SynthesisScientific reports2024
Patient-reported outcomes of chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy in hematologic malignancies: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Patient-reported outcomes after idecabtagene vicleucel vs. ciltacabtagene autoleucel CAR-T for multiple myeloma.Bone marrow transplantation · 2026Article
- Tisagenlecleucel yields superior patient-reported health-related quality of life compared to autologous stem cell transplantation in patients with relapsed/refractory large B-cell lymphomas.Annals of hematology · 2026Article
- Pharmacovigilance in Cell and Gene Therapy: Evolving Challenges in Risk Management and Long-Term Follow-Up.Drug safety · 2026Review
- Assessing Quality of Life and Symptoms in Transplantation and CAR-T Recipients: Expert Panel Recommendations from the Survivorship Special Interest Group of ASTCT.Transplantation and cellular therapy · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Few studies evaluated patient-reported outcomes (PROs) for patients with hematologic malignancies receiving with Chimeric Antigen Receptor T (CAR-T) cell therapy. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the benefits of CAR-T cell therapies focused on PROs. A systematic literature searched from PubMed, Cochrane, and the Web of Science from inception to September 2023. Study selection and data extraction were conducted independently by two reviewers based on pre-specified criteria. The COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) Risk of Bias checklist was used to evaluate the methodological quality of the included studies. The random-effects model was employed to calculate the combined effect and 95% Confidence intervals. This study was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guideline and the protocol was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42024586706). We identified 20,110 studies. Of those, 15 studies with 16 different PRO measures (PROMs) were included in the meta-analysis. CAR-T cell therapy improved PROs in the six domains of general health status, pain, fatigue, depression, social function, and cognitive function: from the general health status (SMD: 0.57, 95% CI: 0.34 to 0.81) to cognitive function (SMD: 0.25, 95% CI: 0.14 to 0.37). The current meta-analysis shows that CAR-T cell therapy produces clinically meaningful differences in PROs. These results suggest that the professional perspective and patient values and preferences should be weighed equally when considering CAR-T cell therapy for hematologic malignancies.
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.