ReviewEMBO molecular medicine2026
Regulatory challenges of personalized medicine in the real world: are the right patients being treated with CD19-targeting CAR T-cells?
Review in EMBO molecular medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Despite the clinical success of CD19-directed CAR T-cell therapies, less than 50% of patients achieve long-term remission. Emerging evidence indicates that loss or reduced expression of CD19-due to mutations, deletions, alternative splicing-is a significant, underrecognized mechanism of treatment failure. Notably, CD19-negative subpopulations can be detected even prior to therapy, and patients with low CD19 expression consistently show poorer outcomes. Although current clinical guidelines do not mandate routine CD19 testing before treatment, this situation reflects both scientific and technical challenges. Importantly, patients with partial/ low CD19 expression may still benefit from therapy, complicating the definition of "target positivity." From a regulatory perspective, targeted therapies should ideally be used only when target expression is confirmed. This principle is difficult to implement, considering the scarcity of data and the difficulties of current diagnostic tools, risking both undertreatment and overtreatment. EU regulators have addressed the issue by introducing harmonized warnings in product information, but more is needed. We highlight this regulatory-clinical gap and advocate for improved diagnostic standards, better data integration, and dialogue among clinicians, developers, and regulators.
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.