Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36849306›Full record

ArticleCytotherapy2023

Label-free in vitro assays predict the potency of anti-disialoganglioside chimeric antigen receptor T-cell products.

Meghan Logun, Maxwell B Colonna, Katherine P Mueller, Divya Ventarapragada, Riley Rodier, Chaitanya Tondepu, Nicole J Piscopo, Amritava Das, Stacie Chvatal, Heather B Hayes and 6 more

Open access · hybridAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Cytotherapy, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 13% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. RSC advances · 2024
    Article
  9. 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

16 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Meghan LogunRegenerative Bioscience Center, University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia, USA; Division of Neuroscience, Biomedical and Health Sciences Institute, University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia, USA.
Maxwell B ColonnaDepartment of Biochemistry & Molecular Biology, Complex Carbohydrate Research Center, University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia, USA; Institute of Bioinformatics, University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia, USA.
Katherine P MuellerDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, Wisconsin USA.
Divya VentarapragadaRegenerative Bioscience Center, University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia, USA.
Riley RodierRegenerative Bioscience Center, University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia, USA.
Chaitanya TondepuRegenerative Bioscience Center, University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia, USA; Division of Neuroscience, Biomedical and Health Sciences Institute, University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia, USA; Edgar L. Rhodes Center for Animal and Dairy Science, College of Agriculture and Environmental Science, University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia, USA.
Nicole J PiscopoDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, Wisconsin USA.
Amritava DasMorgridge Institute for Research, Madison, Wisconsin, USA.
Stacie ChvatalAxion BioSystems, Atlanta, Georgia USA.
Heather B HayesAxion BioSystems, Atlanta, Georgia USA.
Christian M CapitiniDepartment of Pediatrics, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, Wisconsin USA; University of Wisconsin Carbone Cancer Center, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, Wisconsin USA.
Daniel J BratDepartment of Pathology, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, Illinois USA.
Theresa KotanchekEvolved Analytics LLC, Rancho Santa Fe, California, USA.
Arthur S EdisonDepartment of Biochemistry & Molecular Biology, Complex Carbohydrate Research Center, University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia, USA; Institute of Bioinformatics, University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia, USA.
Krishanu SahaDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, Wisconsin USA; University of Wisconsin Carbone Cancer Center, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, Wisconsin USA.
Lohitash KarumbaiahRegenerative Bioscience Center, University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia, USA; Division of Neuroscience, Biomedical and Health Sciences Institute, University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia, USA; Edgar L. Rhodes Center for Animal and Dairy Science, College of Agriculture and Environmental Science, University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia, USA. Electronic address: lohitash@uga.edu.
University of Georgia · USUniversity of Wisconsin–Madison · USAxion Biosystems (United States) · USMorgridge Institute for Research · USNorthwestern University · US

Funding

UW COMPREHENSIVE CANCER CENTER SUPPORTP30CA014520 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON · PI Justine Yang Bruce · 1985 to 2026
$142.6M
Assembly of Novel Gene Editing Particles to Understand Genome Surgery in Patient-Derived CellsR35GM119644 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON · PI SAHA, KRISHANU · 2016 to 2025
$4.0M
Creating Endogenous Stem Cell Niches to Promote Functional Brain Repair Post-TBIR01NS099596 · NINDS · UNIVERSITY OF GEORGIA · PI KARUMBAIAH, LOHITASH · 2017 to 2021
$1.6M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA014520NIGMS NIH HHS R35 GM119644NINDS NIH HHS R01 NS099596
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND

aimsChimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cells have demonstrated remarkable efficacy against hematological malignancies; however, they have not experienced the same success against solid tumors such as glioblastoma (GBM). There is a growing need for high-throughput functional screening platforms to measure CAR T-cell potency against solid tumor cells.

methodsWe used real-time, label-free cellular impedance sensing to evaluate the potency of anti-disialoganglioside (GD2) targeting CAR T-cell products against GD2+ patient-derived GBM stem cells over a period of 2 days and 7 days in vitro. We compared CAR T products using two different modes of gene transfer: retroviral transduction and virus-free CRISPR-editing. Endpoint flow cytometry, cytokine analysis and metabolomics data were acquired and integrated to create a predictive model of CAR T-cell potency.

resultsResults indicated faster cytolysis by virus-free CRISPR-edited CAR T cells compared with retrovirally transduced CAR T cells, accompanied by increased inflammatory cytokine release, CD8+ CAR T-cell presence in co-culture conditions and CAR T-cell infiltration into three-dimensional GBM spheroids. Computational modeling identified increased tumor necrosis factor α concentrations with decreased glutamine, lactate and formate as being most predictive of short-term (2 days) and long-term (7 days) CAR T cell potency against GBM stem cells.

conclusionsThese studies establish impedance sensing as a high-throughput, label-free assay for preclinical potency testing of CAR T cells against solid tumors.

Indexed as

GlioblastomaReceptors, Chimeric AntigenAntibodiesCD8-Positive T-LymphocytesCytokinesHumansImmunotherapy, AdoptiveReceptors, Antigen, T-CellAntibodiesCytokinesReceptors, Antigen, T-CellReceptors, Chimeric AntigenCAR-T therapycellular ImmunotherapyglioblastomaT-cell potency

Identifiers

PMID36849306
PMCPMC10159906
OpenAlexW4322154910

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.