Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36138152›Full record

ArticleNature medicine2022

A real-world comparison of tisagenlecleucel and axicabtagene ciloleucel CAR T cells in relapsed or refractory diffuse large B cell lymphoma.

Emmanuel Bachy, Steven Le Gouill, Roberta Di Blasi, Pierre Sesques, Guillaume Manson, Guillaume Cartron, David Beauvais, Louise Roulin, François Xavier Gros, Marie Thérèse Rubio and 22 more

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Nature medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04328298 (French Register Of Patients With Hemopathy Eligible For CAR-T Cell Treatment), which is not on this map. Cited by 260 papers, 8 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
260citing papers in PubMed, 8 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT04328298 recruitingnot on this map

French Register Of Patients With Hemopathy Eligible For CAR-T Cell Treatment (DESCAR-T)

Typeobservational_patient_registrySponsorThe Lymphoma Academic Research OrganisationRan2019 to 2038Enrolled5,000ConditionsHematopathology Eligible or CAR-t Cell Treatment
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

260 citing papers in PubMed, 8 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Guideline
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

200 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

32 authors.

Emmanuel BachyHematology Department, Hospices Civils de Lyon, Pierre Bénite, Lyon, France. emmanuel.bachy@chu-lyon.fr.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2694-7510
Steven Le GouillHematology Department, Institut Curie, Paris, France.
Roberta Di BlasiHematology Department, Hôpital Saint Louis, Paris, France.
Pierre SesquesHematology Department, Hospices Civils de Lyon, Pierre Bénite, Lyon, France.
Guillaume MansonHematology Department, CHU de Rennes, Rennes, France.
Guillaume CartronHematology Department, CHU de Montpellier & UMR-CNRS, Montpellier, France.
David BeauvaisHematology Department, CHU de Lille, Lille, France.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1866-828X
Louise RoulinHematology Department, Hôpital Henri Mondor, Créteil, France.
François Xavier GrosHematology Department, CHU de Bordeaux, Bordeaux, France.
Marie Thérèse RubioHematology Department, CHU de Nancy, Nancy, France.
Pierre BoriesHematology Department, CHU de Toulouse, Toulouse, France.
Jacques Olivier BayHematology Department, CHU de Clermont Ferrand, Clermont-Ferrand, France.
Cristina Castilla LlorenteHematology Department, Gustave Roussy Cancer Campus, Villejuif, Paris, France.
Sylvain ChoquetHematology Department, Hôpital de la Pitié Salpêtrière & AP-HP Sorbonne Université, Paris, France.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7791-0470
René-Olivier CasasnovasHematology Department, CHU de Dijon, Dijon, France.
Mohamad MohtyHematology Department, Hôpital Saint Antoine & Sorbonne University & Inserm UMRs 938, Paris, France.
Stéphanie GuidezHematology Department, CHU de Poitiers, Poitiers, France.
Magalie JorisHematology Department, CHU d'Amiens, Amiens, France.
Michaël LoschiHematology Department, CHU de Nice, Nice, France.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4460-5939
Sylvain CarrasHematology Department, CHU de Grenoble & University Grenoble-Alpes, Institute for Advanced Biosciences, La Tronche, France.
Julie AbrahamHematology Department, CHU de Limoges, Limoges, France.
Adrien ChauchetHematology Department, CHU de Besançon, Besançon, France.
Laurianne Drieu La RochelleHematology Department, CHU de Tours, Tours, France.
Bénédicte Deau-FischerHematology Department, Hôpital Cochin, Paris, France.
Olivier HermineHematology Department, Hôpital Necker, Paris, France.
Thomas GastinneHematology Department, CHU de Nantes, Nantes, France.
Jean Jacques TudesqHematology Department, CHU de Montpellier & UMR-CNRS, Montpellier, France.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4879-8106
Elodie GatBiostatistics Department, LYSARC, Lyon, France.
Florence BroussaisMedical and Scientific Affairs Department, LYSARC, Lyon, France.
Catherine ThieblemontHematology Department, Hôpital Saint Louis, Paris, France.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9941-2448
Roch HouotHematology Department, CHU de Rennes, Rennes, France.
Franck MorschhauserHematology Department, CHU de Lille, Lille, France.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Axicabtagene ciloleucel (axi-cel) and tisagenlecleucel (tisa-cel) have both demonstrated impressive clinical activity in relapsed/refractory (R/R) diffuse large B cell lymphoma (DLBCL). In this study, we analyzed the outcome of 809 patients with R/R DLBCL after two or more previous lines of treatment who had a commercial chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cells order for axi-cel or tisa-cel and were registered in the retrospective French DESCAR-T registry study ( NCT04328298 ). After 1:1 propensity score matching (n = 418), the best overall response rate/complete response rate (ORR/CRR) was 80%/60% versus 66%/42% for patients treated with axi-cel compared to tisa-cel, respectively (P < 0.001 for both ORR and CRR comparisons). After a median follow-up of 11.7 months, the 1-year progression-free survival was 46.6% for axi-cel and 33.2% for tisa-cel (hazard ratio (HR) = 0.61; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.46-0.79; P = 0.0003). Overall survival (OS) was also significantly improved after axi-cel infusion compared to after tisa-cel infusion (1-year OS 63.5% versus 48.8%; HR = 0.63; 95% CI, 0.45-0.88; P = 0.0072). Similar findings were observed using the inverse probability of treatment weighting statistical approach. Grade 1-2 cytokine release syndrome was significantly more frequent with axi-cel than with tisa-cel, but no significant difference was observed for grade ≥3. Regarding immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome (ICANS), both grade 1-2 and grade ≥3 ICANS were significantly more frequent with axi-cel than with tisa-cel. In conclusion, our matched comparison study supports a higher efficacy and also a higher toxicity of axi-cel compared to tisa-cel in the third or more treatment line for R/R DLBCL.

Indexed as

Biological ProductsImmunotherapy, AdoptiveLymphoma, Large B-Cell, DiffuseReceptors, Chimeric AntigenAntigens, CD19Clinical Studies as TopicCytokine Release SyndromeHumansReceptors, Antigen, T-CellRetrospective StudiesT-LymphocytesAntigens, CD19axicabtagene ciloleucelBiological ProductsReceptors, Antigen, T-CellReceptors, Chimeric Antigentisagenlecleucel

Identifiers

PMID36138152
PMCPMC9556323

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.