ArticleScientific reports2025
Cryopreserved leukapheresis enables scalable and distributed CAR-T manufacturing: a multi-platform comparative study.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Impact of cryopreservation on PBMC-derived CAR-T cell manufacturing outcomes: a systematic review.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Pooled it
- A streamlined and comprehensive protocol for the generation and multi-omic analysis of human monocyte-derived macrophages.BMC biotechnology · 2025Article
- Advances in stem cell-derived beta-cell therapy: A new frontier in type 1 diabetes treatment.Cell transplantationReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cryopreserved leukapheresis is a scalable source for Chimeric antigen receptor T (CAR-T) manufacturing, yet it remains understudied (18.3% of 349 studies, 2010-2024). Current challenges include that cryopreserved leukapheresis lacks a standardized preparation process and has a low level of automation. Systematic validation of its clinical feasibility and platform compatibility is imperative. We carried out a series of optimizations, including the centrifugation procedure, the proportion of CS10, and the cryopreservation procedure. Eventually, a standardized cryopreserved leukapheresis process was established through a closed automated system. Subsequently, a systematic evaluation of the quality and functionality of cryopreserved leukapheresis was conducted. Results showed that cryopreserved leukapheresis achieved ≥ 90% post-thaw viability, with recovery and phenotypic profiles comparable to peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs). It exhibited a higher lymphocyte proportion than PBMCs (66.59% vs. 52.20%), correlating with enhanced CAR-T potential. Initial viability (91.0%) was lower than fresh samples (99.0%), but functional recovery post-electroporation and compatibility with both platforms were confirmed. In the non-viral CAR-T, lentiviral CAR-T, and Fast CAR-T platforms, cryopreserved leukapheresis and fresh leukapheresis were comparable in cell viability, expansion, cell phenotype, CAR + cell proportion, and cytotoxicity. This study comprehensively validated cryopreserved leukapheresis as a universal raw material for CAR-T manufacturing, preserving critical quality attributes (T-cell fitness, CAR functionality) without compromising consistency. Decoupling from fresh material logistics improves supply chain resilience. Protocol standardization and large-scale clinical validation remain critical next steps.
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.