ArticleCancer immunology, immunotherapy : CII2024
Impact of fludarabine and treosulfan on ovarian tumor cells and mesothelin chimeric antigen receptor T cells.
Article in Cancer immunology, immunotherapy : CII, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Integrative analysis of tumor-educated platelets for stage-specific diagnosis, prognosis, and therapy in ovarian cancer.Discover oncology · 2026Article
- Theoretical and preliminary experimental investigations on the interactions between sugar cryptand and treosulfan.Scientific reports · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
In addition to their immunosuppressive effect, cytostatics conditioning prior to adoptive therapy such as chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cells may play a role in debulking and remodeling the tumor microenvironment. We investigated in vitro the killing efficacy and impact of treosulfan and fludarabine on ovarian cancer cells expressing mesothelin (MSLN) and effect on MSLN-targeting CAR T cells. Treosulfan and fludarabine had a synergetic effect on killing of SKOV3 and OVCAR4 cells. Sensitivity to the combination of treosulfan and fludarabine was increased when SKOV3 cells expressed MSLN and when OVCAR4 cells were tested in hypoxia, while MSLN cells surface expression by SKOV3 and OVCAR4 cells was not altered after treosulfan or fludarabine exposure. Exposure to treosulfan or fludarabine (10 µM) neither impacted MSLN-CAR T cells degranulation, cytokines production upon challenge with MSLN + OVCAR3 cells, nor induced mitochondrial defects. Combination of treosulfan and fludarabine decreased MSLN-CAR T cells anti-tumor killing in normoxia but not hypoxia. In conclusion, treosulfan and fludarabine killed MSLN + ovarian cancer cells without altering MSLN-CAR T cells functions (at low cytostatics concentration) even in hypoxic conditions, and our data support the use of treosulfan and fludarabine as conditioning drugs prior to MSLN-CAR T cell therapy.
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.