Evidence Hub

Non-relapse mortality after CAR T-cell therapy: A systematic review and meta-analysis of 7,604 lymphoma and myeloma patients

D. M. Cordas dos Santos, T. Tix, R. Shouval, A. Gafter-Gvili, Jean-Baptiste Alberge, Edward R. Scheffer Cliff, Sebastian Theurich, M. V. von Bergwelt-Baildon et al.

Nature Medicine, 2024

7,604 participants · 258 citations

Abstract

Although chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cell therapy represents a transformative immunotherapy, it is also associated with distinct toxicities that contribute to morbidity and mortality. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched MEDLINE, Embase and CINAHL (Cochrane) for reports of nonrelapse mortality (NRM) after CAR T cell therapy in lymphoma and multiple myeloma up to March 2024. After extraction of causes and numbers of death, we analyzed NRM point estimates using random-effect models. We identified 7,604 patients across 18 clinical trials and 28 real-world studies. NRM point estimates varied across disease entities and were highest in patients with mantle-cell lymphoma (10.6%), followed by multiple myeloma (8.0%), large B cell lymphoma (6.1%) and indolent lymphoma (5.7%). Entity-specific meta-regression models for large B cell lymphoma and multiple myeloma revealed that axicabtagene ciloleucel and ciltacabtagene autoleucel were independently associated with increased NRM point estimates, respectively. Of 574 reported nonrelapse deaths, over half were attributed to infections (50.9%), followed by other malignancies (7.8%) and cardiovascular/respiratory events (7.3%). Conversely, the CAR T cell-specific side effects, immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome/neurotoxicity, cytokine release syndrome and hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis, represented only a minority of nonrelapse deaths (cumulatively 11.5%). Our findings underline the critical…

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: 7,604 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