The DOI matches its Crossref record; 18 of the 18 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; 4 of the 10 sources its claims cite were checked for support.
Idecabtagene Vicleucel in Relapsed and Refractory Multiple Myeloma.
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: Idecabtagene vicleucel (ide-cel, also called bb2121), a B-cell maturation antigen-directed chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy, has shown clinical activity with expected CAR T-cell toxic effects in patients with relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma. METHODS: CAR-positive (CAR+) T cells. The primary end point was an overall response (partial response or better); a key secondary end point was a complete response or better (comprising complete and stringent complete responses). RESULTS: nucleated cells) was confirmed in 33 patients, representing 26% of all 128 patients who were treated and 79% of the 42 patients who had a complete response or better. The median progression-free survival was 8.8 months (95% confidence interval, 5.6 to 11.6). Common toxic effects among the 128 treated patients included neutropenia in 117 patients (91%), anemia in 89 (70%), and thrombocytopenia in 81 (63%). Cytokine release syndrome was reported in 107 patients (84%), including 7 (5%) who had events of grade 3 or higher. Neurotoxic effects developed in 23 patients (18%) and were of grade 3 in 4 patients (3%); no neurotoxic effects higher than grade 3 occurred. Cellular kinetic analysis confirmed CAR+ T cells in 29 of 49 patients (59%) at 6 months and 4 of 11 patients (36%) at 12 months after infusion. CONCLUSIONS: Ide-cel induced responses in a majority of heavily pretreated patients with refractory and relapsed myeloma; MRD-negative status was achieved in 26% of treated patients. Almost all patients had grade 3 or 4 toxic effects, most commonly hematologic toxic effects and cytokine release syndrome. (Funded by bluebird bio and Celgene, a Bristol-Myers Squibb company; KarMMa ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03361748.).
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
79 Own result · 10 Own method · 8 Own interpretation · 4 Sources not found · 2 Partly supported · 2 No basis given · 1 Supported · 1 Supported so far · accuracy not yet measured
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“The B-cell maturation antigen (BCMA)-directed CAR T cell idecabtagene vicleucel (ide-cel, also called bb2121) showed promising efficacy in a phase 1 study involving patients with relapsed or refractory myeloma.11”
§ Idecabtagene Vicleucel in Relapsed and Refractory Multiple Myeloma > D
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [11] 11. Raje N, Berdeja J, Lin Y, et al. Anti- BCMA CAR T-cell therapy bb2121 in re- lapsed or refractory multiple myeloma. N Engl J Med 2019; 380: 1726-37. source
The Methods identify bb2121 as an anti-BCMA CAR T-cell therapy studied in a phase 1 trial involving patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma. The Discussion reports an 85% clinical response rate, supporting the characterization of its efficacy as promising. (LLM, conf=0.94)
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Supported
The sources with a verdict support this claim; the rest weren’t checked yet, have no full text we could read, or their verdicts aren’t rated yet.
In the paper
“These efficacy results compare favorably with results in similarly heavily pretreated patients with relapsed or refractory myeloma treated with two recently approved regimens, selinexor plus dexamethasone and belantamab mafodotin (median progression-free survival, 3.7 months and 2.9 months, respectively).5,17”
§ Idecabtagene Vicleucel in Relapsed and Refractory Multiple Myeloma > Discussion
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [5] 5. Chari A, Vogl DT, Gavriatopoulou M, et al. Oral selinexor-dexamethasone for triple-class refractory multiple myeloma. N Engl J Med 2019; 381: 727-38. source
The Methods and Discussion describe patients with triple-class refractory myeloma who were heavily pretreated, with a median of seven previous regimens. The Efficacy section reports median progression-free survival of 3.7 months with selinexor plus dexamethasone. This citation supports the selinexor result; the separate belantamab result is not attributed to this paper. (LLM, conf=0.92)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [17] 17. Lonial S, Lee HC, Badros A, et al. Belan- tamab mafodotin for relapsed or refracto- ry multiple myeloma (DREAMM-2): a two- arm, randomised, open-label, phase 2 study. Lancet Oncol 2020; 21: 207-21. source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: Cross-trial comparisons of progression-free survival between the KarMMa study and trials of selinexor plus dexamethasone or belantamab mafodotin are valid.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Observed toxic effects were consistent with those in previous reports.11”
§ Idecabtagene Vicleucel in Relapsed and Refractory Multiple Myeloma > Discussion
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [11] 11. Raje N, Berdeja J, Lin Y, et al. Anti- BCMA CAR T-cell therapy bb2121 in re- lapsed or refractory multiple myeloma. N Engl J Med 2019; 380: 1726-37. sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Results (Safety; page unavailable) document the observed toxic effects. The Discussion compares them with previous studies, but reports a lower incidence of severe cytokine release syndrome with bb2121 and cautions that cross-study comparisons are complicated. It does not establish that the toxic effects were generally consistent with previous reports. (LLM, conf=0.82)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Partly supported
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Duration of undetectable sBCMA correlated with response duration, and clearance of sBCMA at month 2 was associated with longer progression-free survival (Fig. S5E and S5F).”
§ Idecabtagene Vicleucel in Relapsed and Refractory Multiple Myeloma > Figure 2 (facing page). Progression-free Survival, Duration of Response, and Overall Survival.
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: Soluble BCMA is a serum-based universal marker of myeloma burden.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“with peak levels higher in patients having cytokine release syndrome of grade 3 or higher (Fig. S6).”
§ Idecabtagene Vicleucel in Relapsed and Refractory Multiple Myeloma > Biomarkers
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“a somewhat higher frequency and somewhat greater depth of response were observed at the 450 × 10 6 dose (response in 81% of the pa-tients and complete response or better in 39%).”
§ Idecabtagene Vicleucel in Relapsed and Refractory Multiple Myeloma > Discussion
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“At baseline, 110 of 112 tumor samples (98%) expressed BCMA, with 109 having at least 50% BCMA-positive plasma cells, and all the patients had detectable levels of sBCMA.”
§ Idecabtagene Vicleucel in Relapsed and Refractory Multiple Myeloma > Figure 2 (facing page). Progression-free Survival, Duration of Response, and Overall Survival.
plainn = 112- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“A response was observed in 73% of the treated patients, and a complete response or better was observed in 33%;”
§ Idecabtagene Vicleucel in Relapsed and Refractory Multiple Myeloma > Discussion
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Baseline cytokine levels were not associated with higher-grade cytokine release syndrome or neurotoxic effects.”
§ Idecabtagene Vicleucel in Relapsed and Refractory Multiple Myeloma > Biomarkers
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“with an incidence of response to bridging therapy of 4%”
§ Idecabtagene Vicleucel in Relapsed and Refractory Multiple Myeloma > Discussion
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Probably not a substantial claim. 12
- It may state two separate claims as one. 32
- The quote only partly states this claim. 1
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“In contrast, CD19 epitope loss is reported to be a relatively common escape mechanism after treatment with CD19-directed CAR T-cell therapy, especially in patients with acute leukemia.18,19”
§ Idecabtagene Vicleucel in Relapsed and Refractory Multiple Myeloma > Discussion
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [18] 18. Cheng J, Zhao L, Zhang Y, et al. Un- derstanding the mechanisms of resis- tance to CAR T-cell therapy in malignan- cies. Front Oncol 2019; 9: 1237. sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Tumor Factors section reports that loss of the targeted CD19 epitope enabled escape after anti-CD19 CAR T-cell therapy in relapsed B-ALL. It also reports that target-antigen-negative relapse accounts for approximately 9–25% of B-ALL relapses, but does not establish that epitope loss specifically is relatively common or more common in acute leukemia than in other malignancies. (LLM, conf=0.82)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [19] 19. Badar T, Shah NN. Chimeric antigen receptor T cell therapy for acute lympho- blastic leukemia. Curr Treat Options On- col 2020; 21: 16. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Partly supported
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Among patients with persistent grade 3 or 4 neutropenia (52 patients) or thrombocytopenia (62 patients) 1 month after infusion, the median time to recovery to grade 2 or lower was 1.9 months (range, 1.2 to 5.6) and 2.1 months (range, 1.2 to 13.8), respectively”
§ Idecabtagene Vicleucel in Relapsed and Refractory Multiple Myeloma > Safety
plainn = 52- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The Kaplan-Meier estimated median progression-free survival was 8.8 months overall (95% CI, 5.6 to 11.6), 12.1 months (95% CI, 8.8 to 12.3) at the 450 × 10 6 dose, and 20.2 months (95% CI, 12.3 to could not be estimated) in patients having a complete or stringent complete response”
§ Idecabtagene Vicleucel in Relapsed and Refractory Multiple Myeloma > Efficacy
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The 128 treated patients had received a median of 6 previous antimyeloma regimens (range, 3 to 16), and 120 (94%) had received previous autologous hematopoietic stem-cell transplants (Table 1).”
