Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34236412›Full record

SynthesisJAMA network open2021

Characteristics of Registered Studies of Chimeric Antigen Receptor Therapies: A Systematic Review.

Rahul Banerjee, Vinay Prasad

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in JAMA network open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 38% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. 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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Rahul BanerjeeDivision of Hematology/Oncology, Department of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco.
Vinay PrasadDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, San Francisco General Hospital, San Francisco, California.
University of California, San Francisco · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Hundreds of chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) therapies are under investigation for hematologic malignant cancers and solid malignant tumors. As the field of modern CAR therapy enters its second decade, clinical trials that demonstrate the efficacy of CAR therapies using randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and/or investigate methods to optimize patient outcomes with commercially available CAR therapies are increasingly important. Objective: To analyze the landscape of registered CAR-related trials with dual focuses on trial methods and intent. Evidence Review: This systematic review identified 1304 ongoing or upcoming CAR-related trials registered at ClinicalTrials.gov as of December 22, 2020, and excluded 513 trials that did not pertain to cell-based therapy. Both CAR-related and trial-related variables, including target antigens and countries of origin, were recorded. Trials were categorized as non-RCTs that compared CAR with non-CAR therapies or RCTs in which every arm received CAR therapy. Trial intent was separately categorized as demonstrating the efficacy of a CAR therapy, optimizing patient outcomes with established CAR therapies using adjunctive non-CAR modalities, or miscellaneous. Findings: Of 778 relevant trials, 587 (75%) involved blood cancers, whereas 182 (23%) involved solid tumor cancers; the remaining 9 (1%) involved nonmalignant diseases. A total of 433 trials (56%) were from China and 288 from the US (37%). Ten RCTs (1%) compared CAR therapies with non-CAR therapies, including phase 3 RCTs for 4 of 5 CAR therapies (80%) that are currently commercially available. Twenty-eight studies (4%) sought to optimize outcomes with established CAR therapies using non-CAR drugs or radiotherapy, whereas 3 studies (0.4%) sought to optimize supportive care during CAR therapy. Conclusions and Relevance: This systematic review found that randomized and optimization-focused trials are comparatively rare within the landscape of ongoing and upcoming CAR-related trials. As the field of modern CAR therapy enters its second decade, additional studies of these characteristics are necessary to strengthen the evidence base for CAR therapy and improve patient outcomes.

Indexed as

HumansImmunotherapy, AdoptiveResearch

Identifiers

PMID34236412
PMCPMC8267610
OpenAlexW3181437129

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.