ReviewEMBO molecular medicine2025
CAR T-cell-associated secondary malignancies challenge current pharmacovigilance concepts.
Review in EMBO molecular medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Secondary malignancy of T-cell origin after CAR T-cell therapy: EMA's conclusions from the evaluation of 38 suspected cases.Gene therapy · 2026Article
- CAR T cells as novel therapeutic strategy for multiple sclerosis and other neuroimmune disorders.Journal of neuroinflammation · 2025Review
- [Chimeric antigen receptor T-cells for patients with hematologic malignancies].Zeitschrift fur Rheumatologie · 2025Review
- The Era of Gene Therapy: The Advancement of Lentiviral Vectors and Their Pseudotyping.Viruses · 2025Review
- Safe CAR-T: shedding light on CAR-related T-cell malignancies.EMBO molecular medicine · 2025Article
- Novel mRNA-Engineered Fully Human CAR-T Cells Targeting AXL in Solid Tumors.Biomedicines · 2025Article
- CAR T-cell therapy for neurological disorders: scientific rationale and mechanistic insights.Therapeutic advances in neurological disorders · 2025Review
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
Suspected adverse reactions following chimeric antigen receptor T-cell (CAR T) treatment include more and more cases of secondary T-cell malignancies. The causality assessment of such suspected reactions challenges established evaluation practices due to (i) patient and product-specific risk factors and (ii) incomplete data available with post-marketing reports submitted to competent authorities. This is of particular relevance for gene therapy products that integrate into the host genome. We present a summary of case reports related to different CAR T products and the rationale for case causality assessment. In this context, possible pathophysiologic mechanisms and differences between CAR T products to be taken into account are discussed. The unparalleled complexity of the case follow-up and the multistep process of cancer development necessitates a case-by-case consideration. This highlights challenges in the pharmacovigilance of advanced therapy medicinal products and underlines the importance of testing for vector presence, integration location and gene expression profile for an informed case assessment of suspected secondary malignancies with the aim to obtain a better understanding of contributing factors.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.