§ Idecabtagene Vicleucel in Relapsed and Refractory Multiple Myeloma > Patients
plainn = 128- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Although high interpatient variability was observed at all doses, upper quartiles of exposure (area under the curve of the transgene level from time of dose to 28 days [AUC 0-28 days ]) were observed more frequently at the 450 × 10 6 dose (Fig. 3B).”
§ Idecabtagene Vicleucel in Relapsed and Refractory Multiple Myeloma > Cellular Pharmacokinetic Profile and Immunogenicity
plaincorrelationaln = 127- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Among treated patients, 5 were positive for antidrug antibodies before infusion.”
§ Idecabtagene Vicleucel in Relapsed and Refractory Multiple Myeloma > Cellular Pharmacokinetic Profile and Immunogenicity
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Baseline sBCMA levels were elevated in treated patients and de-creased rapidly after infusion in patients who had a response, with nadir values achieved within 3 months (Fig. 3A and Fig. S5B and S5C).”
§ Idecabtagene Vicleucel in Relapsed and Refractory Multiple Myeloma > Biomarkers
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: Soluble BCMA is a serum-based universal marker of myeloma burden.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Neurotoxic effects developed in 23 patients (18%) and were of grade 3 in 4 patients (3%); no neurotoxic effects higher than grade 3 occurred.”
- Also stated in: § Table 1. (Continued.) · plain
“Investigator-identified neurotoxic effects were reported in 23 patients (18%), of whom 4 (3%) had grade 3 events; no grade 4 or 5 neu-rotoxic effects were observed”
§ Idecabtagene Vicleucel in Relapsed and Refractory Multiple Myeloma > Abstract
plainn = 128- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Also stated in: § Table 1. (Continued.) · plain
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The median time to first response was 1.0 month (range, 0.5 to 8.8); the median time to a complete response or better was 2.8 months (range, 1.0 to 11.8).”
§ Idecabtagene Vicleucel in Relapsed and Refractory Multiple Myeloma > Efficacy
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“At doses of 150 × 10 6 , 300 × 10 6 , and 450 × 10 6 CAR+ T cells, neurotoxic effects of any grade were reported in 0 of 4 patients, 12 of 70 patients (17%), and 11 of 54 patients (20%), respectively, with grade 3 events in 0 patients, 1 patient (1%), and 3 patients (6%).”
§ Idecabtagene Vicleucel in Relapsed and Refractory Multiple Myeloma > Table 1. (Continued.)
plainn = 54- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Antidrug antibodies had no effect on the incidence of response or of complete response or better and had no noticeable effect on progression-free survival.”
§ Idecabtagene Vicleucel in Relapsed and Refractory Multiple Myeloma > Cellular Pharmacokinetic Profile and Immunogenicity
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: The absence of a detectable effect of antidrug antibodies on efficacy is not due to insufficient statistical power.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The Kaplan-Meier estimated median overall survival was 19.4 months (95% CI, 18.2 to could not be estimated), with an overall survival of 78% at 12 months (Fig. 2D).”
§ Idecabtagene Vicleucel in Relapsed and Refractory Multiple Myeloma > Efficacy
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Exposures were higher in patients who had a response than in those who did not (Fig. S5A), and higher exposure was associated with deeper response and longer progression-free survival (Fig. 3C and 3D).”
§ Idecabtagene Vicleucel in Relapsed and Refractory Multiple Myeloma > Cellular Pharmacokinetic Profile and Immunogenicity
plaincorrelationaln = 127- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Achievement of undetectable sBCMA levels increased with depth of response (17 of 27 pa-”
§ Idecabtagene Vicleucel in Relapsed and Refractory Multiple Myeloma > Biomarkers
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The quote only partly states this claim.
- Rests on an assumption: Soluble BCMA is a serum-based universal marker of myeloma burden.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“At doses of 150 × 10 6 , 300 × 10 6 , and 450 × 10 6 CAR+ T cells, cytokine release syndrome of any grade was observed in 2 of 4 patients (50%), 53 of 70 patients (76%), and 52 of 54 patients (96%), respectively, with cytokine release syndrome of grade 3 or higher observed in 0 patients, 4 patients (6%), and 3 patients (6%).”
§ Idecabtagene Vicleucel in Relapsed and Refractory Multiple Myeloma > Table 1. (Continued.)
plaincorrelationaln = 54- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The Kaplan-Meier estimate for median duration of response was 10.7 months (95% CI, 9.0 to 11.3) overall and 11.3 months (95% CI, 10.3 to 11.4) at the 450 × 10 6 dose”
§ Idecabtagene Vicleucel in Relapsed and Refractory Multiple Myeloma > Efficacy
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Cytokine release syndrome was reported in 107 patients (84%), including 7 (5%) who had events of grade 3 or higher.”
- Also stated in: § Table 1. (Continued.) · plain
“Cytokine release syndrome occurred in 107 patients (84%) and was mostly of grade 1 or 2 (Table 2 and Table S10).Five patients (4%) had grade 3 cytokine release syndrome, 1 (<1%) had grade 4, and 1 (<1%) had grade 5 (300 × 10 6 dose level).”
§ Idecabtagene Vicleucel in Relapsed and Refractory Multiple Myeloma > Abstract
plainn = 128- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Also stated in: § Table 1. (Continued.) · plain
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Infections occurred in 88 patients (69%) and were of grade 3 or 4 in 28 (22%).”
§ Idecabtagene Vicleucel in Relapsed and Refractory Multiple Myeloma > Safety
plainn = 88- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“including many with a high tumor burden, high-risk cytogenetic abnormalities, and extramedullary disease.”
§ Idecabtagene Vicleucel in Relapsed and Refractory Multiple Myeloma > Discussion
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Common toxic effects among the 128 treated patients included neutropenia in 117 patients (91%), anemia in 89 (70%), and thrombocytopenia in 81 (63%).”
§ Idecabtagene Vicleucel in Relapsed and Refractory Multiple Myeloma > Abstract
plainn = 128- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“After disease progression, 28 patients were retreated with ide-cel (Table S4).Six patients (21%) had a second response, with durations of response ranging from 1.9 to 6.8 months; all the patients who had a response were retreated at a dose higher than their initial dose.”
§ Idecabtagene Vicleucel in Relapsed and Refractory Multiple Myeloma > Efficacy
plaincorrelationaln = 28- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Most grade 3 or 4 events were hematologic toxic effects, including neutropenia in 114 patients (89%), anemia in 77 (60%), and thrombocytopenia in 67 (52%), and were at least partially related to the lymphodepleting chemotherapy administered before ide-cel infusion.”
§ Idecabtagene Vicleucel in Relapsed and Refractory Multiple Myeloma > Safety
plainn = 114- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“A total of 44 treated patients (34%) died during the study, with most deaths (27) attributed by the investigator to complications of myeloma progression (Table S12).”
§ Idecabtagene Vicleucel in Relapsed and Refractory Multiple Myeloma > Table 1. (Continued.)
plainn = 44- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Levels of proinflammatory markers, including cytokines, ferritin, and C-reactive protein, increased early after ide-cel infusion and decreased by month 1”
§ Idecabtagene Vicleucel in Relapsed and Refractory Multiple Myeloma > Biomarkers
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The response duration increased with the depth of response; the median response duration was 4.5 months (95% CI, 2.9 to 6.7), 10.4 months (95% CI, 5.1 to 11.3), and 19.0 months (95% CI, 11.3 to could not be estimated) in patients having a best response of partial response (27 patients), very good partial response (25 patients), and complete or stringent complete response (42 patients),”
§ Idecabtagene Vicleucel in Relapsed and Refractory Multiple Myeloma > Efficacy
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“At the target doses of 150 × 10 6 , 300 × 10 6 , and 450 × 10 6 CAR+ T cells, a response was observed in 2 of 4 patients (50%), in 48 of 70 patients (69%), and in 44 of 54 patients (81%), respectively, and a complete response or better was observed in 1 of 4 patients (25%), in 20 of 70 patients (29%), and in 21 of 54 patients (39%).”
