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 2,401–2,500 of 2,535
Blyzniuk, A., Chen, P., Chang, W.-C., Chen, H.-Y., Kao, L., Hsieh, T. Y.-J., Dai, M., Jhou, H., & Lee, C. (2026) · Diagnostics · doi:10.3390/diagnostics16121862
An, X., Wu, T., Gou, R., & Fang, Y. (2026) · Frontiers in Immunology · doi:10.3389/fimmu.2026.1835582
“For relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma, the KarMMa trial of idecabtagene vicleucel showed that patients ≥ 65 years had an ORR of 73% and CR of 33%, nearly identical to younger patients, with comparable 12-month progression-free survival (PFS) (164).”
Du, S., Peng, J., Zhang, T., et al. (2026) · Transplantation and Cellular Therapy · doi:10.1016/j.jtct.2026.06.022
Bispecific CAR T and CAR NK cells in dual-threat immunotherapy: opportunities and challenges
Baher, A. S., Khalid, A., Hakemi, A. G., Ganjalikhani-Hakemi, A., Soltani, M., Saltanatpour, Z., Zamyatnin, A. A., Parodi, A., & Ganjalıkhani-Hakemi, M. (2026) · Molecular Biology Reports · doi:10.1007/s11033-026-12144-8 · Cited by 1
“Beyond CD19, CAR-T therapies targeting BCMA have reshaped the treatment paradigm for multiple myeloma, yet similar challenges have emerged, including antigen downregulation, lineage plasticity, and cumulative toxicity after repeated lines of therapy [21, 80, 81].”
MRD in multiple myeloma: Moving from “minimal” to “measurable”
Cassano, R. C., Banerjee, R. K., Afrough, A., Portuguese, A. J., Thakur, R., Cicero, K. I., Kwok, M., Foster, L. H., Buda, G., Meletath, S. K., et al. (2026) · Blood Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.blre.2026.101413
Yanamandra, U., Ramachandran, R., Sakhuja, V., Nair, R. K., Jha, V., Kumar, S. K., Leung, N., & Malhotra, P. (2026) · Clinical Lymphoma Myeloma & Leukemia · doi:10.1016/j.clml.2026.06.006
del Fava, A. B. P., Lucas, L. C., Ferreira, G. V. D. S., et al. (2026) · RECIMA21 - Revista Científica Multidisciplinar · doi:10.47820/recima21.v7i7.8065
Pan, L., Xie, H., Ji, Y., Zhang, F., Tan, J. E., & Chen, Z. (2026) · European journal of medical research · doi:10.1186/s40001-026-04770-6
“Clinical data from patients receiving CAR-T-cell therapy reveal an over-all incidence of anaemia of approximately 70–81%, with the incidence of grade ≥ 3 anaemia reaching 60–68%, but most cases improve within 60 days, indicating the reversibility of toxicity [65–67].”
