scholarly journals Efficacy and Safety of Experimental versus Approved CAR T-cell Therapies in Large B-cell Lymphoma Using Matching Adjusted Indirect Comparisons: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocol

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 34-39
Author(s):  
Bayarmagnai Maggie Munkhjargal ◽  
Bogdan Muresan ◽  
Sara Solano ◽  
Antonio Vaz de Macedo ◽  
YoonJung Lee ◽  
...  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bayarmagnai Weinstein ◽  
Bogdan Muresan ◽  
Sara Solano ◽  
Antonio Vaz de Macedo ◽  
YoonJung Lee ◽  
...  

Despite favorable results of CAR T-cell therapy for relapsed/refractory large B-cell lymphoma (R/R LBCL), several challenges remain, including incomplete response, immune-mediated toxicity, and antigen-loss relapse. We delineated the relative clinical benefit of the novel approaches compared to the currently approved CAR T-cell therapies. In the absence of head-to-head comparisons and randomized controlled trials, we performed Matching Adjusted Indirect Comparisons to quantify the relative efficacy and safety of experimental CARs against Axicabtagene ciloleucel (Yescarta), the first FDA-approved CAR. A total of 182 R/R LBCL patients from 15 clinical trials with individual patient data (IPD) were pooled into eight populations by their CAR T-cell constructs and +/- ASCT status. The study endpoints were Progression-Free Survival (PFS), grade ≥ 3 cytokine release syndrome (CRS), and grade ≥ 3 neurotoxicity (NT). Tandem CD19.CD20.4-1BBζ CARs indicated favorable efficacy and safety, whereas the co-infusion of CD19 & CD20 with 4-1BBζ showed no clinical benefit compared to Yescarta. Third generation CD19. CD28. 4-1BBζ, and sequential administration of autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) and CD19. CARs presented statistically insignificant yet improved PFS and safety except for ASCT combined intervention which had suggestively higher NT risk than Yescarta. CARs with modified co-stimulatory domains to reduce toxicity (Hu19. CD8.28Zζ and CD19. BBz.86ζ) presented remarkable safety with no severe adverse events; however, both presented worse PFS than Yescarta. Third-generation CARs demonstrated statistically significantly lower NT than Yescarta. CD20. 4-1BBζ data suggested targeting CD20 antigen alone lacks clinical or safety benefit compared to Yescarta. Further comparisons with other FDA-approved CARs are needed.


2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (4) ◽  
pp. 18
Author(s):  
Bayarmagnai Weinstein ◽  
Bogdan Muresan ◽  
Sara Solano ◽  
Antonio Vaz de Macedo ◽  
YoonJung Lee ◽  
...  

Despite favorable results of CAR T-cell therapy for relapsed/refractory large B-cell lymphoma (R/R LBCL), several challenges remain, including incomplete response, immune-mediated toxicity, and antigen-loss relapse. We delineated the relative clinical benefit of the novel approaches compared to the currently approved CAR T-cell therapies. In the absence of head-to-head comparisons and randomized controlled trials, we performed Matching Adjusted Indirect Comparisons to quantify the relative efficacy and safety of experimental CARs against Axicabtagene ciloleucel (Yescarta), the first FDA-approved CAR. A total of 182 R/R LBCL patients from 15 clinical trials with individual patient data (IPD) were pooled into eight populations by their CAR T-cell constructs and +/- ASCT status. The study endpoints were Progression-Free Survival (PFS), grade ≥ 3 cytokine release syndrome (CRS), and grade ≥ 3 neurotoxicity (NT). Tandem CD19.CD20.4-1BBζ CARs indicated favorable efficacy and safety, whereas the co-infusion of CD19 & CD20 with 4-1BBζ showed no clinical benefit compared to Yescarta. Third generation CD19. CD28. 4-1BBζ, and sequential administration of autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) and CD19. CARs presented statistically insignificant yet improved PFS and safety except for ASCT combined intervention which had suggestively higher NT risk than Yescarta. CARs with modified co-stimulatory domains to reduce toxicity (Hu19. CD8.28Zζ and CD19. BBz.86ζ) presented remarkable safety with no severe adverse events; however, both presented worse PFS than Yescarta. Third-generation CARs demonstrated statistically significantly lower NT than Yescarta. CD20. 4-1BBζ data suggested targeting CD20 antigen alone lacks clinical or safety benefit compared to Yescarta. Further comparisons with other FDA-approved CARs are needed.


2020 ◽  
Vol 152 ◽  
pp. 103010
Author(s):  
Kelu Hou ◽  
Zhiying Yu ◽  
Yueping Jia ◽  
Huihui Fang ◽  
Shuai Shao ◽  
...  

Blood ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 136 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 13-14
Author(s):  
Wajeeha Aiman ◽  
Muhammad Ashar Ali ◽  
Rimsha Ali ◽  
Farwah N. Fatima ◽  
Nayab Mirza ◽  
...  

