Evidence Hub

Infection risk associated with talquetamab in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma: a systematic review with meta-analysis of talquetamab monotherapy and descriptive analysis of combination therapy

Huang ZY, Wu W, Luo G, Huang H, Liu XL

Frontiers in immunology, 2026

735 participants

Abstract

Background: Talquetamab, a first-in-class G protein-coupled receptor family C group 5 member D (GPRC5D) × CD3 bispecific antibody, demonstrates substantial clinical activity in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). However, immune dysfunction associated with advanced disease, extensive prior therapies, and bispecific antibody-mediated immune modulation may increase susceptibility to infections. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to characterize infection risk associated with talquetamab, with separate evaluation of monotherapy and combination therapy settings.

Methods: PubMed, Embase, Web of Science Core Collection, and Cochrane Library databases were searched from inception to July 1, 2026. Studies reporting infection outcomes among RRMM patients treated with talquetamab-containing regimens were eligible. Outcomes included any-grade infections, grade ≥3 infections, infection-related mortality, reported pathogens, and preventive strategies when available. Because talquetamab monotherapy and combination regimens represent clinically distinct treatment strategies, quantitative analyses were restricted to monotherapy cohorts, whereas combination therapy studies were summarized descriptively. A random-effects model was used to estimate pooled infection incidence. Methodological quality was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Critical Appraisal Checklist for Case Series.

Results: Six studies were included in the qualitative synthesis, including…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 735 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free