Efficacy of CARVYKTI in CARTITUDE-4 versus other conventional treatment regimens for lenalidomide-refractory multiple myeloma using inverse probability of treatment weighting.

IF 1.9 4区 医学 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Journal of comparative effectiveness research Pub Date : 2024-09-01 Epub Date: 2024-08-20 DOI:10.57264/cer-2024-0080
Winfried Alsdorf, Joris Diels, Francesca Ghilotti, João Mendes, Teresa Hernando, Patricia Cost, Jordan M Schecter, Nikoletta Lendvai, Nitin Patel, Ana Triguero, Margherita Ursi
{"title":"Efficacy of CARVYKTI in CARTITUDE-4 versus other conventional treatment regimens for lenalidomide-refractory multiple myeloma using inverse probability of treatment weighting.","authors":"Winfried Alsdorf, Joris Diels, Francesca Ghilotti, João Mendes, Teresa Hernando, Patricia Cost, Jordan M Schecter, Nikoletta Lendvai, Nitin Patel, Ana Triguero, Margherita Ursi","doi":"10.57264/cer-2024-0080","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Aim:</b> The phase III randomized controlled trial (RCT) CARTITUDE-4 (NCT04181827) demonstrated superiority of CARVYKTI (ciltacabtagene autoleucel; cilta-cel) over daratumumab, pomalidomide and dexamethasone (DPd) and pomalidomide, bortezomib and dexamethasone (PVd) for relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) patients who have received one to three prior line(s) of therapy (LOT[s]) including an immunomodulatory agent and a proteasome inhibitor, and are refractory to lenalidomide. These analyses estimate the relative efficacy between cilta-cel and other common treatment regimens, for which no direct comparative evidence is available. <b>Materials & methods:</b> Patient data were available from the CARTITUDE-4, CASTOR, CANDOR and APOLLO RCTs. Imbalances between cohorts on key patient characteristics were adjusted for using inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW). Relative efficacies were estimated with response rate ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for overall response rate (ORR), very good partial response or better rate (≥VGPR) and complete response or better rate (≥CR), and with hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CIs for progression-free survival (PFS). Sensitivity analyses using different analytical methods and additional covariates were explored. <b>Results:</b> Key characteristics were well balanced across cohorts after IPTW. Cilta-cel showed statistically significant benefit in PFS (HRs: 0.11-0.51), ≥VGPR (RRs: 1.51-5.13) and ≥CR (RRs: 2.90-35.24) versus all comparators, and statistically significant improvements in ORR over most comparator regimens (RRs: 1.22-1.90). Results were consistent across sensitivity analyses. <b>Conclusion:</b> Cilta-cel demonstrated benefit over other common treatment regimens, highlighting its potential to become a new standard of care option for lenalidomide-refractory RRMM patients with one to three prior LOT(s). These comparisons help to demonstrate the improved efficacy of cilta-cel in countries where the standard of care may differ from DPd/PVd.</p>","PeriodicalId":15539,"journal":{"name":"Journal of comparative effectiveness research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11363176/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of comparative effectiveness research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.57264/cer-2024-0080","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/8/20 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Aim: The phase III randomized controlled trial (RCT) CARTITUDE-4 (NCT04181827) demonstrated superiority of CARVYKTI (ciltacabtagene autoleucel; cilta-cel) over daratumumab, pomalidomide and dexamethasone (DPd) and pomalidomide, bortezomib and dexamethasone (PVd) for relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) patients who have received one to three prior line(s) of therapy (LOT[s]) including an immunomodulatory agent and a proteasome inhibitor, and