Background: Diffuse large B cell lymphoma (DLBCL) is the most common type of non-Hodgkin lymphoma in the US. Lenalidomide (Len), an immunomodulator, is used in the treatment of multiple hematological malignancies. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of Lenalidomide based regimens in Newly Diagnosed (ND) and Relapsed/Refractory (R/R) DLBCL. Methods : A search was performed on PubMed, Cochrane, Embase, and Web of Science. We used the following mesh terms and Emtree terms, "Lenalidomide" OR "Revlimid" AND "diffuse large B cell lymphoma" from the inception of literature till 06/20/2020. We screened 1640 articles and included 2 randomized clinical trials (N=72) and 21 single-arm clinical trials (N=860) in this meta-analysis. We excluded case reports, case series, preclinical trials, review articles, meta-analysis, observational studies, and clinical trials not providing any information about the lenalidomide efficacy or safety in DLBCL. We used the R programming language (version 4.0.2) to conduct a meta-analysis. Results : In 23 studies (N=932), Len based regimens were used in patients with age 19-92 years (range) Table 1. In 5 trials on R/R patients (N=252), Len was used as a maintenance therapy. Cumulative overall response rate (ORR) and cumulative complete response (CR) were 0.27 (95% CI 0.21; 0.33, I2=0%) (Fig1) and 0.10 (95% CI 0.07; 0.16, 8%) (Fig2), respectively. In one phase III trial, the ORR and CR were significantly improved in the Len arm vs investigator's choice drug. In 4 trials on R/R patients (N=207), Len with monoclonal antibodies (MoAb) was used. Cumulative ORR and CR were 0.40 (95% CI 0.28; 0.54, I2=71%) and 0.28 (95% CI 0.17; 0.42, I2=72%), respectively. In a trial on R/R patients (N=33), Len with Gemcitabine, Rituximab, and Oxaliplatin was used. Cumulative ORR and CR were 0.61 (95% CI 0.43; 0.76, I2=0%) and 0.39 (95% CI 0.24; 0.57, I2=0%), respectively. In a trial on R/R patients (N=15), Len with RICE was used with ORR and CR of 0.73 (95% CI 0.47; 0.90, I2=0%) and 0.60 (95% CI 0.35; 0.81, I2=0%), respectively. In a trial on R/R patients(N=55), Len with Everolimus was used. ORR and CR were 0.27 (95% CI 0.17; 0.40, I2=0%) and 0.07 (95% CI 0.03; 0.18, I2=0%), respectively. In a trial on R/R patients (N=19), Len with R-ESHAP was used. ORR and CR were 0.79 (95% CI 0.55; 0.92, I2=0%) and 0.47 (95% CI 0.27; 0.69, I2=0%), respectively. In a phase III trial on R/R patients (N=21), Len with Gemcitabine and Rituximab was used vs. placebo The ORR and CR were significantly improved in the Len arm vs placebo. In 4 trials on ND patients (N=158), Len with R-CHOP was used and the cumulative ORR and CR were 0.94 (95% CI 0.88; 0.97, I2=12%) and 0.81 (0.75; 0.87, I2=0%), respectively. In a trial on ND patients (N=15), Len with R-EPOCH was used with ORR and CR of 0.93 (95% CI 0.65; 0.99, I2=0%) and 0.87 (95% CI 0.59; 0.97, I2=0%), respectively. In 2 trials (N=103), Len with Ibrutinib and Rituximab was used. In R/R patients (N=45), cumulative ORR and CR were 0.38 (95% CI 0.25; 0.53, I2=0%) and 0.24 (95% CI 0.14; 0.39, I2=0%), respectively. In ND patients (N=58) has ORR and CR 0.86 (95% CI 0.75; 0.93, I2=0%), respectively. In 2 trials with a combination of ND and R/R patients (N=54), Len with Rituximab and Bendamustine was used. Cumulative ORR and CR were 0.63 (95% CI 0.49; 0.75, I2=0%) and 0.39 (95% CI 0.27; 0.52, I2=0%), respectively. The most common serious treatment-related adverse events (TRAE) were infection, thromboembolism, fatigue, sepsis, respiratory, neurological, cardiac (arrhythmias), gastrointestinal, rash, seizures, and hematological side effects (Table 1). Conclusion : Based on early phase trials, Len based regimens are well tolerated and effective in the treatment of both ND and R/R DLBCL patients. Combinations of lenalidomide with Tafasitamab and R-ESHAP have shown the highest response in R/R patients and combination with R-CHOP has shown the best response in ND patients. In randomized trials, lenalidomide has shown significant improvement in the survival of DLBCL patients as compared to placebo or physician's choice drug. Additional double-blind multicenter randomized clinical trials are needed to compare the efficacy and safety of lenalidomide based regimens in DLBCL patients. Disclosures Anwer: Incyte, Seattle Genetics, Acetylon Pharmaceuticals, AbbVie Pharma, Astellas Pharma, Celegene, Millennium Pharmaceuticals.:Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document