Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41843362›Full record

ArticleTargeted oncology2026

Elranatamab Versus Teclistamab in Relapsed and Refractory Multiple Myeloma: A Real-World Propensity Score-Matched Study.

Yin-Che Wang, Po-Hsien Li, Cheng-Hsien Lin, Yu-Chen Su, Chieh-Lin Jerry Teng

Abstract readComparative StudyMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in Targeted oncology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. 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

5 authors.

Yin-Che Wang *Division of Hematology/Medical Oncology, Department of Medicine, Taichung Veterans General Hospital, Taichung, Taiwan.
Po-Hsien Li *Division of Hematology/Medical Oncology, Department of Medicine, Taichung Veterans General Hospital, Taichung, Taiwan.
Cheng-Hsien LinDivision of Hematology/Medical Oncology, Department of Medicine, Taichung Veterans General Hospital, Taichung, Taiwan.
Yu-Chen SuDivision of Hematology/Medical Oncology, Department of Medicine, Taichung Veterans General Hospital, Taichung, Taiwan.
Chieh-Lin Jerry TengDivision of Hematology/Medical Oncology, Department of Medicine, Taichung Veterans General Hospital, Taichung, Taiwan. drteng@vghtc.gov.tw.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9744-0368

Funding

Taichung Veterans General Hospital TCVGH-1140701CTaichung Veterans General Hospital TCVGH-NHRI113003Taichung Veterans General Hospital TCVGH-YM1140115
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRelapsed and refractory multiple myeloma treatment is challenging. Bispecific antibodies targeting B-cell maturation antigens, including elranatamab and teclistamab, have demonstrated encouraging responses in heavily pretreated diseases. Nonetheless, comparative data from real-world practice are limited.

objectiveThis study aimed to compare the time to the next treatment, overall survival, and adverse events in patients with refractory multiple myeloma receiving elranatamab or teclistamab monotherapy in real-world practice.

methodsWe conducted a multinational retrospective cohort study using deidentified electronic health records from the TriNetX Global Research Network. Adults with refractory multiple myeloma receiving elranatamab or teclistamab as monotherapy after one or more prior systemic regimen were included. Propensity score matching (1:1) was performed based on demographics, comorbidities, and baseline laboratory values. The primary endpoint was the time to the next treatment. Secondary endpoints were overall survival and safety outcomes, including cytokine release syndrome, immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome, cytopenia, and infections.

resultsFollowing matching, 188 patients were included in each group. The median time to the next treatment did not differ significantly between elranatamab and teclistamab (11.0 vs 12.3 months; p = 0.394), and the 3-year overall survival rates were similar (58.8% vs 59.7%; p = 0.077). Subgroup analyses indicated a longer time to the next treatment with teclistamab in patients with baseline thrombocytopenia and in those receiving more than five prior lines of treatment. Grade ≥ 3 neutropenia was more frequent with teclistamab (84.6% vs 74.5%; p = 0.015), whereas cytokine release syndrome occurred more often with elranatamab (45.2% vs 27.1%; p < 0.001). The immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome and infection rates were comparable. Both agents demonstrated comparable real-world effectiveness but different toxicity profiles.

conclusionsThese findings support individualized treatment selection; prospective comparative trials are warranted.

Indexed as

Antibodies, BispecificMultiple MyelomaAgedFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPropensity ScoreRetrospective StudiesAntibodies, Bispecificelranatamabteclistamab

Identifiers

PMID41843362
PMCPMC13031192

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.