Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42122207›Full record

ReviewCancers2026

Determinants of Chimeric Antigen Receptor (CAR) T Cell Success: In Vitro and In Vivo Preclinical Assessment.

Michael K Sheng, William J Murphy

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cancers, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
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

2 authors.

Michael K ShengDepartment of Dermatology, University of California Davis School of Medicine, Sacramento, CA 95817, USA.
William J MurphyDepartment of Dermatology, University of California Davis School of Medicine, Sacramento, CA 95817, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND/

objectivesChimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cell therapy has profoundly transformed the cancer treatment landscape, achieving unprecedented clinical success in patients with hematological malignancies. However, challenges such as cytokine release syndrome, neurotoxicity, antigen escape, and limited efficacy in solid tumors remain, underscoring the need for robust preclinical modeling to evaluate novel CAR T cell products.

methodsThis review provides a comprehensive overview of in vitro and in vivo preclinical modeling for CAR T cell functionality and toxicity assessment. We examine traditional experimental approaches and their limitations, discuss emerging technologies, and highlight how these strategies can be integrated to advance future CAR T cell therapies.

resultsIn vitro assays provide insights into efficacy but fail to model trafficking, dynamic immune cell interactions, and complex tumor microenvironments. In vivo mouse models allow for more complex physiological evaluation but are limited by species differences. Next generation platforms, such as patient-derived tumor organoids and organ- or multi-organ-on-a-chip microfluidics are emerging as potential tools to model CAR T cell therapy in physiologically relevant contexts and computational approaches are being increasingly used to develop novel CAR designs and predict patient responses.

conclusionsBy integrating traditional experimental approaches with innovative technologies, the CAR T cell field is poised to generate more clinically relevant and predictive data thereby accelerating the development of safer, more effective, and personalized CAR T cell therapies.

Indexed as

CAR T cellsimmunotherapyin vitroin vivopreclinical modelingtranslational research

Identifiers

PMID42122207
PMCPMC13162664

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.