Clonal Hematopoiesis and CAR T Cell Therapy: From Biological Crosstalk to Clinical Implications
Du, W., Koga, S., Yang, G., Gill, S. I., & Bagg, A. (2026) · International Journal of Laboratory Hematology · doi:10.1111/ijlh.70181
Chimeric Antigen Receptor-T Cells Fate after Infusion: Cellular Kinetics and Molecular Monitoring
Anelli, L., Cumbo, C., Minervini, A., Zagaria, A., Coccaro, N., Tarantini, F., Tota, G., Conserva, M. R., Redavid, I., Minervini, C. F., et al. (2026) · Transplantation and Cellular Therapy · doi:10.1016/j.jtct.2026.06.041
Mina, R., Terpos, E., Cani, L., Nooka, A. K., Trudel, S., Voorhees, P., Mian, H. S., Dhakal, B., Usmani, S. Z., Richter, J., et al. (2026) · Clinical Lymphoma Myeloma & Leukemia · doi:10.1016/j.clml.2026.06.014
Self-citationWudhikarn, K., Gowda, L., Ye, Q., Oloyede, T., Martens, M., Banerjee, R. K., Devarakonda, S. S., Liu, H., Herr, M. M., Young, J. H., et al. (2026) · Transplantation and Cellular Therapy · doi:10.1016/j.jtct.2026.06.029
Multi-dimensional orchestration of binders for improved CAR-T immunotherapy
Zhu, C., Jiang, Z. H., Jing, R., Guo, W., & Lu, Y. (2026) · Cancer Letters · doi:10.1016/j.canlet.2026.218699 · Cited by 1
Chimeric antigen receptor‐macrophages: A new paradigm for cell therapy
Wang, H., Li, Y., Shi, Y., Zhou, Y., & Zheng, G. (2026) · Bioengineering & Translational Medicine · doi:10.1002/btm2.70157
Practical recommendations for infectious prophylaxis and vaccination in multiple myeloma patients
Bergantim, R., Roque, A. I., Jorge, A., Freitas, J. G., Miranda, M. T., Nunes, M., Ionita, A., Bernardo, P. V., Vieira, J., Aguiar, E. V., et al. (2026) · Frontiers in Medicine · doi:10.3389/fmed.2026.1847793 · Cited by 1
“(71, 72).”
She, H., Lin, J.-H., Zhou, D., Zhang, X.-T., Zheng, F., Feng, Q.-F., Xiao, L., Chen, W., Yan, Z.-L., & Pan, B. (2026) · Biochimica et Biophysica Acta - Molecular Basis of Disease · doi:10.1016/j.bbadis.2026.168342
CAR T-Cell Therapy for Cancer: Updates and Challenges for Response Assessment
de Jong, D., McGale, J., Robinson, T. J., Liao, M. J., Das, J. P., Major, A., Capaccione, K. M., Ladbury, C., Mansilla‐Soto, J., Ma, H., et al. (2026) · Journal of Nuclear Medicine · doi:10.2967/jnumed.123.266605
“…CAR T-cell products were initially approved on the basis of single-arm studies in heavily pretreated patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma, showing high rates of durable response and prolonged PFS when compared with standard-of-care therapies (e.g., chemotherapy) ( 5 , 18 ).”
Straßl, I., Nikoloudis, A., Rüsing, L. Z., Melchardt, T., Leisch, M., Schulz, E., Heine, A., Neumeister, P., Steiner, N., Wolf, D., et al. (2026) · Transplantation and Cellular Therapy · doi:10.1016/j.jtct.2026.06.048
Зуховицкая, Е. В., Пинчук, В. Ю., & Искров, И. А. (2026) · Гематология Трансфузиология Восточная Европа · doi:10.34883/pi.2026.12.2.012
Zhou, X., Chen, S., & Liang, J. (2026) · Discover Oncology · doi:10.1007/s12672-026-05523-x
“Adoptive engineered-cell therapies have transformed haematological oncology [1–3].”
Paiva, B., Manrique, I., Thompson, E. G., Campbell, T., Guerrero, C., Martin, N., Anderson, L. D., Berdeja, J. G., Lonial, S., Raje, N. S., et al. (2026) · HemaSphere · doi:10.1002/hem3.70423
Self-citationDual-modular-nanobody CAR-T cell technical platform against the solid tumor microenvironment
Li, Y., Wang, X., Zhang, S., Peng, T., Gong, Z., Jiang, H., Huang, X., Xie, S., Liu, H., Mo, F., et al. (2026) · Journal of Hematology & Oncology · doi:10.1186/s13045-026-01821-7 · Cited by 1
“T cells in hematological malignancies, their efficacy against solid tumors remains substantially limited [26].”
