What question did this study set out to answer?

To compare the efficacy and safety profiles of ide-cel and cilta-cel in treating relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma.

December 8, 2025Blood

Therapeutic trade-offs between ide-cel and cilta-cel in RRMM: A meta-analytic comparison of efficacy and adverse events

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

Authors

Meta-analysis reveals efficacy differences and adverse events between ide-cel and cilta-cel in RRMM.

To compare the efficacy and safety profiles of ide-cel and cilta-cel in treating relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma.
Conducted a meta-analysis of 23 studies, including 20 with data on Ide-cel and Cilta-cel.
Extracted data on treatment response and adverse events related to each therapy.
Performed random-effects meta-analysis using inverse-variance weighting.
Cilta-cel had a significantly higher overall response rate compared to Ide-cel, with OR of 0.31 (95% CI: 0.11-0.87).
Cytokine release syndrome occurred more frequently with Ide-cel than with Cilta-cel.
Grade 3/4 thrombocytopenia was also significantly more frequent in Ide-cel patients.

Mazzoni et al. (2025) studied this question.

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark