TABLE 3.
Estimated medians and comparative effectiveness for cilta‐cel versus physician's choice of treatment
| Median, months (95% CI) | Hazard ratio a (95% CI), p‐value for cilta‐cel vs. physician's choice of treatment | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CARTITUDE‐1 | RW cohort | ||||
| Unadjusted | Unadjusted | Adjusted b | Unadjusted | Adjusted b | |
| PFS | 22.8 (22.8, NR) c | 4.47 (3.78, 5.03) | 4.50 (2.40, 5.85) | 0.20 (0.14, 0.28), <0.0001 | 0.18 (0.12, 0.27), <0.0001 |
| TTNT | NR (NR, NR) | 4.93 (4.27, 5.52) | 4.53 (2.86, 6.77) | 0.17 (0.11, 0.24), <0.0001 | 0.15 (0.09, 0.22), <0.0001 |
| OS | NR (23.6, NR) | 14.78 (12.29, 17.84) | 13.24 (9.17, 21.29) | 0.28 (0.18, 0.45), <0.0001 | 0.25 (0.13, 0.46), <0.0001 |
a
HR < 1 indicates favorable treatment effect for cilta‐cel.
b
Adjusted for refractory status, International Staging System stage, cytogenetic profile, time to progression on last regimen, number of prior lines of therapy, years since multiple myeloma diagnosis, and age.
c
Median should be interpreted with caution, as reached when few patients were still at risk and may be an underestimate.
Abbreviations: CI, confidence interval; HR, hazard ratio; NR, not reached; OS, overall survival; PFS, progression‐free survival; RW, real world; TTNT, time to next treatment.