ReviewFrontiers in immunology2026
Chimeric antigen receptor macrophages therapy for glioblastoma: challenges and opportunities from preclinical evidence to clinical translation.
Review in Frontiers in immunology, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Treatment failure in glioblastoma (GBM) is primarily attributed to the convergence of multiple barriers, including an immunosuppressive tumor microenvironment (TME), intratumoral heterogeneity, and the blood-brain barrier. Chimeric antigen receptor macrophages (CAR-M) therapy presents a promising new avenue for GBM treatment, leveraging its inherent tumor-homing capacity, TME reprogramming function, and potential to bridge innate and adaptive immunity. However, despite promising preclinical data, clinical efficacy in GBM remains unproven. This review critically analyzes the translational gap. We first outline the theoretical rationale and inherent advantages of CAR-M therapy in overcoming the core barriers of GBM. We then critically assess the limitations of current preclinical evidence and the uncertainties associated with its extrapolation to the clinical setting. We then focus on bottlenecks such as target selection strategies, engineering design, and TME-driven issues like phenotypic inactivation and antigen escape, discussing corresponding optimization approaches like armoring modifications, logic-gated designs, and convection-enhanced delivery. Finally, we propose a pragmatic clinical translation pathway prioritizing mechanistic validation. This pathway emphasizes integrating CAR-M therapy with combinatorial approaches and smart technologies in early-phase clinical trials, supported by biomarker analyzes, to address fundamental biological questions regarding the homing, survival, and function of these cells in patients. This review aims to provide a systematic and critical reference to guide the translation of CAR-M therapy from concept to clinical application, a path characterized by both opportunities and challenges.
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.