4.6 Article

A national service for delivering CD19 CAR-Tin large B-cell lymphoma - The UK real-world experience

期刊

BRITISH JOURNAL OF HAEMATOLOGY
卷 198, 期 3, 页码 492-502

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/bjh.18209

关键词

cellular therapies; lymphoid malignancies; lymphomas

资金

  1. UCLH Biomedical Research Centre

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study presents the results of a large national cohort of patients with relapsed/refractory large B-cell lymphoma (LBCL) treated with CD19 CAR-T therapy in the UK. The findings demonstrate the long-term efficacy of CAR-T treatment in LBCL patients, while emphasizing the significance of early treatment failure.
CD19 CAR-T have emerged as a new standard treatment for relapsed/refractory (r/r) large B-cell lymphoma (LBCL). CAR-T real-world (RW) outcomes published to date suggest significant variability across countries. We provide results of a large national cohort of patients intended to be treated with CAR-T in the UK. Consecutive patients with r/r LBCL approved for CAR-T by the National CAR-T Clinical Panel between December 2018 and November 2020 across all UK CAR-T centres were included. 404/432 patients were approved [292 axicabtagene ciloleucel (axi-cel), 112 tisagenlecleucel (tisa-cel)], 300 (74%) received the cells. 110/300 (38.3%) patients achieved complete remission (CR) at 6 months (m). The overall response rate was 77% (52% CR) for axi-cel, 57% (44% CR) for tisa-cel. The 12-month progression-free survival was 41.8% (axi-cel) and 27.4% (tisa-cel). Median overall survival for the intention-to-treat population was 10.5 m, 16.2 m for infused patients. The incidence of grade >= 3 cytokine release syndrome and neurotoxicity were 7.6%/19.6% for axi-cel and 7.9%/3.9% for tisa-cel. This prospective RW population of CAR-T eligible patients offers important insights into the clinical benefit of CD19 CAR-T in LBCL in daily practice. Our results confirm long-term efficacy in patients receiving treatment similar to the pivotal trials, but highlight the significance of early CAR-T failure.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据