§ Idecabtagene Vicleucel in Relapsed and Refractory Multiple Myeloma > Efficacy
plaincorrelationaln = 128- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Five patients (4%) died after 6 months from unrelated adverse events, and an additional 8 patients (6%) died after disease progression.”
§ Idecabtagene Vicleucel in Relapsed and Refractory Multiple Myeloma > Table 1. (Continued.)
plainn = 5- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Minimal residual disease (MRD)-negative status (<10 -5 nucleated cells) was confirmed in 33 patients, representing 26% of all 128 patients who were treated and 79% of the 42 patients who had a complete response or better.”
- Also stated in: § Efficacy · plain
“Of the 42 patients with a complete or stringent complete response, 33 (79%) also had MRDnegative status at a sensitivity level of 10 -5 , corresponding to 26% (95% CI, 19 to 34) of the treated population; the remaining 9 patients (21%) could not be evaluated for MRD”
§ Idecabtagene Vicleucel in Relapsed and Refractory Multiple Myeloma > Abstract
plainn = 33- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Also stated in: § Efficacy · plain
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“High-grade hematologic toxic effects were common but transient.”
§ Idecabtagene Vicleucel in Relapsed and Refractory Multiple Myeloma > Discussion
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The fact that MRDnegative responses occurred in approximately a quarter of the patients highlights the depth of response induced by ide-cel.”
§ Idecabtagene Vicleucel in Relapsed and Refractory Multiple Myeloma > Discussion
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: MRD negativity at a sensitivity of 10^-5 is a valid measure of depth of response and clinical benefit.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The study protocol was approved by local or independent institutional review boards or ethics committees at participating sites.All the patients provided written informed consent.”
§ Idecabtagene Vicleucel in Relapsed and Refractory Multiple Myeloma > Study Oversight
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Nearly all tumors expressed BCMA, a finding that supports the use of ide-cel in relapsed and refractory myeloma without restriction based on tumor BCMA expression.”
§ Idecabtagene Vicleucel in Relapsed and Refractory Multiple Myeloma > Discussion
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: BCMA expression is required for ide-cel efficacy, so lack of tumor BCMA expression would limit its use.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The primary efficacy analysis was performed in the population of patients treated with ide-cel (128 patients).”
§ Idecabtagene Vicleucel in Relapsed and Refractory Multiple Myeloma > Statistical Analysis
plainn = 128- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Between December 13, 2017, and November 13, 2018, a total of 140 patients were enrolled and underwent leukapheresis, of whom 128 received ide-cel infusions.Twelve patients discontinued the study before ide-cel infusion (including 1 patient who discontinued after unsuccessful manufacture of the CAR T-cell product)”
§ Idecabtagene Vicleucel in Relapsed and Refractory Multiple Myeloma > Patients
plainn = 140- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The study was designed by the authors in conjunction with the sponsors and conducted in accordance with the International Council for Harmonisation guidelines for Good Clinical Practice and the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki.”
§ Idecabtagene Vicleucel in Relapsed and Refractory Multiple Myeloma > Study Oversight
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The sample size for the primary end point (overall response) was based on a onesample binomial test with normal approximation, under the assumption of 15% dropout between the time of enrollment and ide-cel treatment.”
§ Idecabtagene Vicleucel in Relapsed and Refractory Multiple Myeloma > Statistical Analysis
plainn = 128- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Statistical tests were not performed on subgroup analyses.”
§ Idecabtagene Vicleucel in Relapsed and Refractory Multiple Myeloma > Statistical Analysis
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The primary end point was an overall response (partial response or better), defined according to IMWG Uniform Response Criteria for Multiple Myeloma 12 as assessed by an independent review committee.”
§ Idecabtagene Vicleucel in Relapsed and Refractory Multiple Myeloma > End Points and Assessments
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“MRD negativity was evaluated in bone marrow aspirates by next-generation sequencing (clonoSEQ, Adaptive Biotechnologies) with a minimum cutoff of 10 -5 nucleated cells.”
§ Idecabtagene Vicleucel in Relapsed and Refractory Multiple Myeloma > End Points and Assessments
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The actual doses delivered were within 20% of the target doses.”
§ Idecabtagene Vicleucel in Relapsed and Refractory Multiple Myeloma > Study Design and Patients
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Adverse events were graded according to National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (NCI CTCAE), version 4.03.Cytokine release syndrome was graded according to published criteria (Table S2).14”
§ Idecabtagene Vicleucel in Relapsed and Refractory Multiple Myeloma > End Points and Assessments
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper relies on this without support.
Soluble BCMA is a serum-based universal marker of myeloma burden.
“Soluble BCMA was assessed as a serum-based universal marker of myeloma burden.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Cross-trial comparisons of progression-free survival between the KarMMa study and trials of selinexor plus dexamethasone or belantamab mafodotin are valid.
“These efficacy results compare favorably with results in similarly heavily pretreated patients with relapsed or refractory myeloma treated with two recently approved regimens, selinexor plus dexamethasone and belantamab mafodotin (median progression-free survival, 3.7 months and 2.9 months, respectively).5,17”
The paper relies on this without support.
MRD negativity at a sensitivity of 10^-5 is a valid measure of depth of response and clinical benefit.
“The fact that MRDnegative responses occurred in approximately a quarter of the patients highlights the depth of response induced by ide-cel.”
The paper relies on this without support.
BCMA expression is required for ide-cel efficacy, so lack of tumor BCMA expression would limit its use.
“Nearly all tumors expressed BCMA, a finding that supports the use of ide-cel in relapsed and refractory myeloma without restriction based on tumor BCMA expression.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The absence of a detectable effect of antidrug antibodies on efficacy is not due to insufficient statistical power.
“Antidrug antibodies had no effect on the incidence of response or of complete response or better and had no noticeable effect on progression-free survival.”
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Idecabtagene vicleucel (ide-cel) and ciltacabtagene autoleucel (cilta-cel) are newly approved CAR-T products targeting BCMA that are active in relapsed refractory myeloma.89,90”
From Multiple myeloma: 2024 update on diagnosis, risk-stratification, and management (2024) · cites this paper as [89]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Safety of ide-cel remained consistent with the IA, with no parkinsonism, Guillain-Barré syndrome, or SPMs of T-cell origin reported. 13”
From Ide-cel vs standard regimens in triple-class-exposed relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma: updated KarMMa-3 analyses. (2024) · cites this paper as [18]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Common side effects such as CRS and immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome (ICANS) were mostly low grade, indicating manageable toxicity.”
From Multiple myeloma: signaling pathways and targeted therapy (2024) · cites this paper as [243]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“The median duration of response (mDOR) was 11 months in patients achieving CR and 19 months in those achieving stringent complete response (sCR).”
From Multiple myeloma: signaling pathways and targeted therapy (2024) · cites this paper as [243]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“A number of BCMA-directed therapies, including belantamab mafodotin, idecabtagene vicleucel (ide-cel), ciltacabtagene autoleucel (cilta-cel) and teclistamab, have shown efficacy in clinical trials and are approved for the treatment of relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma4–9.”
From Elranatamab in relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma: phase 2 MagnetisMM-3 trial results (2023) · cites this paper as [5]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Median DOR and PFS were 10.7 months and 8.8 months, respectively, for ide-cel, and were both not reached for cilta-cel5,6.”
From Elranatamab in relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma: phase 2 MagnetisMM-3 trial results (2023) · cites this paper as [5]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Although follow-up is still ongoing, among patients with ≥CR, DOR and PFS at 15 months with elranatamab were comparable to those observed with other BCMA-targeted T-cell-redirecting therapies, suggesting similar outcomes once a deep response is achieved5,24,25.”
