India's CAR T-cell therapy achieves 73% cancer success rate

In India, a new CAR T-cell therapy has shown promising results for patients with aggressive blood cancers. This therapy, called talicabtagene autoleucel, has a success rate of 73%. It is aimed at patients with relapsed or treatment-resistant B-cell malignancies, such as B-cell lymphoma and acute lymphoblastic leukemia. The therapy works by reprogramming a patient's immune cells in a lab. These cells are then used to target and destroy cancer cells more effectively. A clinical trial involving 64 patients across six cancer centers in India revealed that 73% of the monitored patients experienced a positive response, with their cancer either shrinking or going into remission. While there are risks associated with the treatment, including infections and reduced blood cell counts, researchers believe the safety profile is manageable. However, it is important to note that two patients died from complications related to the treatment. Talicabtagene autoleucel is significant because it offers a more affordable option compared to similar therapies available in high-income countries. Treatment costs for those therapies can exceed Rs 8.3 crore (USD 1 million), while the Indian-developed treatment costs around Rs 25 lakh (USD 30,000). Experts suggest that the therapy may be more effective for patients with acute lymphoblastic leukemia than those with B-cell lymphoma. They emphasize that better patient selection could improve success rates. The findings were published in The Lancet Hematology on March 13. Researchers also noted that side effects, such as cytokine release syndrome, affected 68% of patients, though severe cases were rare. No cases of a serious neurological issue associated with other CAR T-cell therapies were reported in this trial. While the results are encouraging, experts warn that long-term studies are necessary to fully understand the therapy's effectiveness. Evaluating talicabtagene autoleucel against other approved CAR T-cell therapies is challenging due to a small patient pool and lack of direct comparisons. Nonetheless, initial findings indicate its clinical response rates may be similar to existing treatments.