Oops, you're using an old version of your browser so some of the features on this page may not be displaying properly.

MINIMAL Requirements: Google Chrome 24+Mozilla Firefox 20+Internet Explorer 11Opera 15–18Apple Safari 7SeaMonkey 2.15-2.23

Poster Display & Cocktail

27P - Efficacy and safety of CAR T cell therapy compared to standard of care in non-Hodgkin lymphoma

Date

03 Mar 2025

Session

Poster Display & Cocktail

Presenters

Ádám Szilágyi

Citation

Annals of Oncology (2025) 10 (suppl_2): 1-2. 10.1016/esmoop/esmoop104178

Authors

Á. Szilágyi1, M. Hernádfoi2, M. Garami3, G. Agócs4

Author affiliations

  • 1 Translational Medicine Dept., Semmelweis University, 1125 - Budapest/HU
  • 2 Internal Medicine, Bethesda Childrens Hospital, 1146 - Budapest/HU
  • 3 2nd Department Of Pediatrics, Semmelweis University, 1125 - Budapest/HU
  • 4 -, Centre for Translational Medicine, Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary, 1085 - Budapest/HU

Resources

This content is available to ESMO members and event participants.

Abstract 27P

Background

In non-Hodgkin lymphoma (N-HL), relapse/refractoriness after one or more lines of therapy is still common despite the successes of current standard of care (SOC) such as rituximab. Chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapies could be beneficial according to studies from haematological cancers with promising response and survival results. However, several adverse events (AE) could occur after CAR T-cell treatment such as cytokine release syndrome (CRS). Our aim was to analyse the current comparative literature between CAR T-cell and SOC therapies by response, survival and AE in N-HL with a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Methods

Literature search was conducted in Embase, Medline, and Central databases on 02nd February 2024. During the selection we included articles with comparable cohorts of CAR T-cell and control patients, then extracted the odds ratios (OR) and hazard ratios (HR) of response and survival outcomes respectively with a 95% confidence interval (CI). Efficacy outcomes were distributed according to follow-up (ITT or mITT) and statistical perspective. Safety OR was calculated from the number of patients with AE.

Results

Of 29915 hits, 21 N-HL studies were included. Efficacy outcomes were tending to favour CAR T-cell vs SOC. The ITT adjusted complete- and overall response rate was OR: 2.63 (CI: 1.37-5.05) and 2.94 (CI: 1.42-6.10) respectively, mITT analyses supported these results. ITT adjusted overall survival was HR: 0.61 (CI: 0.44-0.83), like mITT. ITT adjusted progression-free survival was HR: 0.54 (CI: 0.43-0.66), however, mITT results could not show significance: mITT adjusted HR: 0.65 (CI: 0.32-1.32). Most of the AEs were not significantly different in the cohorts. Grade 3-4 febrile neutropenia, hypomagnesaemia, vomiting; grade 1-4 hypokalaemia, hypomagnesaemia, thrombocytopenia, vomiting significantly decreased during CAR T-cell treatment compared to SOC. In addition, dizziness, and hypotension significantly increased with CAR T-cell.

Conclusions

CAR T-cell in N-HL could strongly improve response and survival outcomes compared to SOC. Despite the risk of CRS, CAR T-cell is as safe as SOC, with benefit in some important serious AEs.

Clinical trial identification

Editorial acknowledgement

Legal entity responsible for the study

The authors.

Funding

Centre for Translational Medicine, Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary.

Disclosure

All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

This site uses cookies. Some of these cookies are essential, while others help us improve your experience by providing insights into how the site is being used.

For more detailed information on the cookies we use, please check our Privacy Policy.

Customise settings
  • Necessary cookies enable core functionality. The website cannot function properly without these cookies, and you can only disable them by changing your browser preferences.