A 24-month updated analysis of the comparative effectiveness of ZUMA-5 (axi-cel) vs. SCHOLAR-5 external control in relapsed/refractory follicular lymphoma

Otros/as autores/as

Institut Català de la Salut

[Palomba ML, Ghione P] Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA. [Patel AR, Nahas M, Beygi S] Kite, A Gilead Company, Santa Monica, CA, USA. [Hatswell AJ] Delta Hat, Nottingham, UK. [Bobillo S] Vall d’Hebron Institute of Oncology (VHIO), Barcelona, Spain

Vall d'Hebron Barcelona Hospital Campus

Fecha de publicación

2023-03-06T11:00:30Z

2023-03-06T11:00:30Z

2023-02



Resumen

Follicular lymphoma; Axicabtagene ciloleucel; Comparative effectiveness


Limfoma fol·licular; Axicabtagene ciloleucel; Eficàcia comparativa


Linfoma folicular; Axicabtagene ciloleucel; Eficacia comparativa


Background In the ZUMA-5 trial (Clinical trials identification: NCT03105336), axicabtagene ciloleucel (axi-cel; a chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy) demonstrated high rates of durable response in relapsed/refractory (r/r) follicular lymphoma (FL) patients and clear superiority relative to the SCHOLAR-5 external control cohort. We update this comparison using the ZUMA-5 24-month data. Research design and methods The SCHOLAR-5 cohort is comprised of r/r FL patients who initiated ≥3rd line of therapy after July 2014 and meeting ZUMA-5 eligibility criteria. Groups were balanced for patient characteristics through propensity scoring on prespecified prognostic factors using standardized mortality ratio (SMR) weighting. The overall response rate was compared using a weighted logistic regression. Time-to-event outcomes were evaluated using a Cox regression. Results For SCHOLAR-5, the sum of weights for the 143 patients was 85 after SMR weighting, versus 86 patients in ZUMA-5. The median follow-up was 29.4 months and 25.4 months for ZUMA-5 and SCHOLAR-5, respectively. The hazard ratios for overall survival and progression-free survival were 0.52 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.28–0.95) and 0.28 (95% CI: 0.17–0.45), favoring axi-cel. Conclusion This updated analysis, using a longer minimum follow-up than a previously published analysis, shows that the improved efficacy of axi-cel, relative to available therapies, in r/r FL is durable.


This manuscript was funded by Kite, a Gilead Company.

Tipo de documento

Artículo


Versión publicada

Lengua

Inglés

Publicado por

Taylor & Francis

Documentos relacionados

Expert Review of Anticancer Therapy;23(2)

https://doi.org/10.1080/14737140.2023.2171994

Citación recomendada

Esta citación se ha generado automáticamente.

Derechos

Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/

Este ítem aparece en la(s) siguiente(s) colección(ones)