Safety and efficacy of port use for CAR T-cell infusion in large B-cell lymphoma - Summary - MDSpire
Coming Soon: Introducing MDSpire News. Learn more
Conexiant’s news site is now MDSpire News. Learn more

Safety and effectiveness of implanted ports for CAR T-cell infusion in large B-cell lymphoma

  • By

  • Zachary E. Hunzeker

  • Anath Lionel

  • Xiaowen Sun

  • Lei Feng

  • Sairah Ahmed

  • Amy Ayers

  • Michelly de Castro

  • Jaimole Varghese

  • Karla Ow

  • Taylor Cain

  • Minifrida Santiago

  • Sreekala Nair

  • Jeremy Ramdial

  • Elizabeth J. Shpall

  • Sattva S. Neelapu

  • Paolo Strati

  • October 28, 2026

Share

Objective:

To compare the safety, efficacy, and CAR T-cell expansion associated with infusion through implanted ports versus PICC/CVC access in adults with large B-cell lymphoma.

Approach:
  • Design and population: Single-center retrospective analysis of 504 patients treated with commercially available CAR T-cells from January 2018 through March 2025; follow-up was cut off in May 2025.
  • Groups and outcomes: CAR T-cells were infused through a port in 202 patients and through a PICC/CVC in 302. Investigators assessed toxicities, line complications, response, progression-free and overall survival, and peripheral-blood CAR T-cell expansion.
Key Findings:
  • CRS occurred in 87.5% of patients; any-grade ICANS occurred in 56.2%, and grade 3–4 ICANS in 35.1%. Infection and prolonged cytopenia rates were comparable between access groups.
  • VTE was less frequent with ports than with PICC/CVC access (3.0% vs 9.3%; p = 0.006). Multivariable analyses found a significant association between port use and lower VTE rates.
  • Day 30 and day 90 complete metabolic response rates did not differ significantly between groups. Median PFS and OS also showed no significant between-group differences.
Interpretation:

The authors report that CAR T-cell infusion through an implanted port was safe and effective compared with PICC/CVC infusion in this cohort. They also note that using an existing port may avoid the burden of adding or modifying central venous access.

Limitations:
  • The study was retrospective and conducted at a single center.
  • CAR T-cell expansion was evaluated in a subset of 128 patients.
  • The provided article context ends before the discussion is complete.
Conclusion:

In this single-center cohort, implanted-port infusion was associated with lower VTE rates than PICC/CVC access, with no significant differences in response or survival outcomes. The findings support ports as a potential option for CAR T-cell infusion, but prospective studies are needed to confirm these results.

Sources:

Original Source(s)

Related Content