Supplementary data: Indirect treatment comparison of idecabtagene vicleucel versus conventional care in triple-class exposed multiple myeloma

<b>These are peer-reviewed supplementary materials for the article '</b><b>Indirect treatment comparison of </b><b>idecabtagene vicleucel versus conventional </b><b>care in triple-class exposed multiple </b><b>myeloma</b><b>' published in the</b><b> </b><b><i>Journal of Comparative Effectiveness Research</i></b><b>.</b><b>Supplemental Table 1: </b>Study design and patient eligibility criteria for KarMMa and MAMMOTH<b>Supplemental Table 2: </b>Summary of patient baseline characteristics in CC population from MAMMOTH with the ide-cel population from KarMMa before and after matching to the CC population from MAMMOTH<b>Supplemental Figure 1: </b>HRs of OS for ide-cel versus conventional care based on the triple- or quad-refractory population from MAMMOTH<b>Supplemental Figure 2: </b>HRs of OS for ide-cel versus conventional care based on the penta-refractory population from MAMMOTH<b>Aim: </b>To compare the efficacy of idecabtagene vicleucel (ide-cel, bb2121) versus conventional care (CC) in triple-class exposed relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) patients.<b> Patients &amp; methods: </b>A matching-adjusted indirect comparison was conducted using individual patient-level data from the pivotal, phase II, single-arm KarMMa trial (NCT03361748) and aggregate-level data from MAMMOTH, the largest independent observational study of CC in heavily pretreated RRMM patients. <b>Results: </b>Ide-cel improved overall response rate (odds ratio: 5.30; 95% CI: 2.96–9.51), progression-free survival (hazard ratio: 0.50; 95% CI: 0.36–0.70) and overall survival (hazard ratio: 0.37; 95% CI: 0.25–0.56) versus CC. <b>Conclusion:</b> These results suggest ide-cel offers improvements in clinical outcomes relative to CC in this heavily pretreated RRMM population.