ArticleJournal of translational medicine2026
Metabolic and functional analysis including repetitive antigen stimulation provides a more accurate assessment for CAR-T cell product quality and long-term functionality.
Article in Journal of translational 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
23 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundBCMA-directed CAR-T cell therapy has demonstrated remarkable clinical efficacy in multiple myeloma, but robust methods to evaluate product quality and predict long-term functionality remain underdeveloped. While immunophenotypic features of leukapheresis products correlate with clinical outcomes, the characterization of infused CAR-T cell products remains challenging and inconsistent across studies.
methodsWe compared two versions of our academic BCMA-CAR product, CARTemis-1, differing only in their costimulatory domains (4-1BB vs. CD28), and performed a detailed functional and molecular characterization before and after antigen stimulation to identify which analytical approaches best capture functionally relevant differences between CAR-T cell products. Analyses included conventional flow cytometry, short-term cytotoxicity assays, repetitive antigen stimulation, metabolic profiling, and transcriptomic evaluation. Finally, metabolic profile of patient derived CAR-T cells products (n = 15) was also analyzed.
resultsAlthough previous studies have reported functional differences between CAR-T cell products incorporating distinct costimulatory domains, conventional assays in our system revealed no significant differences in viability, expansion dynamics, immunophenotype, or activation/exhaustion marker expression. In contrast, more functionally demanding assays revealed clear differences between constructs. Repetitive antigen stimulation revealed superior long-term cytotoxicity in CARTemis-1-BB, while metabolic profiling demonstrated enhanced spare respiratory capacity and maximal respiration after antigen exposure. Transcriptomic analysis further showed distinct pathway regulation, with enrichment of T cell activation signatures in CARTemis-1-BB and Wnt/TGFβ-related responses in CARTemis-1-28. Importantly, metabolic profiling of infused CAR-T cell products also identified distinct signatures associated with clinical outcome, distinguishing products administered to long-term responders from those infused into short-term or non-responding patients.
conclusionsPersistence and metabolic analyses represent key tools for optimizing CAR-T cell construct selection during preclinical development, providing a more accurate assessment of CAR-T cell product quality than standard immunophenotyping and enabling the identification of constructs with superior therapeutic potential.
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.