Demonstrates the impact of dexamethasone on severe lymphocyte expansion and mortality risks in multiple myeloma patients, suggesting effective management strategies.
Increased absolute lymphocyte count (ALC) appears to be a predictor of risk for both treatment-related mortality and atypical neurologic events among patients receiving chimeric antigen receptor (CAR)-T cell therapies for relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma. In this study we analyzed clinical outcomes of patients treated with the CAR-T cell therapy ciltacabtagene autoleucel (cilta-cel) at the Colorado Blood Cancer Institute, from September 2023 to January 2025. Baseline demographics, disease characteristics, and clinical data were collected before and after CAR-T therapy. Patients were stratified into 2 groups: pre-intervention (patients treated September 2023-July 2024) and intervention (patients treated August 2024-January 2025; those with ALC >5000/μL received 3 days of dexamethasone prophylaxis on first identification of elevated ALC). In the pre-intervention group, 9/30 patients had peak ALC >5000/μL; 5/9 (55.6%) experienced atypical neurologic events and all 5 died (post-cilta-cel-related complications). In the intervention group, 7/23 patients had peak ALC >5000/μL and received dexamethasone; 1/7 had an atypical neurologic event; and there was 1 death (infectious complication, 9 months post-treatment). Dexamethasone prophylaxis in patients with ALC >5000/μL resulted in rapid ALC reduction. Overall survival (OS) was significantly lower in pre-intervention patients with ALC >5000/μL compared with intervention patients with ALC >5000/μL and patients with ALC ≤5000/μL (P=.0013). ALC >5000/μL (vs ALC ≤5000/μL) was significantly associated with atypical neurologic events (odds ratio 6.8, P=.0157) and lower OS (hazard ratio 6.2, P=.0106). In conclusion, ALC >5000/μL after cilta-cel treatment predicted severe early neurologic events and high mortality risk. Dexamethasone prophylaxis demonstrated promise for risk mitigation.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Forsberg et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: