ArticleWorld journal of experimental medicine2026
Real-world outcomes for multiple myeloma patients after apheresis for planned chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy.
Article in World journal of experimental medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
39 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundChimeric antigen receptor T-cell (CAR-T) therapy is highly active in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM), but manufacturing creates an obligatory waiting period between apheresis and infusion. Patients may deteriorate, progress or die during this window. Analyses that begin follow-up at infusion exclude these patients entirely and cannot describe the experience of all patients who enter the CAR-T pathway.
aimTo describe, in an intention-to-collect fashion, the outcomes of all RRMM patients who underwent T-cell apheresis for planned CAR-T therapy; to characterise the apheresis-to-infusion interval and the reasons for, and correlates of, failure to reach infusion; and to report progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) anchored at the date of apheresis. The study was descriptive; it was not designed to estimate the causal effect of CAR-T infusion on survival.
methodsRetrospective single-centre cohort of all RRMM patients undergoing T-cell apheresis for CAR-T at Hackensack University Medical Center between 1 January 2021 and 30 April 2024. PFS and OS were calculated from apheresis by the Kaplan-Meier method with Greenwood 95% confidence intervals (CIs) and numbers at risk. Groups were compared with the log-rank test; baseline characteristics with the Wilcoxon rank-sum and Fisher exact tests. Because infusion is a post-baseline, time-dependent event, the association between infusion and survival was additionally examined using a Mantel-Byar time-dependent Cox model and a 60-day landmark analysis. Correlates of non-infusion were examined by univariable logistic regression; multivariable modelling was not performed owing to the small number of events.
resultsOf 99 patients undergoing apheresis, 87 (87.9%, 95%CI: 79.8-93.6) were infused and 12 (12.1%, 95%CI: 6.4-20.2) were not. Median follow-up was 14.0 months [interquartile range (IQR): 8.2-20.7]. Median apheresis-to-infusion interval was 54 days (IQR 46-62; range 37-202;
conclusionIn this descriptive cohort, roughly one in eight patients who underwent apheresis never received CAR-T, and attrition clustered before the median time to infusion and among patients with extramedullary disease or plasma cell leukaemia. These data support shortening manufacturing turnaround, prioritising patients with aggressive phenotypes for expedited slots and intensified bridging, and reporting outcomes from apheresis using analytic methods that respect the time-dependent nature of infusion.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.