Matching-adjusted indirect treatment comparison of chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapies for third-line or later treatment of relapsed or refractory large B-cell lymphoma: lisocabtagene maraleucel versus tisagenlecleucel

Table 4 ORR and CR rate MAIC results for the comparison of liso-cel to tisagenlecleucel, infused patients

	JULIET (tisagenlecleucel) efficacy analysis set [8]		TRANSCEND (liso-cel) DLBCL efficacy set [6]		Liso-cel vs tisagenlecleucel
	n	%	n or ESS	%	OR (95% CI)	P-value
ORR analyses
Naive	93	51.6	256	72.7	2.49 (1.52‒4.07)	< 0.001
Primary			164	74.7	2.78 (1.63‒4.74)	< 0.001
Sensitivity			37.3	80.8	3.95 (1.64‒9.51)	0.002
CR rate analyses
Naive	93	39.8	256	53.1	1.71 (1.06‒2.78)	0.029
Primary			200.1	57.0	2.01 (1.22‒3.30)	0.006
Sensitivity			37.3	60.6	2.33 (1.06‒5.10)	0.034

CR complete response, DLBCL diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, ESS effective sample size, liso-cel lisocabtagene maraleucel, MAIC matching-adjusted indirect comparions, OR odds ratio, ORR objective response rate

ISSN: 2162-3619