Unkenholz, C., Ortega-Vida, E., Monge, J., et al. (2026) · Blood Neoplasia · doi:10.1016/j.bneo.2026.100267
Cheng, Y., & Li, Y. (2026) · The Journal of Clinical Pharmacology · doi:10.1002/jcph.70232
Hansson, I., Bengtsson, M., Nyblom, S., et al. (2026) · BMC Palliative Care · doi:10.1186/s12904-026-02214-w
Ogura, K., Fujino, T., Nakamura, T., et al. (2026) · eJHaem · doi:10.1002/jha2.70348
Hollnberger, J., Richardson, T., Gödel, P., Leutiger, J., Schumacher, J. C., Schiestel, S., Allhoff, B., Scheid, C., Holtick, U., Neumann-Haefelin, C., et al. (2026) · British Journal of Haematology · doi:10.1111/bjh.70677 · Cited by 1
Chen, R., Zheng, H., Wang, W. L., Fu, S., Zhang, M., Feng, J., Chang, A. H., Ren, J., Pei, S., Huang, H., et al. (2026) · Blood Cancer Discovery · doi:10.1158/2643-3230.bcd-25-0489
Elranatamab: A novel B-cell maturation T-cell engager
Hossain, S., & Bianchi, G. (2026) · Human Vaccines & Immunotherapeutics · doi:10.1080/21645515.2026.2694852
“16 In comparison, teclistamab reports an CRS incidence of 72.1% with 0.6% having a grade 3 or higher event.”
InfluentialRewiring cellular immunotherapy: From CAR evolution to circuit innovations across diseases
Chen, J., Cui, Y., Du, K., Liu, J., Xie, J., Wang, S., & Yang, Z. (2026) · Biotechnology Advances · doi:10.1016/j.biotechadv.2026.108980
Martino, E. A., Vigna, E., Bruzzese, A., Amodio, N., Caserta, S., Lucia, E., D'Arrigo, G., Olivito, V., Labanca, C., Mendicino, F., et al. (2026) · European Journal Of Haematology · doi:10.1111/ejh.70263
Merz, M., & Goldschmidt, H. (2026) · Springer Reference Medizin · doi:10.1007/978-3-642-54676-1_471-2
Self-citationCAR-T Cell Therapy: Manufacturing Platforms and Clinical Consequences
Bach, D., & Nguyen, T. U. O. N. G. (2026) · Human Gene Therapy · doi:10.1177/10430342261467645
Potential of new BCMA-targeting therapies in overcoming resistance in multiple myeloma
Sra, M. S., & Kumar, S. (2026) · Expert Opinion on Biological Therapy · doi:10.1080/14712598.2026.2703858
“Currently, two BCMA-directed CAR-T products are approved for multiple myeloma, and several allogeneic and next-generation constructs are in advanced clinical development. basis of the KarMMa-1 trial [8].”
InfluentialTERAPIA CAR-T EM NEOPLASIAS HEMATOLÓGICAS: AVANÇOS, TOXICIDADES E PERSPECTIVAS FUTURAS
de Aquino, P. E. A., Cândido, T. M., de Alencar, M. F., et al. (2026) · LUMEN ET VIRTUS · doi:10.56238/levv17n62-020
Rethinking On‐Target Off‐Tumor Toxicity as a Hematopoietic Continuum
Morabito, F., Martino, E. A., Bruzzese, A., et al. (2026) · European Journal Of Haematology · doi:10.1111/ejh.70266
Integrated Engineering of CAR ‐T Cells for Solid Tumours
Yang, C., Li, T., He, P., Zhao, Z., Li, S., & Wang, L. (2026) · Cell Proliferation · doi:10.1111/cpr.70263 · Cited by 1
Brusa, S., D’Angelo, D., D’Ambrosio, G., et al. (2026) · Diagnostic Microbiology and Infectious Disease · doi:10.1016/j.diagmicrobio.2026.117560
Goel, U., Dragomirescu, C., Chedid, R., et al. (2026) · Blood Cancer Journal · doi:10.1038/s41408-026-01582-z
Resistance to CAR-based cell therapy: Mechanisms and overcoming strategies
Sha, S., Pang, X.-Y., Wang, N., Wang, Y., Zhang, C., Guo, Z., Du, Z., Li, L., Liu, N., & Qu, L. (2026) · Drug Resistance Updates · doi:10.1016/j.drup.2026.101452
Alqazaqi, R., Taasan, S. M., Schwartzman, W. S., Khan, A. M., Afrough, A., Zahid, M. F., Schinke, C., van Rhee, F., Anderson, L. D., Sanchorawala, V., et al. (2026) · Blood Advances · doi:10.1182/bloodadvances.2026020740
Self-citationHSCT and CAR-T: a power couple—but who serves whom?