From Elranatamab in relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma: phase 2 MagnetisMM-3 trial results (2023) · cites this paper as [5]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“High response rates have been reported with the BCMA chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapies, ide-cel and cilta-cel, with responses reported in 73% and 97% of treated patients, respectively.”
From Elranatamab in relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma: phase 2 MagnetisMM-3 trial results (2023) · cites this paper as [5]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“In comparison to other BCMA-targeted T-cell-redirecting therapies, the rate of hematologic AEs with elranatamab was similar or lower after a similar follow-up4–6.”
From Elranatamab in relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma: phase 2 MagnetisMM-3 trial results (2023) · cites this paper as [5]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“CAR-T therapy requires that patients have access to specialized care centers and can wait the minimum 4-week period for production, which can result in attrition rates of approximately 10 to 15%,6-8”
From Teclistamab in Relapsed or Refractory Multiple Myeloma (2022) · cites this paper as [6]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Among 128 patients with relapsed refractory myeloma treated on a phase II trial, ide-cel was associated with a response rate of 73%.89 Thirty three percent of patients had a complete response or better. The median PFS was 8.8 months.”
From Multiple myeloma: 2024 update on diagnosis, risk-stratification, and management (2024) · cites this paper as [89]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Cytokine release syndrome was seen in 84%, and 5% were grade 3 or higher. Neurotoxicity was seen in 18%, and was grade 3 in 3%.”
From Multiple myeloma: 2024 update on diagnosis, risk-stratification, and management (2024) · cites this paper as [89]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy has shown promising ef fi cacy in patients with TCE R/RMM. 13-21”
From Ide-cel vs standard regimens in triple-class-exposed relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma: updated KarMMa-3 analyses. (2024) · cites this paper as [18]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“In the KarMMa study involving 128 patients with RRMM, the overall response rate (ORR) to a single infusion of Abecma was 73%, with a complete response (CR) rate of 33%.”
From Multiple myeloma: signaling pathways and targeted therapy (2024) · cites this paper as [243]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Abecma has demonstrated the ability to induce rapid, deep, and long-lasting remissions with just one infusion, providing a new and effective personalized therapy option for MM patients [227, 243, 258, 259].”
From Multiple myeloma: signaling pathways and targeted therapy (2024) · cites this paper as [243]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“In contrast, higher-grade cytokine release syndrome and neurotoxic events have been described after CAR-T administration in patients with multiple myeloma.6,8”
From Teclistamab in Relapsed or Refractory Multiple Myeloma (2022) · cites this paper as [6]
The check wasn’t confident either way, so it gives no verdict — never disputed.
In the citing paper
“Similarly, patients with advanced disease stage (R-ISS stage III) have consistently shown poorer outcomes irrespective of the therapy received4–6,19–22.”
From Elranatamab in relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma: phase 2 MagnetisMM-3 trial results (2023) · cites this paper as [5]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredIn the citing paper
“Recently approved therapies such as selinexor, 9 belantamab mafodotin, 10 idecabtagene vicleucel, 11 and ciltacabtagene autoleucel 12 have had clinical benefit in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma.”
From Talquetamab, a T-Cell–Redirecting GPRC5D Bispecific Antibody for Multiple Myeloma (2022) · cites this paper as [11]
Citations
Cites
Kumar, S., Paiva, B., Anderson, K. C., Durie, B., Landgren, O., Moreau, P., Munshi, N., Lonial, S., Bladé, J., Mateos, M.-V., et al. (2016) · The Lancet Oncology · doi:10.1016/s1470-2045(16)30206-6 · Cited by 3,061
Self-citationCurrent concepts in the diagnosis and management of cytokine release syndrome.
Lee, D. W., Gardner, R., Porter, D. L., Louis, C. U., Ahmed, N., Jensen, M., Grupp, S. A., & Mackall, C. L. (2014) · Blood · doi:10.1182/blood-2014-05-552729 · Cited by 2,806
Anti-BCMA CAR T-cell therapy bb2121 in relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma.
Raje, N., Berdeja, J., Lin, Y., Siegel, D., Jagannath, S., Madduri, D., Liedtke, M., Rosenblatt, J., Maus, M. V., Turka, A., et al. (2019) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa1817226 · Cited by 1,730
Self-citationLonial, S., Lee, H. C., Badros, A., Trudel, S., Nooka, A. K., Chari, A., Abdallah, A.-O., Callander, N., Lendvai, N., Sborov, D., et al. (2020) · The Lancet Oncology · doi:10.1016/s1470-2045(19)30788-0 · Cited by 812
Self-citationOral selinexor-dexamethasone for triple-class refractory multiple myeloma.
Chari, A., Vogl, D. T., Gavriatopoulou, M., Nooka, A. K., Yee, A. J., Huff, C. A., Moreau, P., Dingli, D., Cole, C., Lonial, S., et al. (2019) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa1903455 · Cited by 666
Self-citationOutcomes of patients with multiple myeloma refractory to CD38-targeted monoclonal antibody therapy.
Gandhi, U. H., Cornell, R. F., Lakshman, A., Gahvari, Z. J., McGehee, E., Jagosky, M. H., Gupta, R., Varnado, W., Fiala, M. A., Chhabra, S., et al. (2019) · Leukemia · doi:10.1038/s41375-019-0435-7 · Cited by 616
Friedman, K. M., Garrett, T. E., Evans, J. W., Horton, H. M., Latimer, H. J., Seidel, S. L., Horvath, C. J., & Morgan, R. A. (2018) · Human Gene Therapy · doi:10.1089/hum.2018.001 · Cited by 205
Treatment of relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma
Sonneveld, P., & Broijl, A. (2016) · Haematologica · doi:10.3324/haematol.2015.129189 · Cited by 181
CAR T-cell therapy in hematologic malignancies: a voyage in progress.
Holstein, S. A., & Lunning, M. A. (2020) · Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics · doi:10.1002/cpt.1674 · Cited by 172
Understanding the mechanisms of resistance to CAR T-cell therapy in malignancies.
Cheng, J., Zhao, L., Zhang, Y., Qin, Y., Guan, Y., Zhang, T., Liu, C., & Zhou, J. (2019) · Frontiers in Oncology · doi:10.3389/fonc.2019.01237 · Cited by 153
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 1,701–1,800 of 2,535
Challener, G. J., Wang, C., Gritsch, D., et al. (2025) · ACR Open Rheumatology · doi:10.1002/acr2.70112 · Cited by 2
“19 – 21 However, there is limited research on how CAR T cell therapy toxicity differs in those with autoimmune disease.”
Zadok, O. I. B., Simitsis, P., Jacobson, C. A., Nadeem, O., Frigault, M. J., Raje, N. S., Duffy, C., Costello, P., Cruz, J. D., Looka, A., et al. (2025) · British Journal of Haematology · doi:10.1111/bjh.70216 · Cited by 4
Self-citationLong-term follow-up of zevor-cel in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma
Fu, C., Chen, W., Cai, Z., et al. (2025) · Blood Advances · doi:10.1182/bloodadvances.2025017365 · Cited by 2
“10 Similarly, in the phase 1b/2 study involving cilta-cel, the enrolled patients were infused with 0.75 × 10 6 cells per kilogram, with 24% patients having a high cytogenetic risk, and 75% patients receiving bridging therapy.”
InfluentialImmunotherapy of chimeric antigen receptor NK cells: status and its promising future
Wang, F., Huang, Z., Feng, X., et al. (2025) · Frontiers in Immunology · doi:10.3389/fimmu.2025.1608277 · Cited by 2
Kilroe, K. M., Clarke, J. E., Ann, P., Salamon, N., & Acharya, J. (2025) · Frontiers in Neurology · doi:10.3389/fneur.2025.1704826 · Cited by 3
Adoptive T‐cell therapies in the clinic
Shaha, S., Lourenco, L., Zhao, Z., & Mitragotri, S. (2025) · Bioengineering & Translational Medicine · doi:10.1002/btm2.70086 · Cited by 2
“217 Beyond logistical challenges, the high financial burden of therapy significantly limits access to T cell treatments for a broader patient population.”
