Table of Contents
- Trials overview
- Phase 2 study in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma
- Phase 3 study in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma
- Who can participate
- What the trials measure
- Trial status and size
Trials overview
Two interventional studies are investigating Anitocabtagene Autoleucel in multiple myeloma, which is a cancer of plasma cells in the bone marrow.[1][2] One study is in people with newly diagnosed disease, and the other is in people with relapsed/refractory disease, meaning the cancer came back or did not respond well to earlier treatment.[1][2] The studies are listed as authorised.[1][2]
Phase 2 study in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma
The first trial is a Phase 2, open-label study in participants with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma according to IMWG criteria.[1] Open-label means everyone in the study knows which treatment is being given.[1] This study aims to evaluate the safety and efficacy of Anitocabtagene Autoleucel after induction therapy, which means treatment given before the main study therapy.[1]
The brief summary says the study is designed to characterize safety after induction therapy and to further characterize the efficacy profile in this newly diagnosed group.[1] The planned enrollment is 30 participants.[1]
Phase 3 study in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma
The second trial is a Phase 3 study comparing Anitocabtagene Autoleucel with standard of care therapy in participants with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma.[2] This study is larger and is meant to compare how well the treatment works against usual treatment options.[2] It includes patients who have had 1 to 3 prior lines of therapy and have been exposed to both an immunomodulatory drug and an anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody.[2]
The brief summary states that the study will compare the efficacy of Anitocabtagene Autoleucel versus standard of care therapy in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma.[2] The planned enrollment is 642 participants.[2]
Who can participate
Eligibility is different for each trial.[1][2] In the Phase 2 study, participants must have newly diagnosed multiple myeloma according to IMWG criteria.[1] In the Phase 3 study, participants must have relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma, 1 to 3 prior treatment lines, and prior exposure to both an immunomodulatory drug and an anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody.[2]
Newly diagnosed group: people whose multiple myeloma has just been found and who meet IMWG diagnostic rules.[1]
Relapsed/refractory group: people whose disease returned after treatment or did not respond well enough, and who already received several prior therapies.[2]
What the trials measure
The Phase 2 study measures the incidence, seriousness, and severity of all adverse events, which are medical problems that happen during a study.[1] It also measures the rate of uMRD negative complete response at 12 months, with a small allowed time window of plus or minus 3 months after enrollment.[1] uMRD means undetectable minimal residual disease, so this endpoint checks whether no tiny signs of disease can be found by the study test level used in the trial.[1]
The Phase 3 study measures progression-free survival, which is the time until the disease gets worse or death occurs from any cause, whichever happens first.[2] It also measures MRD-negative complete response at 9 months, using bone marrow testing and IMWG response rules assessed by an independent review committee.[2] MRD negativity in this trial means a negative test result at 9 months, with a small allowed time window of plus or minus 3 months.[2]
Adverse events: unwanted medical problems that happen during the study.[1]
Complete response: a strong treatment result where disease is not found by the study rules.[1][2]
Bone marrow assessment: a test of the soft tissue inside bones where myeloma cells are found.[2]
Independent review committee (IRC): a separate group that checks study results in a fair way.[2]
Trial status and size
Both studies are listed as authorised, meaning they have been approved to proceed in the provided trial data.[1][2] The Phase 2 study plans to enroll 30 participants, while the Phase 3 study plans to enroll 642 participants.[1][2] The difference in size fits the different goals of the studies: early safety and response checking in a smaller group, and comparison with standard care in a larger group.[1][2]



