CAR T cells may provide a meaningful benefit in EMD.</p>","PeriodicalId":8989,"journal":{"name":"Blood Cancer Journal","volume":"25 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":11.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Activity of CAR-T cells and bispecific antibodies in multiple myeloma with extramedullary involvement\",\"authors\":\"Maximilian J. Steinhardt, Christoph Schaefers, Lisa B. Leypoldt, Igor-Wolfgang Blau, Marie Harzer, Xiang Zhou, Christine Riedhammer, Abdulaziz Kamili, Ricardo Kosch, Laura S. Topp, Isabel Molwitz, Nils-Ole Gross-Fengels, Yasmin Fede Melzer, Jule Artzenroth, Maximilian Al-Bazaz, Winfried Alsdorf, Max S. Topp, Johannes Duell, Julia Mersi, Johannes Waldschmidt, Carsten Bokemeyer, Hermann Einsele, K. Martin Kortüm, Katja Weisel, Leo Rasche\",\"doi\":\"10.1038/s41408-025-01330-9\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Extramedullary multiple myeloma (EMD) is associated with low response rates, short progression-free survival, and poor prognosis. CAR T cells and bispecific antibodies (bsABs) have shown efficacy in relapsed myeloma, but it remains uncertain whether one T cell redirection strategy should be preferred. We retrospectively analyzed 80 patients with EMD not adjacent to the bone treated with ide-cel, cilta-cel, teclistamab, or talquetamab at three academic centers in Germany. All patients were heavily pretreated, and a high-risk cytogenetic profile was prevalent in &gt;41% of patients. All cohorts had a median of 5 to 7 prior lines of therapy. The vast majority of patients receiving cilta-cel, ide-cel, or teclistamab were BCMA-naive ( &gt;88%). Response rates after CAR T cell infusion were significantly higher (100% with cilta-cel, 82% with ide-cel) than with bsABs (29% for talquetamab, 36% for teclistamab). Complete resolution of EMD was more frequent after CAR T cell therapies (50% and 41%) than after bsABs (16% and 14%). With a median follow-up of 12.2 months, median (m)PFS was not reached in patients that had received cilta-cel; mPFS was 7.3 months after ide-cel and significantly longer for both CAR T products compared to talquetamab or teclistamab (mPFS 4.0 and 2.6 months). Effective debulking therapy prolonged remissions after CAR T cell infusion compared to no debulking or no response to debulking. Visceral and soft tissue manifestations responded significantly less frequently than EMD in other locations. With significantly higher response rates, deeper remissions, and longer mPFS, our retrospective data suggest CAR T cells may provide a meaningful benefit in EMD.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":8989,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Blood Cancer Journal\",\"volume\":\"25 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":11.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Blood Cancer Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1038/s41408-025-01330-9\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"HEMATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Blood Cancer Journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1038/s41408-025-01330-9","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

摘要

髓外多发性骨髓瘤(EMD)反应率低,无进展生存期短,预后差。CAR - T细胞和双特异性抗体(bsABs)已经显示出对复发性骨髓瘤的疗效,但仍不确定是否应该优先使用一种T细胞重定向策略。我们回顾性分析了德国三个学术中心接受ide-cel、cilta-cel、teclistamab或talquetamab治疗的80例非邻近骨EMD患者。所有患者都进行了大量预处理,41%的患者普遍存在高危细胞遗传学特征。所有队列先前的治疗中位数为5至7条线。绝大多数接受cilta-cel、ide-cel或teclistamab治疗的患者是bcma初始患者(88%)。CAR - T细胞输注后的应答率(cilta-cel组为100%,ide-cel组为82%)明显高于bsABs组(talquetamab组为29%,teclistamab组为36%)。CAR - T细胞治疗后EMD的完全消退(50%和41%)比bsab治疗后EMD的完全消退(16%和14%)更为频繁。中位随访时间为12.2个月,接受cilta-cel治疗的患者未达到中位PFS (m);与talquetamab或teclistamab (mPFS 4.0和2.6个月)相比,这两种CAR - T产品在ide- cell后的mPFS为7.3个月,明显更长。与没有减容或对减容无反应相比,有效的减容疗法延长了CAR - T细胞输注后的缓解期。内脏和软组织表现明显低于其他部位的EMD。我们的回顾性数据表明,CAR - T细胞具有显着更高的应答率、更深的缓解和更长的mPFS,可能为EMD提供有意义的益处。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Activity of CAR-T cells and bispecific antibodies in multiple myeloma with extramedullary involvement

Activity of CAR-T cells and bispecific antibodies in multiple myeloma with extramedullary involvement

Extramedullary multiple myeloma (EMD) is associated with low response rates, short progression-free survival, and poor prognosis. CAR T cells and bispecific antibodies (bsABs) have shown efficacy in relapsed myeloma, but it remains uncertain whether one T cell redirection strategy should be preferred. We retrospectively analyzed 80 patients with EMD not adjacent to the bone treated with ide-cel, cilta-cel, teclistamab, or talquetamab at three academic centers in Germany. All patients were heavily pretreated, and a high-risk cytogenetic profile was prevalent in >41% of patients. All cohorts had a median of 5 to 7 prior lines of therapy. The vast majority of patients receiving cilta-cel, ide-cel, or teclistamab were BCMA-naive ( >88%). Response rates after CAR T cell infusion were significantly higher (100% with cilta-cel, 82% with ide-cel) than with bsABs (29% for talquetamab, 36% for teclistamab). Complete resolution of EMD was more frequent after CAR T cell therapies (50% and 41%) than after bsABs (16% and 14%). With a median follow-up of 12.2 months, median (m)PFS was not reached in patients that had received cilta-cel; mPFS was 7.3 months after ide-cel and significantly longer for both CAR T products compared to talquetamab or teclistamab (mPFS 4.0 and 2.6 months). Effective debulking therapy prolonged remissions after CAR T cell infusion compared to no debulking or no response to debulking. Visceral and soft tissue manifestations responded significantly less frequently than EMD in other locations. With significantly higher response rates, deeper remissions, and longer mPFS, our retrospective data suggest CAR T cells may provide a meaningful benefit in EMD.

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
CiteScore
16.70
自引率
2.30%
发文量
153
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Blood Cancer Journal is dedicated to publishing high-quality articles related to hematologic malignancies and related disorders. The journal welcomes submissions of original research, reviews, guidelines, and letters that are deemed to have a significant impact in the field. While the journal covers a wide range of topics, it particularly focuses on areas such as: Preclinical studies of new compounds, especially those that provide mechanistic insights Clinical trials and observations Reviews related to new drugs and current management of hematologic malignancies Novel observations related to new mutations, molecular pathways, and tumor genomics Blood Cancer Journal offers a forum for expedited publication of novel observations regarding new mutations or altered pathways.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信