Córdoba-Espejo, L., Sánchez-Vega, L., García-Ortiz, A., Castellano, E., Oliva, R., Ortiz-Ruiz, A., Gil-Alós, D., del Moral, P. S., Fernández, A., Sanjurjo, D., et al. (2025) · Cytotherapy · doi:10.1016/j.jcyt.2025.07.009 · Cited by 3
Rizzello, I., Sacchetti, I., Barbato, S., Solli, V., Stefanoni, P., Cani, L., Quaresima, M., Belotti, A., Sgherza, N., Gentile, M., et al. (2025) · Clinical and Experimental Medicine · doi:10.1007/s10238-025-01956-w · Cited by 2
Self-citationUtilization of real-world evidence in regulatory approvals for multiple myeloma therapies
Taylor, L., Chen, A., & Pierre, A. E. (2025) · Blood Cancer Journal · doi:10.1038/s41408-025-01420-8 · Cited by 2
Afrough, A., Dima, D., Razzo, B. M., Goel, U., Sannareddy, A., Pasvolsky, O., Vazquez-Martinez, M. A., Ferreri, C. J., Banerjee, R., Khouri, J., et al. (2025) · Blood Cancer Journal · doi:10.1038/s41408-025-01414-6 · Cited by 6
Self-citationLi, F., Li, F., Xu, X., et al. (2025) · Frontiers in Oncology · doi:10.3389/fonc.2025.1647730 · Cited by 2
Fogel, L., Roney, P. C., Ahn, J., Aleman, A., Perez-Manon, F., Arias‐Orozco, N., Monteleone, G., Londono, K., Builes, K., Anand, P., et al. (2025) · Leukemia & lymphoma/Leukemia and lymphoma · doi:10.1080/10428194.2025.2592783 · Cited by 2
“Furthermore, challenges in administration of CAR-T therapy can occur due to long manufacturing time of the autologous CAR-T product, lack of patient access to specialized centers, and delays in insurance approval for therapy in the setting of rapidly relapsing myeloma [3,4].”
Self-citationZhang, Y., Lei, Y., Huang, Y., Gao, Y., Liu, R., Guo, K., Zhao, C., & Lei, M. (2025) · Molecular Biology Reports · doi:10.1007/s11033-025-11317-1 · Cited by 2
“The most common adverse events were cytokine release syndrome (CRS) and neurotoxicity, predominantly grade 1–2, which could generally be managed with standard interventions [43].”
Long-Term Follow-Up of Patients Receiving Cell and Gene Therapy Products
Irinyi, L., Mintzes, B. J., Warning, J., Collie, L., Rush, A., Turtle, C. J., & Byrne, J. A. (2025) · Human Gene Therapy · doi:10.1177/10430342251403439 · Cited by 3
On-target/off-tumor toxicities following infusion of low-affinity Nectin-4-specific CAR T cells
Ma, L., Wang, J., Li, J., et al. (2025) · Molecular Therapy · doi:10.1016/j.ymthe.2025.12.002 · Cited by 2
Grieb, N., Wiemers, T. C., Born, P., Fandrei, D., Fischer, L., Ferle, M., Franke, S., Keller, J., Wang, S. Y., Jentzsch, M., et al. (2025) · Transplantation and Cellular Therapy · doi:10.1016/j.jtct.2026.05.022 · Cited by 2
Thirugnanam, A., Donthineni, K., Mammi, M., Hundel, J., Munteh, D., D’Amore, F., Bunevičius, A., & Mekary, R. A. (2025) · Critical Reviews in Oncology/Hematology · doi:10.1016/j.critrevonc.2025.105095 · Cited by 2
Kaczmarek, S., Jo, D., Ghaziasgar, S., Marr, B., Berton, S., Wang, L., Ghahroudi, M. A., Jang, M., Visram, A., McComb, S., et al. (2025) · Cancer Letters · doi:10.1016/j.canlet.2025.218235 · Cited by 2
Mina, R., Antonioli, E., Barilà, G., Bolli, N., Botta, C., Furlan, A., Liberatore, C., Martello, M., Móre, S. M. C., Oliva, S., et al. (2025) · Clinical Lymphoma Myeloma & Leukemia · doi:10.1016/j.clml.2025.12.016 · Cited by 3
Martin, T. G., Mateos, M., Yi, J. H., van de Donk, N. W. C. J., Cai, Z., Fu, W., Garfall, A. L., Iida, S., Jung, S., Kuroda, Y., et al. (2026) · Cancer · doi:10.1002/cncr.70237 · Cited by 2
CAR T-cell therapy outcomes in plasma cell leukemia
Tan, M. S. Y., Cook, J., Gonsalves, W. I., et al. (2026) · Blood Immunology & Cellular Therapy · doi:10.1016/j.bict.2026.100033 · Cited by 2
Self-citationRytlewski, J. A., Hansen, D. K., Peres, L. C., Fuller, J., Mertz, D. R., Wu, F., Avila, G. D., Manier, S., Menges, M. A., Reid, K. M., et al. (2026) · Blood Immunology & Cellular Therapy · doi:10.1016/j.bict.2026.100036 · Cited by 2
Self-citationCasas, P. H. F. D. C. L., Marco, J., Lefkou, E., et al. (2026) · British Journal of Haematology · doi:10.1111/bjh.70356 · Cited by 2
“These trials included the pivotal KarMMa and CARTITUDE studies 5–8 in which adverse events were systematically captured and reported through formal trial databases and regulatory submissions.”
Targeted therapies in pediatric oncology: A start
Shah, N. (2026) · Molecular Therapy Oncology · doi:10.1016/j.omton.2026.201146 · Cited by 2
“147,148 Later trials elucidated other risks of CAR-T cells, including immune-effector-cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome (ICANS), an acute transient neurotoxicity, as well as the rare development of a chronic Parkinsonian-like sequela; these have been more commonly seen in adult patients…”
Self-citationLi, J., Liu, M., Peng, Y., & Wu, R. (2026) · Arthritis Research & Therapy · doi:10.1186/s13075-026-03764-3 · Cited by 2
“Several therapeutic agents are already in clinical development: TACI-Ig fusion proteins (e.g., atacicept, telitacicept) block both APRIL and BAFF [33], while BCMA-targeting CAR-T cells and bispecific antibodies have shown remarkable efficacy in multiple myeloma [34].”
Zhou, Z., Zhao, K., Xiao, X., Yang, W., Miao, Y., Wu, T., Kong, X., Tao, Y., Wang, W., & Dong, Z. (2026) · Critical Reviews in Oncology/Hematology · doi:10.1016/j.critrevonc.2026.105208 · Cited by 5
Lowy, J. A., Rogers, M. F., Avigan, Z. M., Flores, M. S., Samuel, M., Rattu, M. A., & Richter, J. (2026) · Expert Review of Hematology · doi:10.1080/17474086.2026.2634283 · Cited by 2
Borkowski, A., Giordano, U., Szlasa, W., et al. (2026) · Cancers · doi:10.3390/cancers18040686 · Cited by 2
“The development of BCMA-directed modalities has included the introduction of chimeric antigen receptor T-cell (CAR-T) therapies, which have demonstrated marked efficacy and are increasingly being incorporated into earlier lines of treatment for relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) [2,3].”
CAR T-cells in hematologic malignancies: Advances, challenges, and future directions
Hernández-Idarraga, K. J., Arias-Rozo, A. J., Arango-Rodríguez, M. L., Sossa, C., & Becerra‐Bayona, S. M. (2026) · iScience · doi:10.1016/j.isci.2026.115213 · Cited by 7
“4,16,17 Despite these successes, CAR T-cell therapy continues to face critical challenges, including variability in response durability, immune-related toxicities, manufacturing complexity, logistical delays, and high costs that limit equitable global access.”
