ArticleFrontiers in immunology2025
Transcriptional fingerprinting of regulatory T cells: ensuring quality in cell therapy applications.
Article in Frontiers in immunology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Mucosal-associated invariant T cells support IL-15-dependent Treg response in skin injury and promote resolution of skin inflammation.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Regulatory T cells in pregnancy disorders: a multi-dimensional framework for biomarkers and therapeutic strategies.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Review
- Regulatory T cell dysfunction and exhaustion in uveitis: immunometabolic mechanisms, microenvironmental drivers, and emerging therapeutic strategies.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Introduction: The success of regulatory T cell (Treg) therapies depends on the source of Treg and the quality of the Treg manufacturing product that maintains Treg identity. Commonly used methods to identify Treg, including assessment of FOXP3 expression and demethylation of the Treg-specific demethylated region (TSDR), may not be sufficient on their own to ensure that Treg cell therapy drug products have an optimal identity and phenotype prior to infusion into patients. Methods: To address this critical need, we developed a robust framework to molecularly characterize Treg products using next-generation sequencing. By systematically profiling Treg and effector T cells (Teff) pre- and post-expansion, we defined the molecular fingerprints for expanded Treg products. We employed a non-parametric algorithm to score Treg manufacturing products for their cell identity and expansion fingerprints. Results: The identity fingerprint reflects Treg cell identity by effectively distinguishing Treg from Teff cells irrespective of their activation status, with 100% sensitivity and specificity, while the expansion fingerprint discriminates expanded versus endogenous Treg or Teff cells. We also showed that the identity fingerprint predicts Treg stability in in vitro settings and can be used to illustrate differences in drug products generated using distinct strategies. We further applied fingerprinting to bulk RNA sequencing (RNA-seq) data from endogenous and expanded Treg cells in a Phase 2 clinical trial for type 1 diabetes (T1D), demonstrating its ability to capture Treg identity and expansion in an independent study. Discussion: This Treg fingerprinting method provides a powerful tool to molecularly characterize Treg products, potentially enabling correlative analysis with the safety and efficacy outcomes of Treg-based cell therapies.
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.