Comparative efficacy of lisocabtagene maraleucel in the PILOT study versus second-line chemotherapy regimens in the real world.

IF 8.2 1区 医学 Q1 HEMATOLOGY Haematologica Pub Date : 2024-10-31 DOI:10.3324/haematol.2024.285828
Nilanjan Ghosh, Alison Sehgal, Fei Fei Liu, Ana Kostic, Alessandro Crotta, Marc De Benedetti, Jillian Faccone, Lily Peng, Leo I Gordon
{"title":"Comparative efficacy of lisocabtagene maraleucel in the PILOT study <i>versus</i> second-line chemotherapy regimens in the real world.","authors":"Nilanjan Ghosh, Alison Sehgal, Fei Fei Liu, Ana Kostic, Alessandro Crotta, Marc De Benedetti, Jillian Faccone, Lily Peng, Leo I Gordon","doi":"10.3324/haematol.2024.285828","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This study assessed the comparative efficacy of lisocabtagene maraleucel (liso-cel) in PILOT (NCT03483103), an open-label, phase II study, versus conventional second-line (2L) chemotherapy regimens in the real world administered to patients with relapsed or refractory (R/R) large B-cell lymphoma (LBCL) who were not intended for hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT). The liso-cel-treated cohort (n=61) was based on patients who received liso-cel in the PILOT study. The conventional chemotherapy cohort included patients who met PILOT eligibility criteria and received conventional 2L chemotherapy in the real-world clinical setting (n=273). After using the trimmed stabilized inverse probability of treatment weighting method to balance cohorts according to baseline characteristics, there were statistically significant differences in all tested measures of efficacy. Compared with real-world conventional chemotherapy regimens, liso-cel demonstrated higher overall response rates (79.6% with liso-cel vs. 50.5% with conventional chemotherapy; relative risk [RR], 1.6; P.</p>","PeriodicalId":12964,"journal":{"name":"Haematologica","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":8.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Haematologica","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3324/haematol.2024.285828","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

Abstract

This study assessed the comparative efficacy of lisocabtagene maraleucel (liso-cel) in PILOT (NCT03483103), an open-label, phase II study, versus conventional second-line (2L) chemotherapy regimens in the real world administered to patients with relapsed or refractory (R/R) large B-cell lymphoma (LBCL) who were not intended for hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT). The liso-cel-treated cohort (n=61) was based on patients who received liso-cel in the PILOT study. The conventional chemotherapy cohort included patients who met PILOT eligibility criteria and received conventional 2L chemotherapy in the real-world clinical setting (n=273). After using the trimmed stabilized inverse probability of treatment weighting method to balance cohorts according to baseline characteristics, there were statistically significant differences in all tested measures of efficacy. Compared with real-world conventional chemotherapy regimens, liso-cel demonstrated higher overall response rates (79.6% with liso-cel vs. 50.5% with conventional chemotherapy; relative risk [RR], 1.6; P.

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
PILOT 研究中的 lisocabtagene maraleucel 与现实世界中二线化疗方案的疗效比较。
本研究评估了开放标签II期研究PILOT(NCT03483103)中的lisocabtagene maraleucel(liso-cel)与传统二线(2L)化疗方案的疗效比较,后者用于复发或难治性(R/R)大B细胞淋巴瘤(LBCL)患者,且不打算进行造血干细胞移植(HSCT)。接受过liso-cel治疗的队列(n=61)是基于在PILOT研究中接受过liso-cel治疗的患者。常规化疗队列包括符合PILOT资格标准并在实际临床环境中接受常规2L化疗的患者(n=273)。根据基线特征使用修剪稳定化治疗逆概率加权法平衡队列后,所有测试的疗效指标均存在显著统计学差异。与真实世界中的传统化疗方案相比,liso-cel的总体应答率更高(liso-cel为79.6%,传统化疗为50.5%;相对风险[RR],1.6;P.
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
Haematologica
Haematologica 医学-血液学
CiteScore
14.10
自引率
2.00%
发文量
349
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: Haematologica is a journal that publishes articles within the broad field of hematology. It reports on novel findings in basic, clinical, and translational research. Scope: The scope of the journal includes reporting novel research results that: Have a significant impact on understanding normal hematology or the development of hematological diseases. Are likely to bring important changes to the diagnosis or treatment of hematological diseases.
期刊最新文献
Investigating the influence of germline ATM variants in chronic lymphocytic leukemia on cancer vulnerability. Optimization of T-cell replete haploidentical hematopoietic stem cell transplantation: the Chinese experience. Acute myeloid leukemia drug tolerant persister cells survive chemotherapy by transiently increasing plasma membrane rigidity, that also increases their sensitivity to immune cell killing. Arkadia: a new player in hematopoietic stem and progenitor cell development. Calaspargase pegol and pegaspargase cause similar hepatosteatosis in mice.
×
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