Efficacy of sonrotoclax vs pirtobrutinib in post–Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitor (BTKi) relapsed/refractory (R/R) mantle cell lymphoma (MCL): An indirect comparison.

e19050 Background: Sonrotoclax (BGB-11417-201) and pirtobrutinib (BRUIN MCL trial; NCT03740529) have demonstrated efficacy in separate single-arm post-BTKi R/R MCL studies. In the absence of head-to-head randomized trials, a matching-adjusted indirect comparison (MAIC) was conducted to compare the efficacy of both therapies in a post-BTKi R/R MCL setting. Methods: An unanchored MAIC compared individual patient-level data from the sonrotoclax trial (n=103 [efficacy set]; median OS follow-up, 15.2 months) with aggregate data from the pirtobrutinib trial (n=120 [US Food and Drug Administration efficacy cohort]; median OS follow-up, 9.3 months). Matching covariates were selected based on literature review and clinical expert input. The base-case model maximized covariate adjustment while maintaining an effective sample size (ESS) >50. Sensitivity analyses with adequate sample size (ESS >50) and alternative covariates were conducted to validate the base-case model results. Outcomes included overall response rate (ORR), duration of response (DOR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). Weighted Cox proportional hazards and logistic regression models were used for time-to-event and binary endpoints, respectively. Hazard ratios (HR) and odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) were reported. Results: In the base-case analysis, sonrotoclax showed a nonsignificant, numerically higher ORR (OR, 1.54; 95% CI, 0.80-2.97), as well as a numerically longer DOR (HR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.37-1.54), versus pirtobrutinib. Consistent numerical improvements in the sonrotoclax cohort were observed for PFS (HR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.48-1.11) and OS (HR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.37-1.15). Sensitivity analyses using alternative covariate sets generated broadly consistent results (Table). Conclusions: Based on the data currently available, the MAIC findings suggest a nonsignificant trend of potential difference in efficacy outcomes between sonrotoclax and pirtobrutinib. Future studies with longer follow-up are warranted. MAIC results comparing efficacy outcomes with sonrotoclax vs pirtobrutinib in post-BTKi R/R MCL. Model ESS n (%) ORR-IRCOR (95% CI) P -value DOR-IRCHR (95% CI) P -value PFS-IRCHR (95% CI) P -value OSHR (95% CI) P -value Base case a-c 55 (53) 1.54(0.80-2.97).20 0.75(0.37-1.54).43 0.73(0.48-1.11).14 0.66(0.37-1.15).14 Sensitivity analysis 1 a,b 97 (94) 1.15(0.67-1.97).62 0.77(0.44-1.36).37 0.90(0.64-1.25).52 0.92(0.59-1.44).71 Sensitivity analysis 2 a 102 (99) 1.14(0.67-1.94).64 0.76(0.43-1.32).32 0.89(0.64-1.23).48 0.92(0.59-1.43).70 Covariates include: a sMIPI, no. of prior therapy lines; b PD to last BTKi; and c blastoid MCL. IRC, independent review committee; PD, progressive disease; sMIPI, simplified Mantle Cell Lymphoma International Prognostic Index.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Published
2026-05-28
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2026.44.16_suppl.e19050
Primary Topic
Lymphoma Diagnosis and Treatment
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Efficacy of sonrotoclax vs pirtobrutinib in post–Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitor (BTKi) relapsed/refractory (R/R) mantle cell lymphoma (MCL): An indirect comparison.

Keri Yang, Swetha Challagulla, Leyla Mohseninejad, Alvaro Jose Alencar et al.
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Lymphoma Diagnosis and Treatment
article

Efficacy of sonrotoclax vs pirtobrutinib in post–Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitor (BTKi) relapsed/refractory (R/R) mantle cell lymphoma (MCL): An indirect comparison.

Keri Yang, Swetha Challagulla, Leyla Mohseninejad, Alvaro Jose Alencar, Toby Andrew Eyre, Natalia Kut, Piotr Wojciechowski, Kaijun Wang, Priscille Bourquelot
article en

Abstract

e19050 Background: Sonrotoclax (BGB-11417-201) and pirtobrutinib (BRUIN MCL trial; NCT03740529) have demonstrated efficacy in separate single-arm post-BTKi R/R MCL studies. In the absence of head-to-head randomized trials, a matching-adjusted indirect comparison (MAIC) was conducted to compare the efficacy of both therapies in a post-BTKi R/R MCL setting. Methods: An unanchored MAIC compared individual patient-level data from the sonrotoclax trial (n=103 [efficacy set]; median OS follow-up, 15.2 months) with aggregate data from the pirtobrutinib trial (n=120 [US Food and Drug Administration efficacy cohort]; median OS follow-up, 9.3 months). Matching covariates were selected based on literature review and clinical expert input. The base-case model maximized covariate adjustment while maintaining an effective sample size (ESS) >50. Sensitivity analyses with adequate sample size (ESS >50) and alternative covariates were conducted to validate the base-case model results. Outcomes included overall response rate (ORR), duration of response (DOR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). Weighted Cox proportional hazards and logistic regression models were used for time-to-event and binary endpoints, respectively. Hazard ratios (HR) and odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) were reported. Results: In the base-case analysis, sonrotoclax showed a nonsignificant, numerically higher ORR (OR, 1.54; 95% CI, 0.80-2.97), as well as a numerically longer DOR (HR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.37-1.54), versus pirtobrutinib. Consistent numerical improvements in the sonrotoclax cohort were observed for PFS (HR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.48-1.11) and OS (HR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.37-1.15). Sensitivity analyses using alternative covariate sets generated broadly consistent results (Table). Conclusions: Based on the data currently available, the MAIC findings suggest a nonsignificant trend of potential difference in efficacy outcomes between sonrotoclax and pirtobrutinib. Future studies with longer follow-up are warranted. MAIC results comparing efficacy outcomes with sonrotoclax vs pirtobrutinib in post-BTKi R/R MCL. Model ESS n (%) ORR-IRCOR (95% CI) P -value DOR-IRCHR (95% CI) P -value PFS-IRCHR (95% CI) P -value OSHR (95% CI) P -value Base case a-c 55 (53) 1.54(0.80-2.97).20 0.75(0.37-1.54).43 0.73(0.48-1.11).14 0.66(0.37-1.15).14 Sensitivity analysis 1 a,b 97 (94) 1.15(0.67-1.97).62 0.77(0.44-1.36).37 0.90(0.64-1.25).52 0.92(0.59-1.44).71 Sensitivity analysis 2 a 102 (99) 1.14(0.67-1.94).64 0.76(0.43-1.32).32 0.89(0.64-1.23).48 0.92(0.59-1.43).70 Covariates include: a sMIPI, no. of prior therapy lines; b PD to last BTKi; and c blastoid MCL. IRC, independent review committee; PD, progressive disease; sMIPI, simplified Mantle Cell Lymphoma International Prognostic Index.

Journal of Clinical OncologyVol. 44(16_suppl)
University of Miami (US), University School of Physical Education in Kraków (PL), Churchill Hospital (GB), Barber-Nichols (United States) (US), Universidad San Carlos (PY), Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 6%
Lymphoma Diagnosis and Treatment
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.