Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40698082›Full record

SynthesisFrontiers in immunology2025

Allogeneic CAR-engineered cellular therapy for relapsed and refractory large B cell lymphoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Alexander Biederstädt, Florian Bassermann, Judith S Hecker

Abstract readSystematic ReviewMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis 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 14 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. 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

3 authors.

Alexander BiederstädtDepartment of Medicine III, Technical University of Munich (TUM), School of Medicine and Health, Munich, Germany.
Florian BassermannDepartment of Medicine III, Technical University of Munich (TUM), School of Medicine and Health, Munich, Germany.
Judith S HeckerDepartment of Medicine III, Technical University of Munich (TUM), School of Medicine and Health, Munich, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Relapsed/refractory (r/r) large B-cell lymphoma (LBCL) remains a difficult-to-treat disease with limited treatment options and high unmet clinical need, necessitating the development of new therapies with greater potency and broader applicability. While autologous chimeric antigen receptor (CAR)-T cell therapies have transformed the treatment landscape, 60-65% of patients receiving these therapies eventually relapse, underscoring the need for improved approaches. Allogeneic CAR-T and CAR-NK cell therapies have recently emerged as promising alternatives, offering the potential to shorten manufacturing times, reduce costs, and expand access to a broader patient population. This systematic review and meta-analysis compiles the currently available clinical trial data on the efficacy and safety of these novel therapies in adult patients with r/r LBCL. Methods: A systematic search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials was conducted for studies published up to January 12, 2025, involving allogeneic CAR-T and CAR-NK cell therapies in R/R LBCL. The primary outcomes assessed were the best overall response rate (bORR) and best complete response rate (bCRR) at any time point. Secondary outcomes included rates of grade 1-2 and grade 3+ cytokine release syndrome (CRS), grade 1-2 and grade 3+ immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome (ICANS), grade 1-2 and grade 3+ infections and incidence of graft-versus-host disease (GvHD). Results: Nineteen studies met the inclusion and exclusion criteria, encompassing 334 patients (155 CAR-NK; 179 CAR-T) evaluable for safety and 235 patients evaluable for response (77 CAR-NK; 158 CAR-T). The pooled estimates for the best overall response rate (bORR) and the best complete response rate (bCRR) were 52.5% [95% CI, 41.0-63.9] and 32.8% [95% CI, 24.2-42.0], respectively. Safety analysis revealed very low incidences of grade 3+ CRS (0.04% [95% CI 0.00-0.49]) or grade 3+ ICANS (0.64% [95% CI 0.01-2.23]) and only one occurrence of a GvH-like reaction across 334 infused patients enrolled in the included studies, highlighting the remarkable safety profile of CAR-engineered "off-the-shelf" allogeneic approaches. The estimated overall incidence of low-grade CRS was 30% [95% CI, 14-48], while the estimated overall incidence of low-grade ICANS was 1% [95% CI, 0%-4%], markedly lower than current-generation autologous CAR-T cell products. The incidence of low-grade and severe infections was 25% [95% CI 14-36%) (n=252) and 7% [95% CI 2-14%] (n=291), respectively. Discussion: Together, allogeneic CAR-T and CAR-NK cell therapies demonstrate encouraging efficacy in heavily pretreated patients with r/r LBCL. Coupled with their favorable safety profiles and the potential for off-the-shelf availability, allogeneic cell therapies hold great promise to broaden the reach of live cell-based treatments, delivering impactful results to a wider patient population in the coming years.

Indexed as

Immunotherapy, AdoptiveLymphoma, Large B-Cell, DiffuseReceptors, Chimeric AntigenHumansKiller Cells, NaturalNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalTransplantation, HomologousTreatment OutcomeReceptors, Chimeric Antigenadoptive cell therapy (ACT)allogeneic CAR-NK cellsallogeneic CAR-T cellscellular engineeringclinical trialCRISPR gene editinglarge B cell lymphomaprecision gene editing

Identifiers

PMID40698082
PMCPMC12279871

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.