InfluentialLan, F., Song, J., Chen, X., & (9093), Y. Z. (2026) · Molecular Immunology · doi:10.1016/j.molimm.2026.02.011 · Cited by 3
Chimeric antigen receptor therapy for hepatocellular carcinoma
Kocheise, L., Benmebarek, M.-R., Ho, M., & Greten, T. F. (2026) · Seminars in Immunology · doi:10.1016/j.smim.2025.102000 · Cited by 2
Shen, J., Peng, J. I. N., Liang, Y., Zhu, J., Xiang, R., Li, Z., Zhu, H., Li, X., Zhang, Y., Wang, W., et al. (2026) · Journal of Experimental & Clinical Cancer Research · doi:10.1186/s13046-026-03689-4 · Cited by 3
Yi, R., Zhang, Z., Yang, Y., & Zhu, H. (2026) · Cancer Innovation · doi:10.1002/cai2.70053 · Cited by 3
“Currently, the primary approved targets for CAR T‐cell therapy are B‐cell maturation antigen (BCMA) for multiple myeloma (MM) [5] and CD19 for various lymphoid malignancies, including B‐cell acute lymphoblastic leukaemia (B‐”
Soomro, M. A., Ahmed, M., Abdallah, A.-O. A., Ahmed, N., & Kort, J. (2026) · Clinical Lymphoma Myeloma & Leukemia · doi:10.1016/j.clml.2026.04.004 · Cited by 4
Zha, C., Yang, Z., Li, L., et al. (2026) · Clinical Therapeutics · doi:10.1016/j.clinthera.2026.03.014 · Cited by 2
Kumamoto, T., Yoshihara, K., Samori, M., et al. (2026) · eJHaem · doi:10.1002/jha2.70282 · Cited by 2
Hashmi, H., Sebastian, T., Rajeeve, S., Farzana, T., Firestone, R. S., Jurgens, E., Miller, K. C., Maura, F., Lesokhin, A., Tan, C., et al. (2026) · Blood Cancer Journal · doi:10.1038/s41408-026-01494-y · Cited by 4
Rasche, L., Krauth, M., Agis, H., Renner, C., Strassl, I., Teipel, R., Vučinić, V., Weisel, K., Willenbacher, W., & Raab, M. (2026) · Bone Marrow Transplantation · doi:10.1038/s41409-026-02905-1 · Cited by 2
Self-citationAdvanced strategies to enhance the safety, persistence, and efficacy of CAR-T cells in solid tumors
Ajmal, I., Du, B., Huang, N., Huang, Q., Jiang, D., Farooq, M. A., & Xu, G. (2026) · Frontiers in Immunology · doi:10.3389/fimmu.2026.1813730 · Cited by 2
Zhou, D., Qi, Y., Ma, S., Sun, Q., Gu, W., Xia, J., Zhang, X., Chen, W., Cheng, H., Qi, K., et al. (2026) · Blood · doi:10.1182/blood.2026033506 · Cited by 4
Sperling, A. S., Derman, B. A., Nikiforow, S., Alonso, A., Ikegawa, S., Orwitz, N., Quinn, D. S., Pearson, D. E., 部德秀, Milanez‐Almeida, P., et al. (2026) · Science Translational Medicine · doi:10.1126/scitranslmed.adx1799 · Cited by 4
Self-citationCAR-T cell therapy and its complications: Role of the pathologist in diagnosis
Sarami, I., & Medeiros, L. J. (2026) · Human Pathology · doi:10.1016/j.humpath.2026.106199 · Cited by 2
Bumma, N., Lee, H. C., Richter, J., Hoffman, J. E., Zonder, J., Fillbrunn, M., García-Horton, V., Zhou, Z.-Y., Xu, Y.-X., Burnett, H., et al. (2026) · Current Medical Research and Opinion · doi:10.1080/03007995.2026.2686032 · Cited by 2
“…in The analyses were based on a total of eight trials, including: LINKER-MM1 (linvoseltamab) 39 , MajesTEC-1 (teclistamab) 40 , MonumenTAL-1 (talquetamab) 41 , MagnetisMM-3 (elranatamab) 42 , CARTITUDE-1 (cilta-cel) 43 , KarMMa (ide-cel) 44 , KarMMa-2 (ide-cel) 45 , and KarMMa-3 (ide-cel) 46 .”
CAR T cell therapy beyond cancer: current status, challenges and future prospects
Upadhyay, S., Cho, S., Upmanyu, K., & Gabr, M. T. (2026) · Signal Transduction and Targeted Therapy · doi:10.1038/s41392-026-02873-4 · Cited by 5
“134,135 Because plasma cells sustain not only pathogenic antibodies but also vaccine-and infection-derived protective titers, BCMA-directed strategies require careful attention to immunoglobulin monitoring, infection prophylaxis, and the kinetics of immune reconstitution.”
ASTCT Consensus Grading for Toxicities after Immune Effector Cell Therapy.
Perales, M., Dietrich, J., Gust, J., Santomasso, B., Rejeski, K., Hansen, D. K., Shah, N. N., Berdeja, J. G., Bishop, M. R., Bleickardt, E., et al. (2026) · Transplantation and Cellular Therapy · doi:10.1016/j.jtct.2026.05.020 · Cited by 4
Self-citationClinical experience of CAR T cell therapy in lymphomas
Oluwole, O. O. (2021) · Best Practice & Research Clinical Haematology · doi:10.1016/j.beha.2021.101281 · Cited by 2
Chimeric Antigen Receptor-T Cell Therapy
Byun, J. M., & Yoon, S. (2022) · Korean Journal of Medicine · doi:10.3904/kjm.2022.97.4.229 · Cited by 2
“USFDA-approved CAR-T cells therapies [2-8]”
BackgroundCAR-T-Zell-Therapie – personalisierte zelluläre Immuntherapie im Jahr 2022
Niebling, J., Bethge, W. A., & Lengerke, C. (2022) · DMW - Deutsche Medizinische Wochenschrift · doi:10.1055/a-1932-8145 · Cited by 2
Prasongtanakij, S., Preedagasamzin, S., Jittorntrum, B., Anurathapan, U., Puavilai, T., Niparuck, P., Chantrathammachart, P., Piyajaroenkij, T., Uaesoontrachoon, K., Uchibori, R., et al. (2023) · European Journal Of Haematology · doi:10.1111/ejh.14007 · Cited by 3
γ-Secretase inhibitors plus anti-BCMA chimeric antigen receptor T cells
Mussetti, A., & Sureda, A. (2023) · The Lancet Oncology · doi:10.1016/s1470-2045(23)00283-8 · Cited by 2
Widening demographic gaps in CAR-T therapy utilization for multiple myeloma in the United States
Lin, M., Estrada‐Merly, N., Eapen, M., et al. (2023) · Bone Marrow Transplantation · doi:10.1038/s41409-023-02102-4 · Cited by 2
Self-citationChen, L., Ding, S., Cheng, Y., Zhou, L., Yan, J., Cheng, Q., Jin, A., Zhou, X., Huang, H., & Hu, Y. (2023) · European Journal Of Haematology · doi:10.1111/ejh.14099 · Cited by 2
Disparity in hematological malignancies: From patients to health care professionals
Chen, X., Shukla, M., & Fleur-Lominy, S. S. (2024) · Blood Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.blre.2024.101169 · Cited by 2
Yeşilaltay, A., Muz, D., Erdal, B., Bilgen, T., Batar, B., Turgut, B., Topçu, B., Yılmaz, B., & Avcı, B. A. (2024) · Pathogens · doi:10.3390/pathogens13010072 · Cited by 2
“…drugs such as lenalido-mide [5], proteasome inhibitors such as bortezomib [6], histone deacetylase inhibitors such as panobinostat [7], monoclonal antibodies such as daratumumab, isatuximab, and elotuzumab [8,9], and B-cell mature antigen-targeted chimeric antigen receptor T cells (CAR-Ts) [10].”
BackgroundYi, J. H., Park, S., Min, C., Eom, H., Byun, J. M., Koh, Y., Yoon, S., Lee, J. H., Jung, S., Lee, J., et al. (2024) · Annals of Hematology · doi:10.1007/s00277-024-05615-0 · Cited by 2
Ferreri, C. J. (2024) · Transplantation and Cellular Therapy · doi:10.1016/j.jtct.2024.01.058 · Cited by 2
Hämatologische Neoplasien und solide Tumore
Ludwig, W.-D., Ganser, A., & Maschmeyer, G. (2023) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-662-68371-2_5 · Cited by 2
de Moraes, F. C. A., Sano, V. K. T., Lôbo, A. D. O. M., Kelly, F. A., Morbach, V., Pasqualotto, E., & Burbano, R. M. R. (2024) · Journal of Personalized Medicine · doi:10.3390/jpm14040360 · Cited by 3
Essentials of CAR-T Therapy and Associated Microbial Challenges in Long Run Immunotherapy
Kalim, M., Jing, R., Li, X., Jiang, Z., Zheng, N., Wang, Z., Wei, G., & Lu, Y. (2024) · Journal of Cellular Immunology · doi:10.33696/immunology.6.189 · Cited by 2
“CRS and neurotoxicity were among the less common side events, with 5% and 3% of cases, respectively [125].”
