ArticleBlood advances2024
A research center's experience of T-cell-redirecting therapies in triple-class refractory multiple myeloma.
Article in Blood advances, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07320326 (A Multi-center, Ambispective, Non-interventional, Observational, Registry Study of the Effectiveness of Elranatamab in Patients With Triple-class Exposed Relapsed/Refractory Multiple Myeloma in Routine Clinical Practice in China), which is not on this map. Cited by 9 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
A Multi-center, Ambispective, Non-interventional, Observational, Registry Study of the Effectiveness of Elranatamab in Patients With Triple-class Exposed Relapsed/Refractory Multiple Myeloma in Routine Clinical Practice in China(ASPIRE: A Registry Study Of Chinese Patients With TCE-RRMM Treated By Elranatamab)
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Subsequent CAR-T and engineered antibody for relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma following BCMA-targeted treatment: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Blood cancer journal · 2026Pooled it
- Comparative efficacy and safety of BCMA-targeted CAR T cells and BiTEs in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma: a meta-analysis of interventional and real-world studies.Annals of hematology · 2025Pooled it
- Phase II trial of elotuzumab with pomalidomide and dexamethasone for daratumumab-refractory multiple myeloma.Blood cancer journal · 2024Trial
- Emerging precision medicine in multiple myeloma: clinical and preclinical landscape of T cell, natural killer cell, and macrophages engaging multi-specific antibodies.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Review
- Sequencing BCMA- and GPRC5D-targeting immunotherapies in multiple myeloma: Practical guidance from the European Myeloma Network.HemaSphere · 2025Article
- How should we choose optimal salvage treatments following BCMA-directed CAR T-cell therapy?Immunotherapy · 2025Review
- Review
- Ciltacabtagene Autoleucel for the Treatment of Relapsed/Refractory Multiple Myeloma: Efficacy, Safety, and Place in Therapy.Cancer management and research · 2025Review
- Mechanisms and salvage treatments in patients with multiple myeloma relapsed post-BCMA CAR-T cell therapy.Frontiers in immunology · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
abstractThe efficacies of chimeric antigen receptor T cells (CAR-Ts) and bispecific monoclonal antibodies (BiAbs) for triple-class refractory (TCR) myeloma have not previously been compared, and clinical data on how to rescue patients after relapse from these immunotherapies are limited. A retrospective study of 73 TCR patients included in trials was conducted: 36 received CAR-Ts and 37 received BiAbs. CAR-Ts produced a higher overall response rate (ORR) than BiAbs (97.1% vs 56.8%, P = .002). After a median of follow-up of 18.7 months, no significant difference in progression-free survival (PFS) was observed between the CAR-T and BiAbs groups (16.6 vs 10.8 months; P = .090), whereas overall survival (OS) was significantly longer in the CAR-T than in the BiAbs group (49.2 vs 22.6 months; P = .021). BiAbs after CAR-Ts yielded a higher ORR and longer PFS2 than did nonredirecting T-cell therapies after CAR-Ts (ORR: 87.5% vs 50.0%; PFS2: 22.9 vs 12.4 months). By contrast, BiAbs after BiAbs resulted in an ORR of 33% and PFS2 of 8.4 months, which was similar to that produced by the nonredirecting T-cell therapies (ORR: 28.6%; PFS2: 8.1 months). Although this is a pooled analysis of different trials with different products and the patient profile is different for CAR-Ts and BiAbs, both were effective therapies for TCR myeloma. However, in our experience, although the PFS was similar with the 2 approaches, CAR-T therapy resulted in better OS, mainly because of the efficacy of BiAbs as rescue therapy. Our results highlight the importance of treatment sequence in real-word experience.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.