Transition Into Clinical Routine and Survival Outcomes of BCL2 ‐ and BTK Inhibitors: An Analysis of Patient Data From the GCLLSG Registry
Résumé fourni par la source
Within a dataset of the German CLL Study Group (GCLLSG) registry, 274 patients were allocated to a cohort with venetoclax and 888 to a cohort with BTKi (79 acalabrutinib, 809 ibrutinib), each as first administered targeted substance class within the documented treatment sequence. Venetoclax was administered as first-line treatment in 152 of 274 patients (55.5%). After a median observation time of 14 months from the start of the first documented venetoclax treatment, the 1-year event-free survival (EFS) was 82.1% and the 1-year overall survival (OS) was 94.2%. The 1-year OS was 96.3% when venetoclax was given as first-line treatment versus 92.1% when given for the first time in a later therapy line (HR 0.38, 95% CI 0.14-1.05). In the BTKi cohort, 351 of 888 patients (39.5%) received a BTKi as first-line treatment. The median observation time was 34 months from the start of the first documented BTKi treatment, with a 3-year EFS of 32.4% and a 3-year OS of 78.5%. The 3-year OS for a BTKi in first-line was 87.9% compared to 73.8% in a later therapy line (HR 0.43, 95% CI 0.30-0.61). Our analysis suggests better survival outcomes when these agents are used as first-line therapy with the caveat that patients treated in later therapy lines typically exhibit more advanced disease and a poorer general condition.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé, mais le titre doit être comparé manuellement.
- Titre Crossref
- Transition Into Clinical Routine and Survival Outcomes of <scp>BCL2</scp> ‐ and <scp>BTK</scp> Inhibitors: An Analysis of Patient Data From the <scp>GCLLSG</scp> Registry
- Date Crossref
- 14/04/2026
- 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 ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Institutions déclarées
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.