Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33815972›Full record

ReviewCureus2021

The Role of Chimeric Antigen Receptor-T Cell Therapy in the Treatment of Hematological Malignancies: Advantages, Trials, and Tribulations, and the Road Ahead.

Sai Rohit Reddy, Adiona Llukmani, Ayat Hashim, Dana R Haddad, Dutt S Patel, Farrukh Ahmad, Majdi Abu Sneineh, Domonick K Gordon

Open access · diamondAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cureus, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 20% 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Colorectal Cancer: Risk Factors, Novel Approaches in Molecular Screening and Treatment.International journal of molecular and cellular medicine · 2025
    Review
  6. Colorectal Cancer; Novel Approaches in Chimeric Antigen Receptors (CAR) -T cell.International journal of molecular and cellular medicine · 2025
    Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. 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

8 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Sai Rohit ReddyInternal Medicine, California Institute of Behavioral Neurosciences & Psychology, Fairfield, USA.
Adiona LlukmaniInternal Medicine, California Institute of Behavioral Neurosciences & Psychology, Fairfield, USA.
Ayat HashimInternal Medicine, California Institute of Behavioral Neurosciences & Psychology, Fairfield, USA.
Dana R HaddadInternal Medicine, California Institute of Behavioral Neurosciences & Psychology, Fairfield, USA.
Dutt S PatelInternal Medicine, California Institute of Behavioral Neurosciences & Psychology, Fairfield, USA.
Farrukh AhmadInternal Medicine, California Institute of Behavioral Neurosciences & Psychology, Fairfield, USA.
Majdi Abu SneinehInternal Medicine, California Institute of Behavioral Neurosciences & Psychology, Fairfield, USA.
Domonick K GordonInternal Medicine, California Institute of Behavioral Neurosciences & Psychology, Fairfield, USA.
California Institute of Behavioral Neurosciences and Psychology (United States) · USScarborough General Hospital · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Immunotherapy is the upcoming trend in cancer treatment. Traditional cancer treatment methods include surgical resection, radiotherapy, chemotherapy, small molecule targeted drugs, monoclonal antibodies, and hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT). Surgical resection is useful for early-stage patients but not for metastatic cancer cells; radiotherapy and chemotherapy are more common but produce substantial damage to normal tissues and have poor selectivity. Targeted drugs, including monoclonal antibodies, have better comprehensive efficacy but can also encourage gene mutation of tumor cells and drug tolerance. HSCT is effective, but choosing a donor is often difficult, and the graft is also prone to rejection. Thus, chimeric antigen receptor (CAR)-T cell therapy, a form of cellular/adoptive immunotherapy, is at the forefront of cancer therapy treatments due to its sustained remission, fewer side effects, and a better quality of life. CAR-T cell therapy involves genetically modifying the T cells and multiplying their numbers to kill cancer cells. This review article gives an insight into how the CAR-T cells have evolved from simple T cells with modest immune function to genetically engineered robust counterparts that brought great hope in the treatment of hematological malignancies. Much research has been undertaken during the past decade to design and deliver CAR-T cells. This has led to successful outcomes in leukemias, lymphomas, and multiple myeloma, paving the way for expanding CAR therapy. Despite tremendous progress, CAR-T cell therapies are faced with many challenges. Areas for improvement include limited T cell persistence, tumor escape, immunosuppressive components in the tumor microenvironment, cancer relapse rate, manufacturing time, and production cost. In this manuscript, we summarize the innovations in the design and delivery of CAR technologies, their applications in hematological malignancies, limitations to its widespread application, latest developments, and the future scope of research to counter the challenges and improve its effectiveness and persistence.

Indexed as

adoptive immunotherapycar-t cell designcar-t cells in hematological malignanciescar-t cell therapyfda approved car therapieshematological malignanciesimmunotherapy and hematological malignanciesnext generation car-t cellssafety strategies in car therapyside effects of car therapies

Identifiers

PMID33815972
PMCPMC8007123
OpenAlexW3132114680

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.