Table 4.
Indirect comparison of PFS and OS benefit between different CAR-Ts and BiTEs for MM.
| Study | Treatment | Comparison | Patients | Outcomes (e.g., ORR, PFS, OS) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| RODRIGUEZ-OTERO P et al[83] | Idecabtagene vicleucel (ide-cel) | Conventional care in RWS | RRMM with prior triple-class exposure | Improved PFS and OS with ide-cel |
| CHO S F et al[39] | Ciltacabtagene autoleucel (cilta-cel) | Ide-cel | Triple-class exposed RRMM | Statistically significant improvement in ORR, DoR, PFS, OS |
| Martin T et al[84] | Cilta-cel | Ide-cel | Triple-class exposed RRMM | Statistically significant improvement in ORR, ≥CR rate, DoR, PFS; OS in favor of cilta-cel but CI overlaps one |
| Mol I et al[85] | Elranatamab | PCT | TCE/R MM | Higher ORR and ≥CR, longer PFS and OS compared to PCT |
| Mol I et al[85] | Elranatamab | Teclistamab | TCE/R MM | Better ORR and PFS, numerically better CR, DoR, and OS |
CI: Confidence interval; CR: Complete response; DoR: Duration of response; MM: Multiple myeloma; MRD: Minimal residual disease; ORR: Overall response rate; OS: Overall survival; PCT: Physician’s choice of treatment; PFS: Progression-free survival; RRMM: Relapsed/refractory MM; RWS: Real world study.