ReviewAnticancer research2022
Phase I CAR-T Clinical Trials Review.
Review in Anticancer research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- DOSET: dose optimization with simultaneous efficacy and toxicity evaluation, motivated by a first-in-human phase I CAR T lymphoma trial.ESMO open · 2026Article
- In vivo CAR-T therapy: from molecular design to precision delivery.Journal of nanobiotechnology · 2026Review
- In vivo engineering of CAR-T cells: delivery strategies and clinical translation.Biomarker research · 2026Review
- Current strategies and novel immunotherapeutic approaches for overcoming immune resistance in glioblastoma.Discover oncology · 2025Review
- CONSORT-DEFINE explanation and elaboration: recommendations for enhancing reporting quality and impact of early phase dose-finding clinical trials.EClinicalMedicine · 2025Article
- Advancements and challenges in developing in vivo CAR T cell therapies for cancer treatment.EBioMedicine · 2024Review
- Pediatric B-cell Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma: The Impact of Therapy Response and Relapse on Outcome. A Single-center Analysis.In vivo (Athens, Greece)Article
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
aimChimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cells with tumor specificity are being increasingly investigated. Phase I trials are the first step of testing for safety of novel CAR-T therapy to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD). Several dose escalation methods have been developed over time including rule-based, model-based, and model-assisted designs. The goal of this project is to overview the phase I designs used in current CAR-T trials. MATERIALS AND
methodsWe searched PubMed for peer-reviewed literature published between January 1, 2015 and December 31, 2021. The search was limited to human studies in the English language using the keywords "CAR-T phase I", "clinical trials", and "full text".
resultsOne hundred nine papers with at least partial phase I components were included for analysis. 31.2% of the trials used the traditional 3+3 or a variation of said design, and 60.6% did not mention the dose escalation design. The majority of the manuscripts (59.6%) did not report cohort size while 19.3% did not specify the timing of evaluation. Although most of the studies were registered with CT.gov, only 33.9% had any results submitted or posted to CT.gov These trends persisted even in manuscripts published in journals with high impact factors.
conclusionStandardizing the publication criteria and providing basic elements of phase I clinical trials are critical to ensure high quality of manuscripts. With the quick development and high costs of CAR-T cell therapy, adoption of advanced designs such as model-based and model-assisted should increase to improve efficiency of clinical trials.
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.