SynthesisFrontiers in medicine2020
Dawn of Monitoring Regulatory T Cells in (Pre-)clinical Studies: Their Relevance Is Slowly Recognised.
Synthesis in Frontiers in medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Regulatory T cell therapy in solid organ transplantation: clinical applications and laboratory monitoring strategies.Clinical transplantation and research · 2025Review
- Revision of ICH S8 Needed?Frontiers in toxicology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Regulatory T cells (Tregs) have a prominent role in the control of immune homeostasis. Pharmacological impact on their activity or balance with effector T cells could contribute to (impaired) clinical responses or adverse events. Monitoring treatment-related effects on T cell subsets may therefore be part of (pre-)clinical studies for medicinal products. However, the extent of immune monitoring performed in studies for marketing authorisation and the degree of correspondence with data available in the public domain is not known. We evaluated the presence of T cell immunomonitoring in 46 registration dossiers of monoclonal antibodies indicated for immune-related disorders and published scientific papers. We found that the depth of Treg analysis in registration dossiers was rather small. Nevertheless, data on treatment-related Treg effects are available in public academia-driven studies (post-registration) and suggest that Tregs may act as a biomarker for clinical responses. However, public data are fragmented and obtained with heterogeneity of experimental approaches from a diversity of species and tissues. To reveal the potential added value of T cell (and particular Treg) evaluation in (pre-)clinical studies, more cell-specific data should be acquired, at least for medicinal products with an immunomodulatory mechanism. Therefore, extensive analysis of T cell subset contribution to clinical responses and the relevance of treatment-induced changes in their levels is needed. Preferably, industry and academia should work together to obtain these data in a standardised manner and to enrich our knowledge about T cell activity in disease pathogenesis and therapies. This will ultimately elucidate the necessity of T cell subset monitoring in the therapeutic benefit-risk assessment.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.