MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4394770414 · doi:10.1016/j.tips.2024.03.004

Direct in vivo CAR T cell engineering

2024· article· en· W4394770414 on OpenAlexafffund
Lauralie Short, Robert A. Holt, Pieter R. Cullis, Laura Evgin

Bibliographic record

VenueTrends in Pharmacological Sciences · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCAR-T cell therapy research
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser UniversityCanada's Michael Smith Genome Sciences CentreUniversity of British Columbia
FundersBC Cancer AgencyCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchBC Cancer FoundationMichael Smith Health Research BC
KeywordsIn vivoChimeric antigen receptorEx vivoCell therapyMedicineImmunotherapyImmunologyComputational biologyComputer scienceBiologyStem cellImmune systemBiotechnologyCell biology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

T cells modified to express intelligently designed chimeric antigen receptors (CARs) are exceptionally powerful therapeutic agents for relapsed and refractory blood cancers and have the potential to revolutionize therapy for many other diseases. To circumvent the complexity and cost associated with broad-scale implementation of ex vivo manufactured adoptive cell therapy products, alternative strategies to generate CAR T cells in vivo by direct infusion of nanoparticle-formulated nucleic acids or engineered viral vectors under development have received a great deal of attention in the past few years. Here, we outline the ex vivo manufacturing process as a motivating framework for direct in vivo strategies and discuss emerging data from preclinical models to highlight the potency of the in vivo approach, the applicability for new disease indications, and the remaining challenges associated with clinical readiness, including delivery specificity, long term efficacy, and safety.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.072
GPT teacher head0.410
Teacher spread0.337 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations102
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTrends in Pharmacological SciencesSame topicCAR-T cell therapy researchFrench-language works237,207