OBJECTIVE: This study estimated the comparative efficacy of ciltacabtagene 
autoleucel (cilta-cel) versus the approved idecabtagene vicleucel (ide-cel) dose 
range of 300-460 × 106 CAR-positive T-cells for the treatment of patients with 
relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) who were previously treated with 
a proteasome inhibitor, an immunomodulatory drug, and an anti-CD38 monoclonal 
antibody (i.e. triple-class exposed) using matching-adjusted indirect treatment 
comparisons (MAICs).
METHODS: MAICs were performed with individual patient data for cilta-cel 
(CARTITUDE-1; NCT03548207) and published summary-level data for ide-cel (KarMMa; 
NCT03361748). Treated patients from CARTITUDE-1 who satisfied the eligibility 
criteria for KarMMa were included in the analyses. The MAIC adjusted for 
unbalanced baseline covariates of prognostic significance identified in the 
literature and by clinical expertise. Comparative efficacy was estimated for 
overall response rate (ORR), complete response or better (≥CR) rate, duration of 
response (DoR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS).
RESULTS: Cilta-cel was associated with statistically significantly improved ORR 
(odds ratio [OR]: 94.93 [95% confidence interval [CI]: 21.86, 412.25; 
p < .0001]; relative risk [RR]: 1.34), ≥CR rate (OR: 5.49 [95% CI: 2.47, 12.21; 
p < .0001]; RR: 2.21), DoR (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.50 [95% CI: 0.29, 0.87; 
p = .0137]), and PFS (HR: 0.37 [95% CI: 0.22, 0.62; p = .0002]) when compared 
with ide-cel. For OS, the results were in favor of cilta-cel and clinically 
meaningful but with a CI overlapping one (HR: 0.55 [95% CI: 0.29, 1.05; 
p = .0702]).
CONCLUSIONS: These analyses demonstrate improved efficacy with cilta-cel versus 
ide-cel for all outcomes, highlighting its therapeutic potential in patients 
with triple-class exposed RRMM.