Yao, S., Zhang, R., Mo, W., Liu, Z., Zhang, H., & Su, N. (2026) · Frontiers in Immunology · doi:10.3389/fimmu.2026.1898336
Jazieh, H., Almashayekh, A., Henson, J. C., et al. (2026) · Transplantation and Cellular Therapy · doi:10.1016/j.jtct.2026.07.019
Nishihara, H., Jinnouchi, F., Ishihara, D., et al. (2026) · International Journal of Hematology · doi:10.1007/s12185-026-04257-4
Mechanisms, optimization strategies, and salvage options for CAR-T cell therapy
Wu, B., Wang, J., Zou, Q., Cai, J., Zhang, Y., Zhong, Q., Bai, B., Liu, F., Cao, Y., Li, P., et al. (2026) · Biomarker Research · doi:10.1186/s40364-026-00974-4
Beyond exhaustion: T cell fitness for next generation of immunotherapy for hematological cancer
Kong, X., Su, Y., Zheng, H., Feng, Z., Huang, J., Zhang, L., & Li, L. (2026) · Frontiers in Immunology · doi:10.3389/fimmu.2026.1895434
When Myeloma Escapes the Bone Marrow: Extramedullary Disease in the Immunotherapy Era
Afrough, A., Dillard, C. M., Alsup, A., Lee, J. H., Hadidi, S. A., Sannareddy, A., Abraham, P. R., Turer, L., Dima, D., Khan, A. M., et al. (2026) · Cancers · doi:10.3390/cancers18152415
“The response rates in this subgroup remained robust, with an ORR of 70% in comparison to 73% in all patients [90].”
Self-citationWagner, W., Twardy, P., Białożyt, J., et al. (2026) · International Journal of Innovative Technologies in Social Science · doi:10.31435/ijitss.2(50).2026.5565
Kanjani, V. G., Bharadia, A. A., & Morakhia, K. R. (2026) · Regenerative medicine reports . · doi:10.4103/regenmed.regenmed-d-26-00003
De-escalation trials in multiple myeloma: past, present and future
Mian, H. S., Costa, L. J., Mohty, M., Garfall, A. L., & Rajkumar, S. V. (2026) · Nature Reviews Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1038/s41571-026-01186-3
“…CAR T cell products are currently approved for the treatment of RRMM. Idecabtagene vicleucel (ide-cel), the first to receive regulatory approval, demonstrated efficacy in the pivotal phase II KarMMa trial 44 , which reported best overall and complete response rates of 73% and 33%, respectively.”
