ReviewFrontiers in immunology2024
Engineering strategies to safely drive CAR T-cells into the future.
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.
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
33 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Microbial Systems Enhancing CAR-Based Therapies: A Synthetic Biology Paradigm for Next-Generation Cancer Immunotherapy.Current microbiology · 2025Pooled it
- In vivo immune cell engineering from bench to clinical reality.Pharmaceutical science advances · 2026Review
- Next-generation CAR-T cell therapy against cancer: precision engineering, programmable immunity, and emerging clinical frontiers.Journal of the Egyptian National Cancer Institute · 2026Review
- Recent advances in molecular mechanisms to improve the efficacy of CAR-T cell therapy for viral diseases, cancer, and autoimmune diseases.Stem cell research & therapy · 2026Review
- Characterization of CAR-T cell factors that contribute to myeloid cell activation.Gene therapy · 2026Article
- Regulatory T cells as a potential treatment for autoimmune inflammatory rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases.Clinical rheumatology · 2026Review
- Humanized biparatopic nanobody-based CAR-T cells overcome antigen-heterogeneity in multiple myeloma.Journal of translational medicine · 2026Article
- Adoptive T-cell therapies in the clinic.Bioengineering & translational medicine · 2026Review
- Rethinking Advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma: Integrative Genomics, Immunotherapy, and Molecular-Orthomolecular Strategies.Cancers · 2026Review
- Cationic mRNA Lipid Nanoparticles for Ex Vivo NanoCAR-T Cell Engineering.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2026Article
- Self-amplifying RNA-based CAR T cell therapy with enhanced duration and multi-genic logic functions.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Epigenetic editing to advance CAR T cell therapy.Clinical epigenetics · 2026Review
- Overcoming Resistance and Relapse in CAR-T and CAR-NK Cell Therapies: From Bench to Bedside.Research (Washington, D.C.) · 2026Article
- Review
- CAR-T cells immunotherapy in the treatment of glioblastoma.Cancer immunology, immunotherapy : CII · 2025Review
- CAR-T Cell Therapy for Prostate Cancer: Current Advances and Future Perspectives.Biomedicines · 2025Review
- Engineering CAR-T cells for solid tumors: bispecific antigen targeting, tumor microenvironment modulation, and toxicity control.Immunologic research · 2025Review
- Review
- State of the art in CAR-based therapy: In vivo CAR production as a revolution in cell-based cancer treatment.Cellular oncology (Dordrecht, Netherlands) · 2025Review
- Enhancing the potency of CAR-T cells against solid tumors through transcription factor engineering.JCI insight · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
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
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.