Trial reportAdvances in therapy2025
Comparative Effectiveness of Ciltacabtagene Autoleucel in CARTITUDE-4 Versus Real-World Physician's Choice of Therapy from the Flatiron Registry in Lenalidomide-Refractory Multiple Myeloma.
Trial report in Advances in therapy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04181827 (A Phase 3 Randomized Study Comparing JNJ-68284528, a Chimeric Antigen Receptor T Cell), which is not on this map. Cited by 1 paper.
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 Phase 3 Randomized Study Comparing JNJ-68284528, a Chimeric Antigen Receptor T Cell (CAR-T) Therapy Directed Against BCMA, Versus Pomalidomide, Bortezomib and Dexamethasone (PVd) or Daratumumab, Pomalidomide and Dexamethasone (DPd) in Subjects With Relapsed and Lenalidomide-Refractory Multiple Myeloma
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
26 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionCiltacabtagene autoleucel (cilta-cel) is approved for relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). In the CARTITUDE-4 study (NCT04181827), cilta-cel demonstrated superior efficacy versus pomalidomide, bortezomib, and dexamethasone or daratumumab, pomalidomide, and dexamethasone in patients with RRMM after 1-3 prior lines of therapy (LOT). We conducted an indirect treatment comparison to understand the comparative efficacy of cilta-cel versus real-world (RW) physician's choice of treatment for lenalidomide-refractory MM.
methodsDe-identified data from the Flatiron Health MM cohort registry (January 2020 to May 2024) were compared with data from CARTITUDE-4 (data cutoff May 1, 2024). Key eligibility criteria for CARTITUDE-4 were used to match patients from the Flatiron database. Baseline covariates of prognostic significance were adjusted using inverse probability of treatment weighting. Outcomes for comparative effectiveness included progression-free survival (PFS), RW PFS, time to next treatment (TTNT), and overall survival (OS). Sensitivity analyses were conducted.
resultsThe CARTITUDE-4 cohort included data from 208 patients who received cilta-cel; the median follow-up was 33.6 months. The real-world cohort included 932 patients (1445 eligible LOT) from the Flatiron database; the median follow-up was 23.6 months. In base case analyses, compared with the Flatiron cohort, patients treated with cilta-cel had improved PFS (hazard ratio [HR] 0.29 [95% confidence interval (CI)] 0.22-0.36; p < 0.001), RW-PFS (HR 0.29 [95% CI 0.23-0.37]; p < 0.001), TTNT (HR 0.32 [95% CI 0.25-0.41]; p < 0.001), and OS (HR 0.59 [95% CI 0.41-0.84]; p = 0.003). These findings were consistent across all sensitivity analyses.
conclusionCilta-cel lengthened TTNT and demonstrated meaningful prolongation in PFS and OS compared with real-world physician's choice for lenalidomide-refractory MM. These data highlight the value of cilta-cel as an effective therapy in earlier-line patients with relapsed, lenalidomide-refractory MM exposed to proteasome inhibitors and immunomodulatory drugs.
trial registrationCARTITUDE-4: ClinicalTrials.gov ID NCT04181827.
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.