Lim, J. U., Tao, D. L., Selvadurai, P. N., et al. (2026) · Frontiers in Immunology · doi:10.3389/fimmu.2026.1848516
Jurgens, E. M., Mitra, S., Herrera, K., Nemirovsky, D., Bready, B., Derkach, A., Hosszu, K., McAvoy, D. P., Firestone, R., Rajeeve, S., et al. (2026) · Science Translational Medicine · doi:10.1126/scitranslmed.aed0039 · Cited by 2
A distinct CAR-T cell phenotype mediates therapeutic response at limited doses
Yousefian, S., Schubert, M., Minafra, A. R., Derigs, P., Gräßle, S., Horne, A., Demel, U. M., Liebaert, J., Röthemeier, C., Pupp, F., et al. (2026) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/s41467-026-76068-4
Engineering Soluble Recombinant BCMA for Ide‐Cel Labeling
Nguyen, L. P. V., Oblet, C., Barbarin, A., et al. (2026) · European Journal of Immunology · doi:10.1002/eji.70251
Cis-targeted IL-2 Mutein to Augment the Antitumor Activity of Engineered T Cells
Sleiman, S., Mathewson, N. D., Hansen, T., Bessette, P., Kimberlin, C., Shen, F., Shestova, O. E., Shestov, M., Kozlowski, M. S., Jarocha, D. J., et al. (2026) · Transplantation and Cellular Therapy · doi:10.1016/j.jtct.2026.07.032
A groundbreaking development in cancer treatment: Chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy
Thoker, Z. A., Marwaha, L., & Prakash, A. (2026) · Elsevier eBooks · doi:10.1016/b978-0-443-27731-3.00001-2
Cascading attrition of in vivo CAR-T therapy: From systemic delivery failure to functional collapse
Rao, H., Xu, S., Chen, J., & Guo, Z. (2026) · Critical Reviews in Oncology/Hematology · doi:10.1016/j.critrevonc.2026.105521
LeRoy, E., Kim, J., Ruland, H., Schanzer, N., Sakharkar, A., Innes, L., Feinstein, Z., Zuniga, D., Chen, R., Arikatla, M. R., et al. (2026) · Communications Biology · doi:10.1038/s42003-026-10550-z
Sporn, K., Kumar, R., & Caplan, R. M. (2026) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-032-26761-0_40
Mersin, S., & Sevindik, Ö. G. (2026) · Annals of Hematology · doi:10.1007/s00277-026-07226-3
“Compared with BCMA-targeted CAR-T cell therapies, which have demonstrated high efficacy but remain limited by manufacturing time, cost, and the need for bridging therapy, bispecific antibodies offer an off-the-shelf alternative that allows rapid initiation and flexible dosing [ 14 ].”
Targeting Adaptive and Innate Immune Responses with Covalent Aptamers
Albright, S., Parikh, A. B., Cacace, M., et al. (2026) · Journal of the American Chemical Society · doi:10.1021/jacs.6c10475
Xu, P., Yu, W.-J., Wu, S., et al. (2026) · Biomarker Research · doi:10.1186/s40364-026-00980-6
“In recent years, chimeric antigen receptor T-cell (CAR-T) therapy has shown remarkable efficacy in relapsed/refractory MM (RRMM), substantially reshaping the therapeutic landscape [6–8].”
Self-citationShambhavi, S., Singh, H., Amonica, T., Grover, A., Singh, T., Paul, S., Paul, S. S., & Pompa, T. A. (2026) · International Journal of Molecular Sciences · doi:10.3390/ijms27167179
“In extended CARTITUDE-1 follow-up, Cilta-cel showed longer survival (median OS 60.7 months at ~5-year follow-up in treated patients) [5,6].”
InfluentialAnwer, M. (2026) · International Immunopharmacology · doi:10.1016/j.intimp.2026.117271
Zolotov, E., Mody, R., Doucette, K., et al. (2026) · Current Oncology · doi:10.3390/curroncol33080475
“However, patients with ESRD requiring HD were systematically excluded from these studies: KarMMa and KarMMa-3 mandated creatinine clearance (CrCl) ≥ 45 mL/min, and CARTITUDE-4 required CrCl ≥ 40 mL/min [7–10].”
InfluentialSelf-citation2026 Myeloma Treatment Guidelines of the Turkish Myeloma Study Group
Beksaç, M., Mastanzade, M. G., Değirmenci, B. B., Oluk, B., Sağlam, B., Özlük, D. Ö., Cengiz, E., Alhan, F. N., Dikici, H. Z., Uygun, K. Y., et al. (2026) · Clinical Lymphoma Myeloma & Leukemia · doi:10.1016/j.clml.2026.08.008
Vairamoorthy, N., Kazi, B. S., Patil, V., et al. (2026) · EMJ Hematology · doi:10.33590/emjhematol/z2uy6bh6
Zhan, Y., Hu, C., & Xiao, K. (2026) · Frontiers in Immunology · doi:10.3389/fimmu.2026.1913968
Tedeschi, A., Pasini, N., Talassi, M., et al. (2026) · Journal of Clinical Medicine · doi:10.3390/jcm15166371
“Comparable findings emerged from the Phase 2 KarMMa study evaluating idecabtagene vicleucel in relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma [37].”
