ArticleFuture oncology (London, England)2025
Clinical representativeness of pivotal trials for T-cell engagers in relapsed/refractory follicular lymphoma.
Article in Future oncology (London, England), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimTo characterize trial populations of T-cell-engaging therapies, including bispecific antibodies and chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapies, for relapsed/refractory (R/R) follicular lymphoma (FL) after ≥ 2 systemic therapies and the extent to which they represent real-world R/R FL populations.
methodsInclusion/exclusion criteria and baseline characteristics were compared descriptively for EPCORE NHL-1 (epcoritamab, N = 128), GO29781 (mosunetuzumab, N = 90), ELARA (tisagenlecleucel [tisa-cel], N = 97), and ZUMA-5 (axicabtagene ciloleucel [axi-cel], N = 124). Real-world data from the COTA Healthcare (New York, NY) and Optum Market Clarity (Eden Prairie, MN) databases contextualized the clinical representativeness of trial populations.
resultsThe epcoritamab trial enrolled a higher proportion of patients who were older, had higher Follicular Lymphoma International Prognostic Index scores, and were more double-refractory versus other trials. Notably, 37% of epcoritamab trial patients would have been excluded from the mosunetuzumab trial, 30% from the tisa-cel trial, and 29% from the axi-cel trial. These excluded subgroups were characterized by factors associated with poor clinical outcomes.
conclusionThe epcoritamab trial enrolled more broadly and was more representative of typical R/R FL patients than the mosunetuzumab, tisa-cel, and axi-cel trials. Differences in patient characteristics should be considered when evaluating the comparative benefits of T-cell engagers in R/R FL after ≥ 2 systemic therapies.
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.