Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38281590›Full record

SynthesisTransplantation and cellular therapy2024

Axicabtagene Ciloleucel versus Tisagenlecleucel for Relapsed or Refractory Large B Cell Lymphoma: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Nico Gagelmann, Michael Bishop, Francis Ayuk, Wolfgang Bethge, Bertram Glass, Anna Sureda, Marcelo C Pasquini, Nicolaus Kröger

Open access · hybridAbstract readSystematic ReviewMeta-AnalysisComparative Study
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Transplantation and cellular therapy, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 37 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
37citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
11.0field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

37 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 39 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Observational
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. The 1000eLife · 2026
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 6 institutions in 3 countries.

Nico GagelmannDepartment of Stem Cell Transplantation, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany. Electronic address: nico.gagelmann@posteo.de.
Michael BishopThe David and Etta Jonas Center for Cellular Therapy, University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois.
Francis AyukDepartment of Stem Cell Transplantation, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.
Wolfgang BethgeDepartment of Hematology and Oncology, University Hospital Tuebingen, Tuebingen, Germany.
Bertram GlassDepartment of Hematology and Cell Therapy, Helios Klinikum Berlin-Buch, Berlin, Germany.
Anna SuredaBellvitge Institute for Biomedical Research, Universitat de Barcelona, Hematology Department, Institut Català d'Oncologia-Hospitalet, Barcelona, Spain.
Marcelo C PasquiniDepartment of Medicine, Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, Wisconsin.
Nicolaus KrögerDepartment of Stem Cell Transplantation, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.
Universität Hamburg · DEBellvitge University Hospital · ESHelios Hospital Berlin-Buch · DEMedical College of Wisconsin · USUniversity of Chicago · USUniversity of Tübingen · DE

Funding

Data Resource for Analyzing Blood &Marrow TransplantsU24CA076518 · NCI · MEDICAL COLLEGE OF WISCONSIN · PI Amy M Moskop, Bronwen Shaw · 1998 to 2026
$105.2M
NCI NIH HHS U24 CA076518
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Axicabtagene ciloleucel (axi-cel) and tisagenlecleucel (tisa-cel) are CD19-directed chimeric antigen receptor T cell (CAR-T) therapies approved for relapsed/refractory aggressive large B cell lymphoma (LBCL). Significant costs and complex manufacturing underscore the importance of evidence-based counseling regarding the outcomes of these treatments. With the aim of examining the efficacy and safety of axi-cel versus tisa-cel in patients with relapsed/refractory aggressive LBCL, we performed a systematic literature search of comparative studies evaluating outcomes in relapsed/refractory aggressive LBCL after treatment with axi-cel or tisa-cel. We calculated odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for response, progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), cytokine release syndrome (CRS), immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome (ICANS), and hematotoxicity. Meta-analysis and meta-regression were used to generate summary statistics. A total of 2372 participants were included in the 8 studies in our analysis. The dropout rate between apheresis and infusion was 13% for axi-cel versus 18% for tisa-cel, and the median time from apheresis to infusion was 32 days versus 45 days. Axi-cel showed higher odds for a complete response (OR, 1.65; P < .001) and was associated with higher odds for PFS at 1 year after infusion (OR, .60; P < .001). OS appeared to be improved with axi-cel (OR, .84; 95% CI, .68 to 1.02; P = .08), whereas the cumulative incidence of nonrelapse mortality (NRM) was 11.5% for axi-cel versus 3.7% for tisa-cel (P = .002). The main predictors for survival were lactate dehydrogenase level, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status, and response to bridging, and axi-cel maintained superior efficacy even in elderly patients. In terms of safety, axi-cel was associated with significantly higher odds of any-grade CRS (OR, 3.23; P < .001), but not of grade ≥3 CRS (P = .92). Axi-cel was associated with significantly higher odds of severe ICANS grade ≥3 (OR, 4.03; P < .001). In terms of hematotoxicity, axi-cel was significantly associated with higher odds of severe neutropenia at 1 month after infusion (OR, 2.06; P = .003). As a result, axi-cel was associated with significantly greater resource utilization, including prolonged hospital stay, more frequent intensive care admission, and use of agents such as tocilizumab for toxicity management. We provide strong evidence of the greater efficacy of axi-cel versus tisa-cel in relapsed/refractory aggressive LBCL. The higher toxicity and NRM seen with axi-cel might not counterbalance the overall results, highlighting the need for timely intervention and careful selection of patients, balancing resource utilization and clinical benefit.

Indexed as

Biological ProductsLymphoma, Large B-Cell, DiffuseAntigens, CD19Cytokine Release SyndromeHumansImmunotherapy, AdoptiveReceptors, Antigen, T-CellTreatment OutcomeAntigens, CD19axicabtagene ciloleucelBiological ProductsReceptors, Antigen, T-CelltisagenlecleucelAxicabtageneCAR-TCRSDLBCLICANSTisagenlecleucel

Identifiers

PMID38281590
PMCPMC11771143
OpenAlexW4391265244

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.