CAR T-cell detection scoping review: An essential biomarker in critical need of standardization

13Citations
Citations of this article
27Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

The expansion and persistence of chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cells in patients are associated with response, toxicity, and long-term efficacy. As such, the tools used to detect CAR T-cells following infusion are fundamental for optimizing this therapeutic approach. Nevertheless, despite the critical value of this essential biomarker, there is significant variability in CAR T-cell detection methods as well as the frequency and intervals of testing. Furthermore, heterogeneity in the reporting of quantitative data adds layers of complexity that limit intertrial and interconstruct comparisons. We sought to assess the heterogeneity of CAR T-cell expansion and persistence data in a scoping review using the PRISMA-ScR checklist. Focusing on 21 clinical trials from the USA, featuring a Food and Drug Administration-approved CAR T-cell construct or one of its predecessors, 105 manuscripts were screened and 60 were selected for analysis, based on the inclusion of CAR T-cell expansion and persistence data. Across the array of CAR T-cell constructs, flow cytometry and quantitative PCR were identified as the two primary techniques for detecting CAR T-cells. However, despite apparent uniformity in detection techniques, the specific methods used were highly variable. Detection time points and the number of evaluated time points also ranged markedly and quantitative data were often not reported. To evaluate whether subsequent manuscripts from a trial resolved these issues, we analyzed all subsequent manuscripts reporting on the 21 clinical trials, recording all expansion and persistence data. While additional detection techniques-including droplet digital PCR, NanoString, and single-cell RNA sequencing-were reported in follow-up publications, inconsistencies with respect to detection time points and frequency remained, with a significant amount of quantitative data still not readily available. Our findings highlight the critical need to establish universal standards for reporting on CAR T-cell detection, especially in early phase studies. The current reporting of non-interconvertible metrics and limited provision of quantitative data make cross-trial and cross-CAR T-cell construct comparisons extremely challenging. Establishing a standardized approach for collecting and reporting data is urgently needed and would represent a substantial advancement in the ability to improve outcomes for patients receiving CAR T-cell therapies.

References Powered by Scopus

PRISMA extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR): Checklist and explanation

19712Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

A scoping review of scoping reviews: Advancing the approach and enhancing the consistency

2005Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

CD19 CAR-T cells of defined CD4<sup>+</sup>:CD8<sup>+</sup> composition in adult B cell ALL patients

1686Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Cited by Powered by Scopus

INSPIRED Symposium Part 2: Prevention and Management of Relapse Following Chimeric Antigen Receptor T Cell Therapy for B Cell Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia

5Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

CD19 CAR-T cell therapy for relapsed or refractory diffuse large B cell lymphoma: Why does it fail?

4Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Need for standardization of cytokine profiling in CAR T cell therapy

2Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Turicek, D. P., Giordani, V. M., Moraly, J., Taylor, N., & Shah, N. N. (2023). CAR T-cell detection scoping review: An essential biomarker in critical need of standardization. Journal for ImmunoTherapy of Cancer, 11(5). https://doi.org/10.1136/jitc-2022-006596

Readers over time

‘23‘24‘250481216

Readers' Seniority

Tooltip

PhD / Post grad / Masters / Doc 6

60%

Researcher 3

30%

Professor / Associate Prof. 1

10%

Readers' Discipline

Tooltip

Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Bi... 6

55%

Medicine and Dentistry 3

27%

Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1

9%

Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceut... 1

9%

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free
0