Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30206753›Full record

SynthesisMedical oncology (Northwood, London, England)2018

Effect of transplant status in CD19-targeted CAR T-cell therapy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Kathleen Nagle, Barbara Tafuto, Lisa Palladino Kim, J Scott Parrott

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Medical oncology (Northwood, London, England), 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Outcomes of Allogeneic Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation after Salvage Therapy with Blinatumomab in Patients with Relapsed/Refractory Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia.Biology of blood and marrow transplantation : journal of the American Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation · 2020
    Article
  7. Review
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

4 authors.

Kathleen NagleDepartment of Health Informatics, School of Health Professions, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, 65 Bergen Street, Newark, NJ, 07107, USA. kmn100@shp.rutgers.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3369-8092
Barbara TafutoDepartment of Health Informatics, School of Health Professions, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, 65 Bergen Street, Newark, NJ, 07107, USA.
Lisa Palladino KimDepartment of Health Informatics, School of Health Professions, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, 65 Bergen Street, Newark, NJ, 07107, USA.
J Scott ParrottDepartment of Interdisciplinary Studies, School of Health Professions, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, 65 Bergen Street, Room 353A, Newark, NJ, 07107, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy has shown promise for relapsed/refractory malignancies. Many patients have undergone prior hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT), yet effects of transplant status on CAR T-cell therapy efficacy and safety have not been reported. The purpose of the study is to systematically evaluate the likelihood of achieving optimum response, severe cytokine release syndrome (sCRS), and neurotoxicity in the context of CAR T-cell therapy for HSCT-naïve patients versus those with prior HSCT. Trials were identified in ClinicalTrials.gov, Cochrane Library, and PubMed, and through reference pearl growing. Included studies used CD19-directed CAR T-cells for relapsed/refractory B-lineage Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia and B cell Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia, enrolled both HSCT-naïve and prior-HSCT patients, and denoted transplant status with outcomes. Six studies were included for optimum response, five for sCRS incidence, and four for neurotoxicity incidence. The pooled odds ratio for optimum response was 1.57 favoring HSCT-naïve patients (95% CI 0.54-4.61), whereas the pooled odds ratios for sCRS and neurotoxicity were 1.41 (95% CI 0.51-3.94) and 1.37 (95% CI 0.28-6.77), respectively, toward HSCT-naïve patients. Odds ratios were non-statistically significant. Overall risk of bias was moderate. While pooled estimates showed an advantage among HSCT-naïve patients for achieving optimum response and increased likelihood for sCRS and neurotoxicity, findings were not statistically significant. Any differences in efficacy and safety of CAR T-cell therapy cannot be verifiably attributed to transplant status, and additional controlled trials with increased sample sizes are needed to determine whether suggestive patterns favoring HSCT-naïve patients are validated.

Indexed as

Antigens, CD19Receptors, Chimeric AntigenClinical Trials as TopicHematopoietic Stem Cell TransplantationHumansImmunotherapy, AdoptiveLeukemia, Lymphocytic, Chronic, B-CellLymphoma, B-CellPrecursor Cell Lymphoblastic Leukemia-LymphomaAntigens, CD19CD19 molecule, humanReceptors, Chimeric AntigenCAR T-cell therapyCytokine release syndromeHematopoietic stem cell transplantMRD-negative complete remissionNeurotoxicity

Identifiers

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.