Bispecific T-Cell Engagers and Chimeric Antigen Receptor T-Cell Therapies in Glioblastoma: An Update
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Glioblastoma is the most common malignant primary brain tumor in adults. The prognosis is extremely poor even with standard treatment of maximal safe resection, radiotherapy, and chemotherapy. Recurrence is inevitable within months, and treatment options are very limited. Chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy (CART) and bispecific T-cell engagers (TCEs) are two emerging immunotherapies that can redirect T-cells for tumor-specific killing and have shown remarkable success in hematological malignancies and been under extensive study for application in glioblastoma. While there have been multiple clinical trials showing preliminary evidence of safety and efficacy for CART, bispecific TCEs are still in the early stages of clinical testing, with preclinical studies showing very promising results. However, there are multiple shared challenges that need to be addressed in the future, including the route of delivery, antigen escape, the immunosuppressive tumor microenvironment, and toxicity resulting from the limited choice of tumor-specific antigens. Efforts are underway to optimize the design of both these treatments and find the ideal combination therapy to overcome these challenges. In this review, we describe the work that has been performed as well as novel approaches in glioblastoma and in other solid tumors that may be applicable in the future.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".