Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29248427›Full record

SynthesisMolecular therapy : the journal of the American Society of Gene Therapy2018

CAR-T Cells: A Systematic Review and Mixed Methods Analysis of the Clinical Trial Landscape.

David Pettitt, Zeeshaan Arshad, James Smith, Tijana Stanic, Georg Holländer, David Brindley

Open access · hybridAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Molecular therapy : the journal of the American Society of Gene Therapy, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 60 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
60citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
5.5field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

60 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 116 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Dose fractionation of CAR-T cells. A systematic review of clinical outcomes.Journal of experimental & clinical cancer research : CR · 2023
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Employing CRISPR-Cas9 to Enhance T Cell Effector Function.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2024
    Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Emerging Immunotherapy Approaches for Treating Prostate Cancer.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023
    Review
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

David PettittThe Oxford - UCL Centre for the Advancement of Sustainable Medical Innovation (CASMI), The University of Oxford, Oxford, UK; Department of Paediatrics, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Zeeshaan ArshadUniversity of Cambridge School of Medicine, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK. Electronic address: za272@cam.ac.uk.
James SmithThe Oxford - UCL Centre for the Advancement of Sustainable Medical Innovation (CASMI), The University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Tijana StanicDepartment of Molecular, Cellular and Developmental Biology, Yale University, New Haven, CT, USA.
Georg HolländerDepartment of Paediatrics, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK; Department of Biomedicine, University of Basel, and Basel University Children's Hospital, Basel, Switzerland.
David BrindleyThe Oxford - UCL Centre for the Advancement of Sustainable Medical Innovation (CASMI), The University of Oxford, Oxford, UK; Department of Paediatrics, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK; Centre for Behavioral Medicine, UCL School of Pharmacy, University College London, London, UK; USCF-Stanford Center of Excellence in Regulatory Science and Innovation (CERSI), San Francisco, CA, USA; Harvard Stem Cell Institute, Cambridge, MA, USA.
University of Oxford · GBUniversity of Cambridge · GBYale University · US

Funding

Medical Research Council MR/K501256/
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

CAR-T cells are a promising new therapy that offer significant advantages compared with conventional immunotherapies. This systematic review and clinical trial landscape identifies and critiques published CAR-T cell clinical trials and examines the critical factors required to enable CAR-T cells to become a standard therapy. A review of the literature was conducted to identify suitable studies from the MEDLINE and Ovid bibliographic databases. The literature and database searches identified 20 studies for inclusion. The average number of participants per clinical trial examined was 11 patients. All studies included in this systematic review investigated CAR-T cells and were prospective, uncontrolled clinical studies. Leukemia is the most common cancer subtype and accounts for 57.4% (n = 120) of disease indications. The majority of studies used an autologous cell source (85%, n = 17) rather than an allogeneic cell source. Translational challenges encompass technical considerations relating to CAR-T cell development, manufacturing practicability, clinical trial approaches, CAR-T cell quality and persistence, and patient management.

Indexed as

Immunotherapy, AdoptiveClinical Trials as TopicHumansNeoplasmsReceptors, Antigen, T-CellReceptors, Chimeric AntigenT-LymphocytesTreatment OutcomeReceptors, Antigen, T-CellReceptors, Chimeric AntigenCAR-T cellscell therapytranslational medicine

Identifiers

PMID29248427
PMCPMC5835018
OpenAlexW2765190380

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.