CAR-T CELL THERAPY IN ONCOLOGY AND RHEUMATOLOGY
Tyczka, K., Szczepanik, M., Nowakowska, M. K., Senko, J., Kulpa, J., & Suchanek, Z. (2026) · International Journal of Innovative Technologies in Social Science · doi:10.31435/ijitss.3(51).2026.6385
Li, S., Huang, J., Fang, R., Zhang, M., Jin, Y., Zhu, Y., & Ma, C. (2026) · Seminars in Oncology · doi:10.1016/j.seminoncol.2026.152541
Venglár, O., Radova, E., Warmuzová, M., Bilek, D., Kudelkova, M., Jasinkova, K., Muroňová, L., Broskevičová, L., Kapustová, V., Vrána, J., et al. (2026) · HemaSphere · doi:10.1002/hem3.70455
Multiple Myeloma: 2026 Update on Diagnosis, Risk‐Stratification and Management
Rajkumar, S. V. (2026) · American Journal of Hematology · doi:10.1002/ajh.70475 · Cited by 3
Shani, U., Ungar, B., Muchtar, E., et al. (2026) · Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology · doi:10.1016/j.cgh.2026.07.040
Global trends in CAR-T cell therapy for multiple myeloma: A bibliometric analysis, 2013–2025
Zhang, T., Wang, S., Li, X., Li, X., & Wu, Y. (2026) · Human Vaccines & Immunotherapeutics · doi:10.1080/21645515.2026.2711554
“The second cluster (green) focuses on the principal themes related to the clinical application of CAR-T cells in MM.”
InfluentialAlvaro, M. E., Martino, E. A., Caserta, S., Bruzzese, A., Amodio, N., Lucia, E., Olivito, V., Labanca, C., Mendicino, F., Morabito, F., et al. (2026) · Frontiers in Immunology · doi:10.3389/fimmu.2026.1934257
“Idecabtagene vicleucel produced durable responses in the KarMMa study, including high rates of MRD negativity among patients achieving complete response or better (45).”
Drug Resistance in Multiple Myeloma: Tumor‐Intrinsic Mechanisms and the Bone Marrow Microenvironment
Chen, Y., Huang, W., Tang, M., & Wang, X. (2026) · Cell Biochemistry and Function · doi:10.1002/cbf.70286
Niiyama‐Uchibori, Y., Tsukamoto, T., Inoue, Y., Chinen, S., Nakamura, T., Nagata, H., Okamoto, H., Fujino, T., Mizutani, S., Shimura, Y., et al. (2026) · British Journal of Haematology · doi:10.1111/bjh.70787
Optimal CAR-T cell therapy options for patients with multiple myeloma
Deng, S., Xu, Y., Zou, D., et al. (2026) · Chinese Medical Journal · doi:10.1097/cm9.0000000000004274
Bispecific Antibodies and T‐Cell Engagers in Multiple Myeloma
Bhatt, M., Rajkumar, S. V., & Kumar, S. K. (2026) · European Journal Of Haematology · doi:10.1111/ejh.70301
Hung, Y.-C., Cho, S., Chen, Y.-Y., Hsu, Y., Huang, S., Wei, C., Tsai, C., Huang, W., & Liu, C. (2026) · Journal of the Formosan Medical Association · doi:10.1016/j.jfma.2026.08.029
Straßl, I., Nikoloudis, A., Rüsing, L. Z., et al. (2026) · British Journal of Haematology · doi:10.1111/bjh.70773
Real World Data and Its Impact on the Management of Plasma Cell Dyscrasias
Subramanian, N. G., & Rubinstein, S. M. (2026) · Current Hematologic Malignancy Reports · doi:10.1007/s11899-026-00787-0
Ussowicz, M., Jakubczyk, E., Wróbel, T., et al. (2026) · Frontiers in Immunology · doi:10.3389/fimmu.2026.1884854
Artzenroth, J., Kosch, R., Al-Bazaz, M., Bartke, L., Cords, L., Güsmer, C., Harzer, M., Heinrich, F., Kamili, A., Leypoldt, L., et al. (2026) · Transplantation and Cellular Therapy · doi:10.1016/j.jtct.2026.08.044
