Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38962002›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in immunology2024

Engineering strategies to safely drive CAR T-cells into the future.

Matteo Rossi, Eytan Breman

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in immunology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
33citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

33 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Adoptive T-cell therapies in the clinic.Bioengineering & translational medicine · 2026
    Review
  9. Review
  10. Cationic mRNA Lipid Nanoparticles for Ex Vivo NanoCAR-T Cell Engineering.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2026
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. CAR-T cells immunotherapy in the treatment of glioblastoma.Cancer immunology, immunotherapy : CII · 2025
    Review
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. 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.

Matteo RossiCelyad Oncology SA, Mont-Saint-Guibert, Belgium.
Eytan BremanCelyad Oncology SA, Mont-Saint-Guibert, Belgium.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy has proven a breakthrough in cancer treatment in the last decade, giving unprecedented results against hematological malignancies. All approved CAR T-cell products, as well as many being assessed in clinical trials, are generated using viral vectors to deploy the exogenous genetic material into T-cells. Viral vectors have a long-standing clinical history in gene delivery, and thus underwent iterations of optimization to improve their efficiency and safety. Nonetheless, their capacity to integrate semi-randomly into the host genome makes them potentially oncogenic via insertional mutagenesis and dysregulation of key cellular genes. Secondary cancers following CAR T-cell administration appear to be a rare adverse event. However several cases documented in the last few years put the spotlight on this issue, which might have been underestimated so far, given the relatively recent deployment of CAR T-cell therapies. Furthermore, the initial successes obtained in hematological malignancies have not yet been replicated in solid tumors. It is now clear that further enhancements are needed to allow CAR T-cells to increase long-term persistence, overcome exhaustion and cope with the immunosuppressive tumor microenvironment. To this aim, a variety of genomic engineering strategies are under evaluation, most relying on CRISPR/Cas9 or other gene editing technologies. These approaches are liable to introduce unintended, irreversible genomic alterations in the product cells. In the first part of this review, we will discuss the viral and non-viral approaches used for the generation of CAR T-cells, whereas in the second part we will focus on gene editing and non-gene editing T-cell engineering, with particular regard to advantages, limitations, and safety. Finally, we will critically analyze the different gene deployment and genomic engineering combinations, delineating strategies with a superior safety profile for the production of next-generation CAR T-cell.

Indexed as

Gene EditingImmunotherapy, AdoptiveReceptors, Chimeric AntigenT-LymphocytesAnimalsCRISPR-Cas SystemsGenetic EngineeringGenetic VectorsHumansNeoplasmsReceptors, Antigen, T-CellTumor MicroenvironmentReceptors, Antigen, T-CellReceptors, Chimeric AntigenCAR T-cellscell engineeringgene editinggene modificationtransgene delivery

Identifiers

PMID38962002
PMCPMC11219585

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.