TY - JOUR
T1 - Comparison of Standard-of-Care Idecabtagene Vicleucel and Ciltacabtagene Autoleucel in Relapsed/Refractory Multiple Myeloma
AU - Hansen, Doris K.
AU - Peres, Lauren C.
AU - Dima, Danai
AU - Richards, Alicia
AU - Shune, Leyla
AU - Afrough, Aimaz
AU - Midha, Shonali
AU - Dhakal, Binod
AU - Kocoglu, Mehmet H.
AU - Atrash, Shebli
AU - Ferreri, Christopher
AU - Castaneda, Omar
AU - Davis, James A.
AU - Bhurtel, Evguenia
AU - Mcguirk, Joseph
AU - Wagner, Charlotte
AU - Bansal, Radhika
AU - Costello, Patrick
AU - Smith, Kinaya
AU - Lieberman-Cribbin, Alex
AU - De Avila, Gabriel
AU - Purvey, Sneha
AU - Hosoya, Hitomi
AU - Mikkilineni, Lekha
AU - Oswald, Laura B.
AU - Kaur, Gurbakhash
AU - Pasvolsky, Oren
AU - Gaballa, Mahmoud
AU - Herr, Megan M.
AU - Forsberg, Peter
AU - Janakiram, Murali
AU - Htut, Myo
AU - Asoori Maringanti, Sireesha
AU - Kalariya, Nilesh
AU - Hashmi, Hamza
AU - Reshef, Ran
AU - Sborov, Douglas W.
AU - Nadeem, Omar
AU - Anwer, Faiz
AU - Khouri, Jack
AU - Raza, Shahzad
AU - Atanackovic, Djordje
AU - Alsina, Melissa
AU - Freeman, Ciara L.
AU - Locke, Frederick L.
AU - Voorhees, Peter
AU - Anderson, Larry D.
AU - Richard, Shambavi
AU - Martin, Thomas
AU - Lin, Yi
AU - Patel, Krina K.
AU - Sidana, Surbhi
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2025 by American Society of Clinical Oncology.
PY - 2025/5/1
Y1 - 2025/5/1
N2 - PURPOSEIdecabtagene vicleucel (ide-cel) and ciltacabtagene autoleucel (cilta-cel), two B-cell maturation antigen-directed chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapies have demonstrated remarkable efficacy in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). We compare safety, efficacy, and survival among patients with RRMM treated with standard-of-care (SOC) ide-cel or cilta-cel.METHODSData were from a retrospective chart review of patients with RRMM leukapheresed by December 31, 2022, with the intent to receive SOC ide-cel or cilta-cel at 19 institutions. An inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) approach was used to compare outcomes by therapy type.RESULTSA total of 641 patients were leukapheresed by December 31, 2022, with ide-cel (n = 386) and cilta-cel (n = 255). Five hundred eighty-six patients were infused (n = 350 for ide-cel; n = 236 for cilta-cel) with a median follow-up of 12.6 and 13.0 months for ide-cel and cilta-cel, respectively. After IPTW, patient characteristics were well balanced. Cilta-cel was associated with higher likelihood of grade ≥3 cytokine release syndrome (CRS; odds ratio [OR], 6.80 [95% CI, 2.28 to 20.33]), infections (OR, 2.03 [95% CI, 1.41 to 2.92]), second primary malignancies (OR, 1.77 [95% CI, 0.89 to 3.56]), and delayed neurotoxicity (OR, 20.07 [95% CI, 4.46 to 90.20]). Cilta-cel was also associated with better treatment responses (≥complete response: OR, 2.42 [95% CI, 1.63 to 3.60]), longer progression-free survival (hazard ratio [HR], 0.48 [95% CI, 0.36 to 0.63]), and longer overall survival (HR, 0.67 [95% CI, 0.46 to 0.97]). No associations were observed between therapy type and immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome, any CRS, severe cytopenia at days 30 and 90, or nonrelapse mortality. We observed consistent findings when repeating the analyses restricting the ide-cel cohort to patients infused during the same time period as Food and Drug Administration approval for cilta-cel (≥March 2022).CONCLUSIONCilta-cel demonstrated superior efficacy and survival, with higher incidence of certain toxicities, compared with ide-cel.
AB - PURPOSEIdecabtagene vicleucel (ide-cel) and ciltacabtagene autoleucel (cilta-cel), two B-cell maturation antigen-directed chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapies have demonstrated remarkable efficacy in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). We compare safety, efficacy, and survival among patients with RRMM treated with standard-of-care (SOC) ide-cel or cilta-cel.METHODSData were from a retrospective chart review of patients with RRMM leukapheresed by December 31, 2022, with the intent to receive SOC ide-cel or cilta-cel at 19 institutions. An inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) approach was used to compare outcomes by therapy type.RESULTSA total of 641 patients were leukapheresed by December 31, 2022, with ide-cel (n = 386) and cilta-cel (n = 255). Five hundred eighty-six patients were infused (n = 350 for ide-cel; n = 236 for cilta-cel) with a median follow-up of 12.6 and 13.0 months for ide-cel and cilta-cel, respectively. After IPTW, patient characteristics were well balanced. Cilta-cel was associated with higher likelihood of grade ≥3 cytokine release syndrome (CRS; odds ratio [OR], 6.80 [95% CI, 2.28 to 20.33]), infections (OR, 2.03 [95% CI, 1.41 to 2.92]), second primary malignancies (OR, 1.77 [95% CI, 0.89 to 3.56]), and delayed neurotoxicity (OR, 20.07 [95% CI, 4.46 to 90.20]). Cilta-cel was also associated with better treatment responses (≥complete response: OR, 2.42 [95% CI, 1.63 to 3.60]), longer progression-free survival (hazard ratio [HR], 0.48 [95% CI, 0.36 to 0.63]), and longer overall survival (HR, 0.67 [95% CI, 0.46 to 0.97]). No associations were observed between therapy type and immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome, any CRS, severe cytopenia at days 30 and 90, or nonrelapse mortality. We observed consistent findings when repeating the analyses restricting the ide-cel cohort to patients infused during the same time period as Food and Drug Administration approval for cilta-cel (≥March 2022).CONCLUSIONCilta-cel demonstrated superior efficacy and survival, with higher incidence of certain toxicities, compared with ide-cel.
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/85218769357
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/85218769357#tab=citedBy
U2 - 10.1200/JCO-24-01730
DO - 10.1200/JCO-24-01730
M3 - Article
C2 - 39965175
AN - SCOPUS:85218769357
SN - 0732-183X
VL - 43
SP - 1597
EP - 1609
JO - Journal of Clinical Oncology
JF - Journal of Clinical Oncology
IS - 13
ER -