ArticleBMJ open2024
Experiences and perspectives on chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy among recipients, carers and referrers (RE-TELL): a qualitative study to inform CAR T-cell service design.
Article in BMJ open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- The burdens, coping strategies, and unmet needs of family caregivers of Chinese patients with lymphoma receiving commercial CAR-T-cell therapy: A qualitative study.Asia-Pacific journal of oncology nursing · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesRE-TELL is a qualitative study, which aims to understand patient, support person, clinician and coordinator experiences and perspectives of chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy, to inform design of a clinical CAR T-cell service in Aotearoa New Zealand.
designSemistructured qualitative interviews focused on domains of: experience through treatment, elements that work well and those that could be improved on. Interviews used thematic analysis to identify key themes. A workshop was held to obtain participants' reflections on interim analysis and proposed improvements.
participantsNew Zealanders with experience of CAR T-cell therapy, including recipients, support persons, clinicians and coordinators.
resultsWe interviewed 19 participants comprising 5 CAR T-cell recipients, 3 support persons, 6 clinicians and 5 coordinators. Four participants identified as Māori. Thematic analysis identified three global themes. The first, 'sociocultural factors impact CAR T access', identified potential sources of inequity including geographic, financial and informed consent barriers. The second, 'varying emotions, roles and enablers', identified an easier treatment experience compared with alternatives; an underwhelming cell administration process; frustration with inpatient monitoring; burden on support persons and importance of 'bridge' organisations such as charities and patient support groups. Lastly, 'golden opportunities: reimagining CAR T service delivery', suggested: improved geographical access to CAR T-cell therapy, while retaining consolidated clinician experience; a 'dashboard' with information on CAR T-cell treatment, time frames and manufacture; a health navigator to co-ordinate non-medical aspects of treatment and signpost care; embedding of indigenous data sovereignty and ownership of cells; a cell infusion ceremony, incorporating family involvement and Māori cultural elements and outpatient administration and monitoring where possible.
conclusionThis study documented the current experience of New Zealanders receiving CAR T-cell therapy and identified opportunities for future service development. These insights are relevant to service design within Aotearoa New Zealand, and other countries developing equitable CAR T-cell services.
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.