机构:[1]Capital Med Univ, Beijing Tongren Hosp, Dept Hematol, Beijing, Peoples R China临床科室血液内科首都医科大学附属北京同仁医院首都医科大学附属同仁医院[2]Capital Med Univ, Beijing, Peoples R China[3]Peking Univ Sixth Hosp, Beijing, Peoples R China[4]Southern Med Univ, Nanfang Hosp, Dept Hematol, Guangzhou, Guangdong, Peoples R China[5]Southern Med Univ, Shunde Hosp, Dept Radiol, Guangzhou, Peoples R China
Background CAR-T-cell therapy and bispecific antibody have revolutionized the treatment landscape for multiple myeloma. However, there is currently a lack of studies comparing the efficacy and safety of these two approaches. This meta-analysis assesses the efficacy and safety of B-cell maturation antigen (BCMA)-directed CAR-T-cell therapies and BCMAxCD3 bispecific antibodies as third-line or later interventions for relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). Methods We searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases up to May 31, 2024, identifying 11 eligible studies encompassing 1269 participants. Random-effects models evaluated the primary (complete response (CR) rate) and secondary (overall response rate (ORR)) outcomes, while meta-regression analyses adjusted for relevant covariates. Results CAR-T-cell therapy achieved significantly higher pooled CR rate (0.54 (95% CI 0.42-0.69) vs bispecific antibodies 0.35 (0.30-0.41), p<0.01) and pooled ORR (0.83 (0.76-0.90) vs 0.65 (0.59-0.71), p<0.01). However, CAR-T therapy had a higher incidence of adverse events, particularly cytokine release syndrome (CRS 0.83 (0.70-0.97) vs bispecific antibodies 0.59 (0.43-0.74), p<0.05). Severe CRS (grade >= 3) occurred at a rate of 0.07 (0.03-0.14) in the CAR-T cell group, contrasting with a negligible rate of 0.01 (0.00-0.02) in the bispecific antibody group (p<0.01). Hematologic adverse events, including neutropenia (grade >= 3; 0.88 (0.81-0.95) vs 0.48 (0.30-0.67), p<0.01) and anemia (grade >= 3; 0.55 (0.47-0.62) vs 0.34 (0.28 to 0.40), p<0.01), were also more frequent in the CAR-T-cell group. Furthermore, differences in efficacy were observed among various CAR-T products, with ciltacabtagene autoleucel showing greater efficacy in CR rate (0.77 (0.71-0.84) vs 0.37 (0.32-0.41), p<0.01) and ORR (0.91 (0.83-0.99) vs 0.73 (0.68-0.77), p<0.01) compared with idecabtagene vicleucel. Conclusion CAR-T-cell therapy demonstrated superior CR rates compared with bispecific antibodies, although with an increase in severe adverse events.
基金:
Beijing Natural Science Foundation [7222027]; National Natural Science Foundation of China [82170181, 82370188]; Beijing Physician Scientist Training Project [BJPSTP-2024-01]; National Key R&D Program of China [2022YFF1502000]
第一作者机构:[1]Capital Med Univ, Beijing Tongren Hosp, Dept Hematol, Beijing, Peoples R China[2]Capital Med Univ, Beijing, Peoples R China
共同第一作者:
通讯作者:
推荐引用方式(GB/T 7714):
Liang Xiaojie,Wang Yufan,Luo Baiwei,et al.Comparison of CAR T-cell and bispecific antibody as third-line or later-line treatments for multiple myeloma: a meta-analysis[J].JOURNAL FOR IMMUNOTHERAPY OF CANCER.2024,12(11):doi:10.1136/jitc-2024-010064.
APA:
Liang, Xiaojie,Wang, Yufan,Luo, Baiwei,Lin, Bingyu,Lu, WeiXiang...&Wang, Liang.(2024).Comparison of CAR T-cell and bispecific antibody as third-line or later-line treatments for multiple myeloma: a meta-analysis.JOURNAL FOR IMMUNOTHERAPY OF CANCER,12,(11)
MLA:
Liang, Xiaojie,et al."Comparison of CAR T-cell and bispecific antibody as third-line or later-line treatments for multiple myeloma: a meta-analysis".JOURNAL FOR IMMUNOTHERAPY OF CANCER 12..11(2024)