MétaCan
Menu
← Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4417002069 · doi:10.1182/blood-2025-2730

Patient journey with axicabtagene ciloleucel for relapsed or refractory large B cell lymphoma in Canada: Manufacturing experience and impact of patient location to treatment centre

2025· article· en· W4417002069 sur OpenAlexaffabout
Sita Bhella, Isabelle Fleury, Christopher Lemieux, S. Li, Lieven Billen, David Myers, Iwona Grzegorczyk-Manuel, Bing Du, T. R. Shuler, Natasha Kekre

Notice bibliographique

RevueBlood · 2025
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueCAR-T cell therapy research
Établissements canadiensOttawa HospitalHôtel-Dieu de QuébecHôpital Maisonneuve-RosemontPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésChimeric antigen receptorReal world dataLymphomaCAR T-cell therapyFollicular lymphomaRituximabRefractory (planetary science)Apheresis

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Abstract Introduction: Axicabtagene ciloleucel (axi-cel) is an autologous anti-CD19 chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cell therapy approved for patients (pts) with relapsed/refractory large B-cell lymphoma (R/R LBCL), with curative potential demonstrated in this setting (Westin et al NEJM. 2023; Neelapu et al Blood 2023). Studies have shown that time to CAR T infusion may impact patient outcome (Locke et al Blood Adv 2025; Tan et al Eur J Haematol 2025). Timely CAR T treatment is dependent on a variety of factors, including manufacturing slot availability and turnaround time, as well as the coordination of healthcare teams at the treatment and referral centres. Given the vast geography of Canada, characterization of the patient journey to CAR T therapy starting from first CAR T eligibility (i.e. at relapse) is critical to identify non-clinical treatment barriers and optimize timely axi-cel infusion. Objective: To describe the 4-year real world experience of pts treated with axi-cel in Canada, including manufacturing experience and impact of patient location relative to treatment centre on time to axi-cel infusion. Methods: This is a retrospective review of adult pts with R/R LBCL registered on Kite Konnect® and apheresed for commercial axi-cel treatment between Nov 1, 2019- Nov 30, 2023 in Canada. Fresh apheresis material collected from pts at authorized treatment centres (ATCs) were shipped to Kite for manufacturing. Finished product lot remained at the manufacturing facility until Quality Assurance (QA) release as per Health Canada's Good Manufacturing Practice requirements and shipped to the ATC. Data is reported as 1) Full Analysis Set (FAS) and 2) ATC Analysis Set (ATC Data). FAS includes pts registered in Kite Konnect® and apheresed for axi-cel manufacturing. FAS analysis was conducted using data from Kite Konnect® for all ATCs in Canada. ATC Data includes pts in the FAS who were treated at 4 ATCs and includes data from patient charts on timelines from disease relapse, referral and consult, as well as referral centre information relative to the ATC. Referral centre information includes whether the patient was an in-province or out-of-province referral. In-province referrals were further defined as pts originating within the ATC, including those who may be co-managed by ATC and referring centre, compared to those referred to the ATC (e.g. not known to ATC). Results: A total of 506 pts were registered on Kite Konnect® website and provided apheresis material for axi-cel manufacturing (FAS), and the vast majority (n=500) of the pts were treated in third-line or later. A total of 87 pts (23.3%) were out-of-province referrals. Among all pts, the manufacturing success rate was 98.2%, with a 96.2% first-pass manufacturing success rate. Overall, 88.3% (N=447) were infused with axi-cel, and this infusion rate did not differ between out-of-province and in-province referrals, with rates of 88.9% and 88.2% respectively. The median turnaround time (Q1, Q3) from date of apheresis to QA release was 18 days (17, 19), with a range of 16-28. The median time from apheresis to infusion (Q1, Q3) was 33 days (29, 38), with a range of 25-292. Among the ATC data set (N=372), 77% (N=285) of pts were in-province referrals, and among these 59.3% (N=169) originated within the ATC. The median time from relapse to apheresis (Q1, Q3) was 34 days (20, 48). Pts who were out-of-province referrals had a significantly longer median time from relapse to apheresis of 44 days (32, 58), compared to 29 days (18, 43) for in-province referrals (p<0.001). Among in-province referrals, pts who originated within the ATC had a shorter median time from relapse to apheresis of 23 days (14, 39), compared to 37 days (24, 55) for pts referred to the ATC (p<0.001). The median time from apheresis to infusion was 33 days regardless of patient location. Conclusions: First 4 years of experience in manufacturing commercial axi-cel for pts treated in Canada shows high manufacturing success (98%), with rapid and reliable time from apheresis to product release of 18 days. Pts who were referred from out of province and those not known to ATC experienced longer time from relapse to apheresis compared to pts who originated at the ATC, while there was no difference in time from apheresis to infusion. Optimizing timely patient identification and referral, and developing additional CAR T treatment centres across the country may improve time to axi-cel infusion in Canada for these pts.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,073
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,171

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,002
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0010,004
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0020,001
Communication savante0,0020,000
Science ouverte0,0010,001
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0020,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,013
Tête enseignante GPT0,275
Écart entre enseignants0,262 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2025
Routes d'admission2
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueBlood→Même sujetCAR-T cell therapy research→Travaux en français237 207→