Mode
Text Size
Log in / Sign up

Axicabtagene ciloleucel shows higher early response but greater toxicity than tisagenlecleucel in large B-cell lymphomaComparison of two CAR-T cell therapies for lymphoma

AI-generated summary of the cited source, checked by automated accuracy review. How we work

Key Takeaway
Note that axicabtagene ciloleucel offers higher early response rates but involves greater risks of CRS and ICANS.

The researchers conducted a meta-analysis comparing two CAR-T cell therapies, axicabtagene ciloleucel and tisagenlecleucel, in patients with large B-cell lymphoma. The primary focus was on early response rates, progression-free survival, and safety profiles including cytokine release syndrome (CRS) and immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome (ICANS).

The findings indicated that axicabtagene ciloleucel was associated with significantly higher rates of both overall response and complete response at the three-month mark compared to tisagenlecleucel. However, the authors observed lower progression-free survival for the axicabtagene ciloleucel group at twelve months. Regarding safety, axicabtagene ciloleucel was associated with significantly higher rates of all-grade CRS and ICANS, as well as more frequent tocilizumab use.

The authors noted that a primary limitation of the study is the need for longer follow-up periods to accurately evaluate long-term outcomes. Clinicians should consider these findings when selecting a CAR-T regimen, noting that axicabtagene ciloleucel may offer faster initial responses but carries a higher risk of acute toxicity and increased healthcare resource utilization.

For people living with large B-cell lymphoma, choosing the right treatment is a critical decision. Recent research has looked closely at two specific types of CAR-T cell therapies: axicabtagene ciloleucel (Axi-cel) and tisagenlecleucel (Tisa-cel). Because these treatments are complex and have different side effect profiles, understanding how they compare can help patients and their families have more informed conversations with their medical teams.

To understand the differences, researchers conducted a large-scale analysis involving over 2,000 patients across Europe. They compared how both therapies performed in terms of early treatment success and the types of risks patients faced during the initial stages of therapy. This type of comparison is vital because while both treatments are designed to fight cancer, they do not behave identically in every patient.

The findings showed a complex picture of trade-offs between speed and safety. Patients receiving axicabtagene ciloleucel saw significantly higher rates of overall response and complete response within the first three months compared to those on tisagenlecleucel. However, when looking at the 12-month mark, patients on tisagenlecleucel actually showed better progression-free survival. This suggests that while one treatment might show a faster initial response, the other may offer different benefits over a longer period.

Safety was another major area of difference. The study found that axicabtagene ciloleucel was associated with significantly higher rates of cytokine release syndrome (CRS) and neurotoxicity (ICANS). These are serious conditions where the body's immune system reacts strongly to the treatment. Because of these higher risks, patients on axicabtagene ciloleucel also required more frequent use of certain medications to manage these reactions and utilized more healthcare resources.

It is important to remember that this study is a meta-analysis, which means it combines data from many different groups of people. While the results are helpful for understanding general trends, they cannot predict exactly how an individual patient will react to a specific drug. Because the study also noted a need for longer follow-up times to see long-term outcomes, these findings represent a snapshot of early and intermediate progress. For patients today, this means that there is no one-size-fits-all answer. The choice between these two therapies depends on an individual's specific health needs, their tolerance for certain side effects, and the goals of their treatment plan. Patients should discuss these specific findings with their doctors to decide which path best fits their personal situation.

What this means for you:
Axicabtagene ciloleucel shows faster early responses but carries higher risks of severe side effects than tisagenlecleucel.

Study Details

Study typeMeta analysis
Sample sizen = 2,178
EvidenceLevel 1
Follow-up120.0 mo
PublishedJan 2026
View Original Abstract ↓
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Large B-cell lymphoma (LBCL) is a common and aggressive non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) characterized by abnormal proliferation of mature B lymphocytes, with a 10-year prevalence of up to 45 cases per 100,000 individuals in European populations and a continuing upward trend. Axicabtagene ciloleucel (Axi-cel) and Tisagenlecleucel (Tisa-cel) are the two most established chimeric antigen receptor T-cell (CAR-T) therapy products for LBCL, yet a systematic comparison of their efficacy and safety in European populations has been lacking. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to address this gap by comprehensively evaluating differences in treatment efficacy and adverse events between Axi-cel and Tisa-cel in European patients with LBCL. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We searched PubMed, Cochrane Library, Scopus, and other databases for studies published between January 2020 and February 2026, ultimately including eight European cohort studies with a total of 2,178 patients. Efficacy and survival outcomes comprised 3-month overall response (OR), 3-month complete response (CR), 12-month progression-free survival (PFS), and 12-month overall survival (OS). Toxicity outcomes included 12-month non-relapse mortality (NRM), all-grade and grade ≥ 3 cytokine release syndrome (CRS), all-grade and grade ≥ 3 immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome (ICANS), all-grade and grade ≥ 3 neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, and anemia, as well as tocilizumab use and ICU support. A random-effects model was used for pooled analysis, with sensitivity analyses performed for outcomes exhibiting substantial heterogeneity. RESULTS: Regarding efficacy, Axi-cel was associated with significantly higher 3-month OR and 3-month CR rates compared with Tisa-cel, whereas 12-month PFS was lower in the Axi-cel group. In terms of toxicity, the incidences of all-grade CRS, all-grade ICANS, and grade ≥ 3 ICANS were significantly higher with Axi-cel, and tocilizumab use was more frequent. No statistically significant differences were observed for the remaining outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: In European patients with LBCL, Axi-cel demonstrated superior short-term efficacy compared with Tisa-cel, but showed inferior performance on certain intermediate-term efficacy endpoints and was generally associated with greater toxicity and higher healthcare resource utilization. Clinical selection of a CAR-T regimen should be individualized, with careful consideration of efficacy, toxicity, and cost. Future high-quality studies with longer follow-up are needed to evaluate long-term outcomes and to validate the findings of this analysis.
Free Newsletter

Clinical research that matters. Delivered to your inbox.

Join thousands of clinicians and researchers. No spam, unsubscribe anytime.