From spear to trident: Upgrading arsenal of CAR-T cells in the treatment of multiple myeloma
Zhao, J., Zheng, M., Ma, L., Guan, T., & Su, L. (2024) · Heliyon · doi:10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e29997 · Cited by 2
Optimisation de l’efficacité et de la sécurité d’utilisation des lymphocytes CAR-T
Lew‐Derivry, L., Lamrani, L., Alcantara, M., & Alanio, C. (2024) · médecine/sciences · doi:10.1051/medsci/2024058 · Cited by 2
Schütt, J., Brinkert, K., Plis, A., Schenk, T., & Brioli, A. (2024) · Cancer Drug Resistance · doi:10.20517/cdr.2024.39 · Cited by 2
Patwardhan, P. P., Franz, J. K., Agha, M., et al. (2024) · American Journal of Clinical Pathology · doi:10.1093/ajcp/aqae083 · Cited by 2
Effectors of the Future: Universal Chimeric Antigen Receptor
Schlegel, L. S., & Schlegel, P. (2024) · Transfusion Medicine and Hemotherapy · doi:10.1159/000539609 · Cited by 2
Advances in Diagnosis and Treatment of AL Cardiac Amyloidosis
Sapru, A. B., Mohammadi, M., Medvedova, E., et al. (2024) · Current Treatment Options in Cardiovascular Medicine · doi:10.1007/s11936-024-01049-z · Cited by 2
The Power of Imaging Techniques in CAR-T Cell Therapy Enhancement: Revolutionizing Cancer Treatment
Karimi, H., Mohammadi, S., Jolfayi, A. G., Lavafian, A., Khalili, E., Khalaj, F., Khojasteh‐Kaffash, S., & Keshavarz, E. (2024) · Interdisciplinary cancer research · doi:10.1007/16833_2024_352 · Cited by 2
How can we improve the successful identification of patients suitable for CAR-T cell therapy?
Feng, Y.-Q., Wu, L., Gu, T., Hu, Y.-X., & Huang, H. (2024) · Expert Review of Molecular Diagnostics · doi:10.1080/14737159.2024.2399152 · Cited by 2
“Additionally, the efficacy and safety profiles of older patients (>70 years old) paralleled those of the entire cohort [11].”
Bangolo, A., Amoozgar, B., Zhang, L., Nagesh, V. K., Sekhon, I. S., Weissman, S. I., Vesole, D. H., Phull, P. M., Donato, M. L., Biran, N., et al. (2024) · Journal of Clinical Medicine · doi:10.3390/jcm13206207 · Cited by 2
“…(Ide-cel), have demonstrated impressive efficacy in targeting B cell maturation antigen (BCMA) on malignant plasma cells, leading to notable improvements in both overall response rates (ORRs) and progression-free survival (PFS) in patients who have undergone multiple prior lines of therapy [1,2].”
BackgroundResultInfluentialSelf-citationInfections during novel myeloma therapies
Liu, A. J., Slavin, M. A., Harrison, S. J., & Teh, B. W. (2024) · Leukemia & lymphoma/Leukemia and lymphoma · doi:10.1080/10428194.2024.2428819 · Cited by 2
Visualizing immunotherapy for multiple myeloma worldwide from 2013 to 2023: A bibliometric analysis
Li, J., Li, X., Fu, Y., Meng, H., Xu, D., & Hou, W. (2024) · Human Vaccines & Immunotherapeutics · doi:10.1080/21645515.2024.2433304 · Cited by 2
Cardiovascular Toxicity of CAR-T Cell Therapy: A Literature Review
Murtuzaliev, S. M., Salakheeva, E. Y., Kardovskaya, S. A., Kirichenko, Y. Y., Сидерко, Е. А., Belenkov, Y. N., & Ilgisonis, I. S. (2024) · Clinical oncohematology · doi:10.21320/2500-2139-2024-17-4-404-414 · Cited by 3
karamivandishi, A., Hatami, A., Eslami, M. M., Soleimani, M., & Izadi, N. (2024) · Human Immunology · doi:10.1016/j.humimm.2024.111207 · Cited by 3
Özen, O., & Özen, M. İ. (2025) · Turkish Journal of Ophthalmology · doi:10.4274/tjo.galenos.2024.77783 · Cited by 3
Hayashino, K., Kitamura, W., Fujii, N., et al. (2025) · Cytotherapy · doi:10.1016/j.jcyt.2024.12.014 · Cited by 2
Bürdek, M., Prinz, P. U., Mutze, K., et al. (2025) · Cancers · doi:10.3390/cancers17020242 · Cited by 2
Exploring CAR-PBMCs: A Novel Strategy Against EGFR-Positive Tumor Cells
Tîrziu, A., Gavriliuc, O. I., Bojin, F. M., & Păunescu, V. (2025) · Biomedicines · doi:10.3390/biomedicines13020264 · Cited by 2
“This method is currently used in clinical manufacturing (Kymriah [19], Breyanzi [20], Abecma [21], Carteyva [22], and Carvykti [23]) against CD19+/ BCMA+ hematologic malignancies (non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, relapsed or refractory B-cell lymphoblastic leukemia, or relapsed multiple myeloma).”
Chari, A., Bal, S., Ailawadhi, S., Krishnan, A. Y., Patel, K. K., Berdeja, J. G., Garfall, A. L., Callander, N. S., Banerjee, R., Alsina, M., et al. (2025) · Clinical Lymphoma Myeloma & Leukemia · doi:10.1016/j.clml.2025.03.008 · Cited by 2
Self-citationHolstein, S. A., Atrash, S., Mian, H. S., Dimopoulos, M. A., Schjesvold, F. H., Popat, R., Shah, N. N., Gatt, M. E., Gocke, C. B., Frenzel, L., et al. (2025) · Blood · doi:10.1182/blood.2024027873 · Cited by 3
Self-citationKong, L., Xu, K., & Chen, W. (2025) · Best Practice & Research Clinical Haematology · doi:10.1016/j.beha.2025.101632 · Cited by 3
Updates to Management of Multiple Myeloma
Callander, N. S., Mangan, P. A., & Kumar, S. K. (2025) · Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network · doi:10.6004/jnccn.2025.5008 · Cited by 2
Application Advances of Lentiviral Vectors: From Gene Therapy to Vaccine Development
Fang, E., He, G., Chang, Y., He, Q., Chen, P., & Hu, K. (2025) · Molecular Biotechnology · doi:10.1007/s12033-025-01472-y · Cited by 2
Yan, K., & Xiao, Z. (2025) · Cellular Immunology · doi:10.1016/j.cellimm.2025.105001 · Cited by 2
Sierro-Martínez, B., Guijarro-Albaladejo, B., Fernández-Cisnal, R., Rodríguez‐Gil, A., Hernández-Díaz, P., de la Rosa-Garrido, M., Carrasco-Brocal, I., Lara‐Chica, M., Gómez, V. E., Muñoz-García, R., et al. (2025) · Journal of Translational Medicine · doi:10.1186/s12967-025-06899-0 · Cited by 2
“Complete responses (CR) in R/R B-cell lymphoblastic leukemia (B-ALL) have reached 71–81% in multicenter trials [4, 5] and overall response rates (ORRs) of 73–98% have been reported in R/R multiple myeloma (MM) [6–10].”
A burden too high for CAR T cells in CLL
Kater, A. P., & Themeli, M. (2025) · Blood · doi:10.1182/blood.2025029368 · Cited by 2
Yang, B., Yang, S., Wang, C., & Yu, L. (2025) · Frontiers in Immunology · doi:10.3389/fimmu.2025.1663522 · Cited by 2
“BCMA-directed CAR-T therapy induces an ORR of 70% – 90% in RRMM (64), while the rate of sustained CR remains below 50% (65).”
