MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408957618 · doi:10.1111/bjh.20061

CD19 chimeric antigen receptor‐T cell therapy in murine immune thrombocytopenia

2025· article· en· W4408957618 on OpenAlexaff
Fengjiao Han, Zhengqi Jiang, Qiuyu Guo, Yucan Li, Chaoyang Li, Xiaohong Liang, Lin Han, Reid C. Gallant, Ming Hou, Jun Peng, Miao Xu

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Journal of Haematology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCAR-T cell therapy research
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersNatural Science Foundation of Shandong ProvinceNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsChimeric antigen receptorImmunologyCD19AntigenImmune thrombocytopeniaMedicineImmune systemReceptorVirologyT cellAntibodyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary Immune thrombocytopenia (ITP) is an autoimmune disorder characterized by antiplatelet autoantibodies, with many patients refractory or relapsing on conventional treatments. GPIbα, an important autoantigen in ITP, is notably linked to refractoriness, highlighting the need for novel treatments. We assessed CD19 chimeric antigen receptor (CAR)‐T cell therapy's potential in a modified murine model targeting GPIbα. CD19 CAR‐T cell infusion accelerated platelet count recovery compared to the control group, effectively depleted CD19 + B cells and CD138 + plasma cells, and markedly reduced anti‐GPIbα autoantibodies in vivo. In vitro CD19 CAR‐T cells reduced both plasma cells and B cells in the spleens of mice and ITP patients. CD19 CAR‐T cell therapy significantly altered T‐cell subsets, increasing regulatory T cells, T helper 1 and T helper 17 populations, suggesting a role in modulating the immune response for sustained ITP remission. Monitoring of body/spleen weights and temperature showed no significant cytokine release syndrome, indicating a favourable safety profile. These promising results support the potential of CD19 CAR‐T cell therapy as a novel treatment option for refractory ITP, particularly in GPIbα‐positive autoantibody patients. Further clinical studies are warranted to assess the safety and efficacy of this approach in human patients.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.296 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations4
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBritish Journal of HaematologySame topicCAR-T cell therapy researchFrench-language works237,207