Comparison of standard-of-care idecabtagene vicleucel and ciltacabtagene autoleucel in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma Journal Article


Authors: Hansen, D. K.; Peres, L. C.; Dima, D.; Richards, A.; Shune, L.; Afrough, A.; Midha, S.; Dhakal, B.; Kocoglu, M. H.; Atrash, S.; Ferreri, C.; Castaneda, O.; Davis, J. A.; Bhurtel, E.; McGuirk, J.; Wagner, C.; Bansal, R.; Costello, P.; Smith, K.; Lieberman-Cribbin, A.; De Avila, G.; Purvey, S.; Hosoya, H.; Mikkilineni, L.; Oswald, L. B.; Kaur, G.; Pasvolsky, O.; Gaballa, M.; Herr, M. M.; Forsberg, P.; Janakiram, M.; Htut, M.; Maringanti, S. A.; Kalariya, N.; Hashmi, H.; Reshef, R.; Sborov, D. W.; Nadeem, O.; Anwer, F.; Khouri, J.; Raza, S.; Atanackovic, D.; Alsina, M.; Freeman, C. L.; Locke, F. L.; Voorhees, P.; Anderson, L. D.; Richard, S.; Martin, T.; Lin, Y.; Patel, K. K.; Sidana, S.; onbehalf of the US Multiple Myeloma Immunotherapy Consortium
Article Title: Comparison of standard-of-care idecabtagene vicleucel and ciltacabtagene autoleucel in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma
Abstract: 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.
Keywords: safety; efficacy; t-cell therapy
Journal Title: Journal of Clinical Oncology
Volume: 43
Issue: 13
ISSN: 0732-183X
Publisher: American Society of Clinical Oncology  
Date Published: 2025-05-01
Start Page: 1597
End Page: 1609
Language: English
ACCESSION: WOS:001513242500007
DOI: 10.1200/jco-24-01730
PROVIDER: wos
PMCID: PMC12037312
PUBMED: 39965175
Notes: Erratum published at DOI: 10.1200/JCO-25-00453 -- Source: Wos
Altmetric
Citation Impact
BMJ Impact Analytics
MSK Authors
  1. Hamza Hashmi
    61 Hashmi