<HashMap><database>biostudies-literature</database><scores/><additional><omics_type>Unknown</omics_type><volume>42(10)</volume><submitter>Touzeau C</submitter><funding>Johnson &amp;amp; Johnson</funding><pubmed_abstract>&lt;h4>Introduction&lt;/h4>Ciltacabtagene autoleucel (cilta-cel) is approved for relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). In the CARTITUDE-4 study (NCT04181827), cilta-cel demonstrated superior efficacy versus pomalidomide, bortezomib, and dexamethasone or daratumumab, pomalidomide, and dexamethasone in patients with RRMM after 1-3 prior lines of therapy (LOT). We conducted an indirect treatment comparison to understand the comparative efficacy of cilta-cel versus real-world (RW) physician's choice of treatment for lenalidomide-refractory MM.&lt;h4>Methods&lt;/h4>De-identified data from the Flatiron Health MM cohort registry (January 2020 to May 2024) were compared with data from CARTITUDE-4 (data cutoff May 1, 2024). Key eligibility criteria for CARTITUDE-4 were used to match patients from the</pubmed_abstract><journal>Advances in therapy</journal><pagination>5023-5041</pagination><full_dataset_link>https://www.ebi.ac.uk/biostudies/studies/S-EPMC12474644</full_dataset_link><repository>biostudies-literature</repository><pubmed_title>Comparative Effectiveness of Ciltacabtagene Autoleucel in CARTITUDE-4 Versus Real-World Physician's Choice of Therapy from the Flatiron Registry in Lenalidomide-Refractory Multiple Myeloma.</pubmed_title><pmcid>PMC12474644</pmcid><pubmed_authors>Touzeau C</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Lee S</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Zamagni E</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Mina R</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Yeh TM</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Dytfeld D</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Sidana S</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Corradini P</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Nair S</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Leleu X</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Slaughter A</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Zhao M</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Puig N</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Delforge M</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Khan AM</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Schecter JM</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Lipe B</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Lonardi C</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Karlin L</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>He J</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Weisel K</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Chen D</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Mendes J</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Roeloffzen W</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Dhakal B</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Lendvai N</pubmed_authors></additional><is_claimable>false</is_claimable><name>Comparative Effectiveness of Ciltacabtagene Autoleucel in CARTITUDE-4 Versus Real-World Physician's Choice of Therapy from the Flatiron Registry in Lenalidomide-Refractory Multiple Myeloma.</name><description>&lt;h4>Introduction&lt;/h4>Ciltacabtagene autoleucel (cilta-cel) is approved for relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). In the CARTITUDE-4 study (NCT04181827), cilta-cel demonstrated superior efficacy versus pomalidomide, bortezomib, and dexamethasone or daratumumab, pomalidomide, and dexamethasone in patients with RRMM after 1-3 prior lines of therapy (LOT). We conducted an indirect treatment comparison to understand the comparative efficacy of cilta-cel versus real-world (RW) physician's choice of treatment for lenalidomide-refractory MM.&lt;h4>Methods&lt;/h4>De-identified data from the Flatiron Health MM cohort registry (January 2020 to May 2024) were compared with data from CARTITUDE-4 (data cutoff May 1, 2024). Key eligibility criteria for CARTITUDE-4 were used to match patients from the</description><dates><release>2025-01-01T00:00:00Z</release><publication>2025 Oct</publication><modification>2026-06-03T23:24:04.465Z</modification><creation>2026-05-03T03:10:49.26Z</creation></dates><accession>S-EPMC12474644</accession><cross_references><pubmed>40768190</pubmed><doi>10.1007/s12325-025-03308-2</doi></cross_references></HashMap>