TALOs, Fill the Gap: Tafasitamab and Lenalidomide in Diffuse Large B‐Cell Lymphoma in the Real‐Life Patient Journey
Rattachement africain : it, us. Niveau de preuve : code pays fourni par la source.
Le résumé fourni par la source
The combination of tafasitamab and lenalidomide (tafa-lena) has demonstrated efficacy in relapsed/refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (R/R DLBCL), as evidenced by the L-MIND study. To investigate the therapeutic potential and safety profile of tafa-lena in real-life, we conducted a national multicentric retrospective study. Eighty-three patients with median age of 74 years were enrolled. The 49.4% of patients had a disease refractory to the first line therapy while 63.9% were refractory to the most recent one. The best overall response rate was 47% (28.9% complete remission). With a median follow-up of 16 months, the median overall survival (OS) was 8.6 months and the median progression-free survival (PFS) was 4.5 months. Disease-free survival and median duration of response were reached at 52.8 and at 52.1 months, respectively. Compared to refractory disease (N = 53, 63.9%), relapsed disease (N = 26, 31.3%) was associated with better outcome in term of PFS (median 2.8 vs. 12.4 months) and OS (median 5.4 months vs. not reached). Neutropenia (52.5%) was the most common adverse events, predominantly related to lenalidomide. Our findings align with other real-world studies, supporting the regimen as effective and safe, and highlighting that one third of patients experiencing long-lasting responses even with dose reduction.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Le contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- TALOs, Fill the Gap: Tafasitamab and Lenalidomide in Diffuse Large B‐Cell Lymphoma in the Real‐Life Patient Journey
- Date Crossref
- 01/01/2026
- Éditeur
- Wiley
- Type
- journal-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude, et il ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Les institutions déclarées
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.