Self-citationGundroo, H. M., Nasrollahi, E., Alford, B., et al. (2026) · British Journal of Haematology · doi:10.1111/bjh.70804
Five-year durability in cell and gene therapy: evidence review and implications for payer coverage
Pittos, E. C., & DePinto, J. (2026) · Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research · doi:10.1080/14737167.2026.2723931
A single-cell atlas of multiple myeloma defines malignant archetypes and proliferative states
Zada, M., Kurilovich, A., Shapira, N., Wang, S.-Y., Sharet-Eshed, R., Kfir‐Erenfeld, S., Schlossberg, M., Zorde, E., Asherie, N., Gur, C., et al. (2026) · Nature Genetics · doi:10.1038/s41588-026-02725-5
Oyewole, S. O., Butler, E., Goyal, S. D., et al. (2026) · Dentistry Journal · doi:10.3390/dj14090549
Multiples Myelom: Modernes Verständnis von Heilung geht über MRD-Negativität hinaus
Weinhold, N., Raab, M., Kortüm, M. K., Mai, E., Goldschmidt, H., Einsele, H., & Rasche, L. (2026) · Deutsches Ärzteblatt Online · doi:10.3238/personko.2026.09.04.01
Self-citationTheprungsirikul, P. P., Wang, R., Chang, S., Bar, N., Browning, S. L., Parker, T. L., Wang, S., & Neparidze, N. (2026) · European Journal Of Haematology · doi:10.1111/ejh.70304
Su, S., Yan, S., Wu, J., & Xiao, Y. (2026) · Stem Cell Reviews and Reports · doi:10.1007/s12015-026-11228-z
Singh, L., Singh, N., Arya, R. K., Kiran, P., Sohail, M., Verma, P., & Arya, M. K. (2026) · Asian Journal of Oncology · doi:10.25259/asjo_30_2026
Itez, G. G., & Sunguroğlu, A. (2026) · Therapeutic Advances in Hematology · doi:10.1177/20406207261484713
“80,81 Consequently, KarMMa-1 reported a median progression-free survival (PFS) of 8.8 months and a median overall survival (OS) of 19.4 months values substantially lower than those achieved by later dual-epitope designs.”
InfluentialWang, K., Zhao, C., Shi, J., et al. (2026) · Cancer Science · doi:10.1111/cas.70523
Yuasa, A., Nagano, M., Kamei, Y., Hatsuyama, K., Matsuda, H., Hlavacek, P. R., DiBonaventura, M., & Suzuki, K. (2026) · Journal of Medical Economics · doi:10.1080/13696998.2026.2730069
A 3D engineered multiple myeloma niche for evaluating CAR T cell therapy
Jordana-Urriza, L., Muraro, M. G., Du, M., Lambrecht, V., Rodríguez-Madoz, J. R., Martín, I., & García‐García, A. (2026) · Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology · doi:10.3389/fbioe.2026.1860416
“Nevertheless, almost every patient eventually relapses in the long term (Berdeja et al., 2021; Munshi et al., 2021; Rodriguez-Otero et al., 2023; San-Miguel et al., 2023).”
CRS and ICANS: Early detection and personalized management
Kim, J. (2026) · Blood Research · doi:10.1007/s44313-026-00167-w
Dampmann, M., Flossdorf, S., Keyl, J., Leitner, T., Khandanpour, C., Maulhardt, M., Shumilov, E., Stelljes, M., Leypoldt, L. B., Harzer, M., et al. (2026) · European Journal Of Haematology · doi:10.1111/ejh.70319
Martínez, S., Gómez, C., & Navarro, L. (2024) · Archive of International Journal of Cancer and Allied Science · doi:10.51847/njbb2s214l
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
