Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39825416›Full record

ArticleJournal of hematology & oncology2025

Multinational retrospective analysis of bridging therapy prior to chimeric antigen receptor t cells for relapsed/refractory acute lymphoblastic leukemia in children and young adults.

Maike Breidenbach, Peter Bader, Andishe Attarbaschi, Claudia Rossig, Roland Meisel, Markus Metzler, Marion Subklewe, Fabian Mueller, Paul-Gerhardt Schlegel, Irene Teichert von Lüttichau and 10 more

Abstract readMulticenter StudyLetter
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of hematology & oncology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–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.

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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Novel Therapeutic Approaches in Pediatric Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025
    Review
  2. From Bench to Bedside: Emerging Paradigms in CAR-T Cell Therapy for Solid Malignancies.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2025
    Review
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

20 authors.

Maike BreidenbachBavarian Cancer Research Center (BZKF), R/R ALL Study Group, Bavaria, Germany.
Peter BaderDepartment of Pediatrics, Division for Stem Cell Transplantation, Immunology and Intensive Care, Goethe University Frankfurt, University Hospital, Frankfurt, Germany.
Andishe AttarbaschiDepartment of Pediatric Hematology and Oncology, St. Anna Children's Hospital, Vienna, Austria.
Claudia RossigDepartment of Pediatric Hematology and Oncology, University Children's Hospital Muenster, Muenster, Germany.
Roland MeiselDivision of Pediatric Stem Cell Therapy, Department of Pediatric Oncology, Hematology and Clinical Immunology, Medical Faculty, Heinrich-Heine-University, Duesseldorf, Germany.
Markus MetzlerBavarian Cancer Research Center (BZKF), R/R ALL Study Group, Bavaria, Germany.
Marion SubkleweBavarian Cancer Research Center (BZKF), R/R ALL Study Group, Bavaria, Germany.
Fabian MuellerBavarian Cancer Research Center (BZKF), R/R ALL Study Group, Bavaria, Germany.
Paul-Gerhardt SchlegelBavarian Cancer Research Center (BZKF), R/R ALL Study Group, Bavaria, Germany.
Irene Teichert von LüttichauBavarian Cancer Research Center (BZKF), R/R ALL Study Group, Bavaria, Germany.
Jean-Pierre BourquinDepartment of Oncology and Children's Research Center, University Children's Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Gabriele EscherichClinic of Pediatric Hematology and Oncology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.
Gunnar CarioDepartment of Pediatrics I, University Hospital Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Kiel, Kiel, Germany.
Peter LangDepartment of General Pediatrics, Hematology and Oncology, University Children's Hospital Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany.
Ramona CoffeyBavarian Cancer Research Center (BZKF), R/R ALL Study Group, Bavaria, Germany.
Arend von StackelbergDepartment of Pediatric Oncology and Hematology, Charité Universitaetsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Semjon WillierDepartment of Pediatric Hematology, Oncology and Stem Cell Transplantation, Medical Center - University of Freiburg, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany.
Brigitte StrahmDepartment of Pediatric Hematology, Oncology and Stem Cell Transplantation, Medical Center - University of Freiburg, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany.
Christina PetersDepartment of Pediatric Hematology and Oncology, St. Anna Children's Hospital, Vienna, Austria.
Tobias FeuchtingerBavarian Cancer Research Center (BZKF), R/R ALL Study Group, Bavaria, Germany. tobias.feuchtinger@uniklinik-freiburg.de.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Anti-CD19 chimeric antigen receptor T cells (CAR) are a well-established treatment option for children and young adults suffering from relapsed/refractory B-lineage acute lymphoblastic leukemia. Bridging therapy is used to control disease prior to start of lymphodepletion before CAR infusion and thereby improve efficacy of CAR therapy. However, the effect of different bridging strategies on outcome, side effects and response to CAR therapy is still poorly understood. In this retrospective, multinational study, real-world data were collected from 14 different sites in Germany, Austria and Switzerland on 88 patients receiving 93 2nd-generation CAR therapies. Bridging therapy was classified into the categories 1) no systemic therapy (15/93 treatments), 2) low-intensity therapy (38/93 treatments) and 3) high-intensity therapy (39/93 treatments). We analyzed the impact of bridging regimens on clinical outcome. Patients receiving a high-intensity bridging therapy had a significantly higher tumor burden at time of eligibility compared to patients treated with a low-intensity or no systemic bridging therapy. They suffered significantly more from bacterial adverse events and mucositis. Overall survival was significantly better for patients who did not receive any bridging therapy in comparison to patients who had been treated with a low- or high-intensity bridging regimen. In conclusion, in this retrospective cohort, high-intensity bridging therapy has not improved the outcome in terms of overall and progression-free survival in comparison to a low-intensity therapy. Yet, high-intensity bridging therapy was associated with more adverse events. Our study suggests that a low-intensity bridging regimen may be preferred whenever tumor burden and disease kinetics allow this treatment strategy.

Indexed as

Immunotherapy, AdoptivePrecursor Cell Lymphoblastic Leukemia-LymphomaReceptors, Chimeric AntigenAdolescentAdultChildChild, PreschoolFemaleHumansMaleNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalRetrospective StudiesYoung AdultReceptors, Chimeric AntigenB-ALLBridging therapyCAR T cells

Identifiers

PMID39825416
PMCPMC11742544

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.