are refractory to lenalidomide. These analyses estimate the relative efficacy between cilta-cel and other common treatment regimens, for which no direct comparative evidence is available. Materials & methods: Patient data were available from the CARTITUDE-4, CASTOR, CANDOR and APOLLO RCTs. Imbalances between cohorts on key patient characteristics were adjusted for using inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW). Relative efficacies were estimated with response rate ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for overall response rate (ORR), very good partial response or better rate (≥VGPR) and complete response or better rate (≥CR), and with hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CIs for progression-free survival (PFS). Sensitivity analyses using different analytical methods and additional covariates were explored. Results: Key characteristics were well balanced across cohorts after IPTW. Cilta-cel showed statistically significant benefit in PFS (HRs: 0.11-0.51), ≥VGPR (RRs: 1.51-5.13) and ≥CR (RRs: 2.90-35.24) versus all comparators, and statistically significant improvements in ORR over most comparator regimens (RRs: 1.22-1.90). Results were consistent across sensitivity analyses. Conclusion: Cilta-cel demonstrated benefit over other common treatment regimens, highlighting its potential to become a new standard of care option for lenalidomide-refractory RRMM patients with one to three prior LOT(s). These comparisons help to demonstrate the improved efficacy of cilta-cel in countries where the standard of care may differ from DPd/PVd.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
CARTITUDE-4中的CARVYKTI治疗来那度胺难治性多发性骨髓瘤的疗效与其他常规治疗方案的疗效对比,采用反治疗概率加权法。
研究目的III期随机对照试验(RCT)CARTITUDE-4(NCT04181827)显示,CARVYKTI(ciltacabtagene autoleucel;cilta-cel)优于达拉单抗、泊马度胺和地塞米松(DPd)以及泊马度胺、硼替佐米和地塞米松(PVd),后者适用于既往接受过一至三线治疗(LOT[s])(包括一种免疫调节剂和一种蛋白酶体抑制剂)且对来那度胺难治的复发性/难治性多发性骨髓瘤(RRMM)患者。这些分析估计了 cilta-cel 与其他常见治疗方案之间的相对疗效,目前尚无直接的比较证据。材料与方法:患者数据来自 CARTITUDE-4、CASTOR、CANDOR 和 APOLLO RCTs。采用反向治疗概率加权法(IPTW)调整了各组间主要患者特征的不平衡。用总反应率(ORR)、很好的部分反应或更好的反应率(≥VGPR)和完全反应或更好的反应率(≥CR)的反应率比(RRs)和 95% 置信区间(CIs)以及无进展生存期(PFS)的危险比(HRs)和 95% CIs 估算相对疗效。采用不同的分析方法和额外的协变量进行了敏感性分析。结果:IPTW后各组群的主要特征非常均衡。与所有比较方案相比,Cilta-cel 在 PFS(HRs:0.11-0.51)、≥VGPR(RRs:1.51-5.13)和≥CR(RRs:2.90-35.24)方面显示出统计学意义上的显著优势,与大多数比较方案相比,Cilta-cel 在 ORR 方面显示出统计学意义上的显著改善(RRs:1.22-1.90)。各种敏感性分析的结果一致。结论与其他常见治疗方案相比,Cilta-cel显示出了优势,突出了其成为来那度胺难治性RRMM患者新的标准治疗方案的潜力,这些患者既往曾接受过一至三次来那度胺治疗。这些比较有助于证明,在治疗标准可能不同于DPd/PVd的国家,cilta-cel具有更好的疗效。
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 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of comparative effectiveness research
Journal of comparative effectiveness research HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES-
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
9.50%
发文量
121
期刊介绍: Journal of Comparative Effectiveness Research provides a rapid-publication platform for debate, and for the presentation of new findings and research methodologies. Through rigorous evaluation and comprehensive coverage, the Journal of Comparative Effectiveness Research provides stakeholders (including patients, clinicians, healthcare purchasers, and health policy makers) with the key data and opinions to make informed and specific decisions on clinical practice.
期刊最新文献
Dependent censoring bias assessment using inverse probability of censoring weights: Type 2 diabetes mellitus risk in patients initiating bisoprolol versus other antihypertensives in a Clinical Practice Research Datalink cohort study. Access in all areas? A round up of developments in market access and HTA: part 5. Cost-effectiveness of lung cancer screening with volume computed tomography in Portugal. Use of transportability methods for real-world evidence generation: a review of current applications. Ravulizumab for adults with generalized myasthenia gravis: a plain language summary of three studies.
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1