Freeman, Ciara Louise

Abstract Background: Real-world data suggest that safety and efficacy of ide-cel and cilta-cel mirror data from pivotal trials, yet older adults remain underrepresented. We report outcomes of the largest cohort of RRMM patients aged ≥75 years receiving CAR-T and compare them with propensity-matched younger patients. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed RRMM patients receiving standard-of-care BCMA CAR-T at 15 centers from the US Myeloma Immunotherapy Consortium between May 2021 and December 2024. Patients ≥ 75 years were 2:1 propensity-matched to patients < 75 based on CAR-T product, sex, performance status, extramedullary disease, baseline ferritin, penta-refractory status, bridging therapy, prior autologous SCT and lines of therapy. Continuous outcomes were analyzed with multivariable linear regression, binary outcomes with logistic regression, and time-to-event endpoints with Cox proportional-hazards models. We estimated average treatment effects via G-computation, using cluster-robust standard errors to account for the matched sets. Results: After 2:1 propensity matching, the cohort included 194 patients ≥ 75 years (cilta-cel: 64 and ide-cel: 130) and 388 patients < 75 years (cilta-cel: 128, ide-cel: 260). Median ages were 78 (range: 75-90) for the older cohort vs 65 (range: 35-74) for the younger cohort. The older cohort had a higher frequency of t(14;16) (9% vs. 3%, p = 0.005), lower baseline ferritin (151 vs. 196 ng/mL, P = 0.046), and lower likelihood of prior ASCT (57% vs. 71%, P = 0.001). Median prior lines of therapy were 5. Median follow-up time for ≥ 75 and < 75 groups for cilta-cel was 11.5 and 11 months and for ide-cel was 16 and 24.3 months, respectively. ORR did not differ amongst the older vs younger patients: cilta-cel (97% vs. 97%) and ide-cel (90% vs. 88%).For patients ≥ 75 years, median PFS with cilta-cel was 28.7 months (95% CI: 13.3–NR) and with ide-cel was 16.4 months (95% CI: 12.1–22.4). In patients < 75 years, median PFS was not reached for cilta-cel but was 11.5 months (95% CI: 9.6–12.7) for ide-cel, reflecting inferior PFS with ide-cel in the younger group (HR 0.4, 95% CI 0.3–0.6). On sensitivity analysis by Cox proportional hazards model, we did not observe any statistically significant differences in PFS in older vs younger patients receiving cilta-cel, although older patients paradoxically had better PFS with ide-cel compared to their matched younger cohort. In the cilta-cel cohort, HR for PFS for older vs younger patients was 1.48 (95% CI:0.77-2.84; p=0.2) and in the ide-cel cohort it was 0.7 (95% CI: 0.5, 0.98; p=0.04). Median OS was reached only in the < 75-year ide-cel cohort at 40 months (95% CI: 32.5–43.5). Rates of CRS were similar, with any-grade (grade ≥3) CRS seen in 74% vs 78% (0% vs. 0.8%) of cilta-cel recipients and 86% vs. 87% (3.1% vs. 1.5%) of ide-cel recipients in the older vs younger groups, respectively. ICANS rates were 21% vs. 20% for cilta-cel (p = 0.79) and 29% vs 20% for ide-cel (p = 0.07), with similar rates of grade ≥ 3 ICANS. In the cilta-cel cohort, Parkinsonian delayed neurotoxicity (DNT) occurred in 3/62 (4.8%) older patients and 6/128 (4.7%) younger patients. Similarly, other non-Parkinsonian DNT rates were similar across age groups, with 6.4% vs 5.5% in older vs younger cilta-cel cohort and 0% vs 1% in the older vs younger ide-cel cohort. Rates of IEC-HS, and infections were comparable across the cohorts. There was no difference in hospital length of stay and ICU admission rate between products within either age cohort. The overall non-relapse mortality (NRM) was 6.7% for patients ≥ 75 years and 6.2% in patients < 75 years. For cilta-cel, NRM in older vs younger cohort was 9.4% vs 4.7% (p= 0.96) and for ide-cel it was 5.4% vs 6.9%, respectively (p= 0.65). Conclusion: Appropriately selected older adults (≥75 years) receiving CAR-T therapy for RRMM can derive a similar efficacy benefit with CAR-T as a propensity-matched younger cohort, without any increased signal of toxicity including CRS, ICANS or delayed NT. NRM was numerically greater, but not statistically significant, in older adults receiving cilta-cel. Median PFS with cilta-cel and ide-cel in older adults were 28.7 months and 16.4 months with median OS not reached and 40 months, respectively. Older adults, ≥75 years old, should not be excluded from CAR-T therapy solely due to advanced age. Overall, cilta-cel was not associated with worsened toxicities in older adults and may offer better PFS.

PURPOSE Idecabtagene vicleucel (ide-cel) and ciltacabtagene autoleucel (cilta-cel), two B-cell maturation antigen–directed chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapies have demonstrated remarkable efficacy in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). We compare safety, efficacy, and survival among patients with RRMM treated with standard-of-care (SOC) ide-cel or cilta-cel. METHODS Data were from a retrospective chart review of patients with RRMM leukapheresed by December 31, 2022, with the intent to receive SOC ide-cel or cilta-cel at 19 institutions. An inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) approach was used to compare outcomes by therapy type. RESULTS A total of 641 patients were leukapheresed by December 31, 2022, with ide-cel (n = 386) and cilta-cel (n = 255). Five hundred eighty-six patients were infused (n = 350 for ide-cel; n = 236 for cilta-cel) with a median follow-up of 12.6 and 13.0 months for ide-cel and cilta-cel, respectively. After IPTW, patient characteristics were well balanced. Cilta-cel was associated with higher likelihood of grade ≥3 cytokine release syndrome (CRS; odds ratio [OR], 6.80 [95% CI, 2.28 to 20.33]), infections (OR, 2.03 [95% CI, 1.41 to 2.92]), second primary malignancies (OR, 1.77 [95% CI, 0.89 to 3.56]), and delayed neurotoxicity (OR, 20.07 [95% CI, 4.46 to 90.20]). Cilta-cel was also associated with better treatment responses (≥complete response: OR, 2.42 [95% CI, 1.63 to 3.60]), longer progression-free survival (hazard ratio [HR], 0.48 [95% CI, 0.36 to 0.63]), and longer overall survival (HR, 0.67 [95% CI, 0.46 to 0.97]). No associations were observed between therapy type and immune effector cell–associated neurotoxicity syndrome, any CRS, severe cytopenia at days 30 and 90, or nonrelapse mortality. We observed consistent findings when repeating the analyses restricting the ide-cel cohort to patients infused during the same time period as Food and Drug Administration approval for cilta-cel (≥March 2022). CONCLUSION Cilta-cel demonstrated superior efficacy and survival, with higher incidence of certain toxicities, compared with ide-cel.