Chalopin, T., Cellerin, E., Demarquette, H., Pieragostini, A., Sonntag, C., Jaquet, C., de Wyngaert, Z. V., Rumpler, A., Roussel, M., Labouré, G., et al. (2025) · Blood Cancer Journal · doi:10.1038/s41408-025-01365-y · Cited by 2
Current Role of CAR-T Therapy in Haematological Care
Jandová, M., Lánská, M., Šýkorová, A., Gregor, J., Rozsívalová, P., Beková, L., Ducháčová, Z. W., Radocha, J., Stacey, G., Měřička, P., et al. (2025) · Advances in experimental medicine and biology · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-97297-3_16 · Cited by 2
Precision medicine with car cells in acute myeloid leukemia: where are we?
Zanetti, L. C., Tomaz, V., de Souza, I. F., Campregher, P. V., Hamerschlak, N., & Kerbauy, L. N. (2025) · Frontiers in Immunology · doi:10.3389/fimmu.2025.1653350 · Cited by 2
“The success of CAR-T cell therapy has been exempli fi ed by FDA-approved treatments targeting CD19 and BCMA in B-cell malignancies (5 – 11).”
Yi, J. H., Yoon, D. H., & Kım, K. (2025) · Seminars in Hematology · doi:10.1053/j.seminhematol.2025.11.003 · Cited by 2
Treatment of multiple myeloma in 2021
Minařík, J. (2021) · Klinická farmakologie a farmacie · doi:10.36290/far.2021.020 · Cited by 2
Tai, W., Wahab, A., Franco, D., Shah, Z., Ashraf, A., Abid, Q., Mohammed, Y. N., Lal, D., & Anwer, F. (2022) · Antibodies · doi:10.3390/antib11020022 · Cited by 2
“The regimen included a lymphodepletion phase which included cyclophosphamide and fludarabine for three days; subsequently, ide-cel was given for two days [110].”
MethodLutz, R., Friedrich, M., Raab, M. S., Weinhold, N., & Goldschmidt, H. (2021) · Cancers · doi:10.3390/cancers13164135 · Cited by 1
“Grade 3/4 CRS was 5% and ICANS 3% [34].”
BackgroundSelf-citationMartino, M. V., Macheda, S., Aguglia, U., Arcudi, L., Pucci, G., Martino, B., Altomonte, M., Rossetti, A. M., Cusumano, G., Russo, L., et al. (2021) · Expert Opinion on Biological Therapy · doi:10.1080/14712598.2021.1974394 · Cited by 2
Maiolino, Â., Costa, L. J., Pasquini, M. C., Crusoé, E. D. Q., Vigorito, A. C., Salvino, M. A., Seguro, F. S., Filho, J. S., & Hungria, V. (2021) · Hematology Transfusion and Cell Therapy · doi:10.1016/j.htct.2021.09.004 · Cited by 2
“It is important to note that the results of the efficacy among patients aged ≥ 65 and ≥ 70 years were comparable, with no difference in the safety profile.(17)”
ResultPeaytt, R., Parsons, L. B., Siler, D., Matthews, R., Li, B., Bell, D., Bachier, C. R., Pantin, J. M., Berdeja, J. G., Flinn, I. W., et al. (2021) · Journal of Oncology Pharmacy Practice · doi:10.1177/10781552211052635 · Cited by 2
“>70% in several clinical trials for CAR-T for MM.(10,11)”
BackgroundSelf-citationPochon, C., Courbon, C., Bay, J., et al. (2021) · Bulletin du Cancer · doi:10.1016/j.bulcan.2021.10.004 · Cited by 2
Self-citationChabannon, C., Lemaitre, J., de Latour, R. P., Neven, B., Bay, J., Robin, M., Kuball, J. H. E., Terwel, S. R., Mohty, M., & Yakoub‐Agha, I. (2021) · Bulletin du Cancer · doi:10.1016/j.bulcan.2021.08.004 · Cited by 2
Self-citationShahryari, A., Nazari, Z., Jazi, M. S., Hashemi-Shahraki, F., Wißmiller, K., Xu, W., Burtscher, I., & Lickert, H. (2022) · Elsevier eBooks · doi:10.1016/b978-0-12-820472-6.00213-9 · Cited by 2
Jiang, M. H., Sun, W., Lu, D., He, J., Wang, J., Tan, S., & Gao, G. F. (2022) · Chinese Science Bulletin (Chinese Version) · doi:10.1360/tb-2022-0235 · Cited by 2
Golden, E., Ingram, S., Schade, H. H., Matous, J., & Gregory, T. K. (2022) · touchREVIEWS in Oncology & Haematology · doi:10.17925/ohr.2022.18.1.59 · Cited by 2
Metadata
- Authors
- Munshi, N. C., Anderson, L. D., Shah, N., Madduri, D., Berdeja, J., Lonial, S., Raje, N., Lin, Y., Siegel, D., Oriol, A., Moreau, P., Yakoub-Agha, I., Delforge, M., Cavo, M., Einsele, H., Goldschmidt, H., Weisel, K., Rambaldi, A., Reece, D., Petrocca, F., Massaro, M., Connarn, J. N., Kaiser, S., Patel, P., Huang, L., Campbell, T. B., Hege, K., & San-Miguel, J.
- Affiliations
- Harvard University (US)
- Mayo Clinic (US)
- Hackensack University Medical Center (US)
- From the Jerome Lipper Multiple Myeloma Center, Dana–Farber Cancer Institute (N.C.M.), the Veterans Affairs Boston Healthcare System, Harvard Medical School (N.C.M.), and Massachusetts General Hospital (N.R.), Boston, and bluebird bio, Cambridge (F.P., M.M.) — all in Massachusetts; Simmons Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas (L.D.A.); the University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco (N.S.); Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York ...
- ORCID
- Munshi, Nikhil C.
- Anderson, Larry D.
- Shah, Nina
- Madduri, Deepu
- Berdeja, Jesús
- Lonial, Sagar
- Raje, Noopur
- Lin, Yi
- Siegel, David
- Oriol, Albert
- Moreau, Philippe
- Yakoub-Agha, Ibrahim
- Delforge, Michel
- Einsele, Hermann
- Goldschmidt, Hartmut
- Weisel, Katja
- Rambaldi, Alessandro
- Reece, Donna
- Petrocca, Fabio
- Connarn, Jamie N.
- Kaiser, Shari
- Patel, Payal
- Huang, Liping
- Campbell, Timothy B.
- Hege, Kristen
- Venue
- New England Journal of Medicine
- Publisher
- Massachusetts Medical Society
- Published
- 2021-02-25
- Volume
- 384
- Issue
- 8
- Pages
- 705-716
- ISSN
- 0028-4793 (ISSN-L)
- 1533-4406
- OpenAlex
- W3133229959
- Semantic Scholar
- fd96e2f87dff7d1153a17b78b56fbbab69cb714e
- Cited by
- 2,560
- References
- 17
- Citations by year
- 2026: 411 · 2025: 486 · 2024: 540 · 2023: 493 · 2022: 436 · 2021: 186
- FWCI
- 150.68
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- New England Journal of Medicine (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- HAL (submittedVersion)
- Archivio istituzionale della ricerca (Alma Mater Studiorum Università di Bologna) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Lirias (KU Leuven) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- Bristol-Myers Squibb
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › CAR-T cell therapy research
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Hematology › Multiple Myeloma Research and Treatments
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Protein Degradation and Inhibitors
- Keywords
- idecabtagene vicleucel, CAR T-cell therapy, relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma, BCMA, minimal residual disease, cytokine release syndrome, neurotoxicity, CAR T cell persistence, progression-free survival, complete response, neutropenia, anemia, thrombocytopenia, chimeric antigen receptor T cells
- MeSH terms
- Receptors, Chimeric Antigen, Progression-Free Survival, Cytokine Release Syndrome, Adult, Aged, Female, Hematologic Diseases, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Multiple Myeloma, Recurrence, Biomarkers, Immunotherapy, Adoptive, Drug Resistance, Neoplasm
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-11, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-11 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
Cited sources are checked with a language model’s help (gpt-6-sol).
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
