MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A phase 1/2 study evaluating the safety and efficacy of autologous TAC T cells in subjects with claudin 18.2+ advanced solid tumors.

2025· article· en· W4410804591 on OpenAlexaff
Davendra Sohal, Syma Iqbal, Simon Turcotte, Gregory P. Botta, Benjamin L. Schlechter, Geoffrey Y. Ku, Peter J. Hosein, Samuel D. Saibil, Miriam Gavriliuc, Maria Apostolopoulou, Mobolaji Giwa, Heather MacGregor, Kara M. Moss, Eli Panna, Swaminathan Murugappan, Ecaterina E. Dumbrava

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCell Adhesion Molecules Research
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreUniversity of TorontoCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineClaudinCancer researchInternal medicineOncologyTight junction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

e14519 Background: The purpose of this study is to determine the safety of autologous TAC T cell administration to subjects with claudin 18.2+ advanced solid tumors. Claudin18.2 (CLDN18.2) is a tight junction protein found in gastric epithelial cells. It can become abnormally expressed in gastric cancer and other solid tumors, rendering it a candidate for targeted therapy. The T cell antigen coupler (TAC) technology modifies T cells ex vivo , allowing cytotoxicity of tumor cells by co-opting the natural T cell receptor. TAC T cells demonstrate a safer profile than chimeric antigen receptor T cells. TAC01-CLDN18.2 is an autologous T-cell product comprising T cells expressing CLDN18.2 TAC. Methods: In this first-in-human study (NCT05862324), subjects undergo leukapheresis (bridging anticancer therapy during cell manufacturing is allowed). Prior to TAC01-CLDN18.2 infusion, subjects undergo lymphodepletion chemotherapy. In Phase I, TAC01-CLDN18.2 is being administered at increasing doses (3 cohorts) in adult subjects with ≥2 lines of prior therapy (1 for subjects with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC)) using the classic 3+3 dose escalation study design. CLDN18.2 expression levels are determined centrally using a validated clinical trial assay. Dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) are assessed for up to 28 days after the infusion. A second dose may be administered according to preidentified clinical and safety criteria. In Phase II, dose expansion groups will evaluate the efficacy, safety, and pharmacokinetics of the optimal TAC01-CLDN18.2 dose, with the option of redosing. Indications will include gastric and esophageal adenocarcinoma (group A), PDAC (group B) and ovarian and non-small cell lung cancer (group C) in subjects with < 4 lines of prior therapy. Results: The first two dose cohorts of Phase I have been completed, and the third cohort has been deemed safe by the Data and Safety Monitoring Committee, with no reported dose-limiting toxicities (DLT). One subject experienced two Grade 3 treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs): gastritis and gastric hemorrhage (both resolving within 4 days). Three subjects experienced CRS (one Grade 2 and two Grade 1). One subject in cohort 2 experienced a grade 1 neurotoxicity, which resolved the same day without intervention. Eight subjects reported a total of 18 serious adverse events, with 5 related to TAC01-CLDN18.2. A 67% disease control rate was observed at first tumor assessment (Day 29). Two subjects with high CLDN18.2 expression had partial responses. One of them was enrolled in cohort 1 with heavily pre-treated PDAC (3 prior lines) and has an ongoing, confirmed partial response. This subject received a second dose and is still on treatment (10 months). Conclusions: Treatment with TAC01-CLDN18.2 is safe and shows promising clinical activity in a heavily pre-treated cancer population. Treatment of cohort 3 is ongoing. Clinical trial information: NCT05862324 .

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.121
GPT teacher head0.551
Teacher spread0.429 · 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 designNon-randomized trial
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical OncologySame topicCell Adhesion Molecules ResearchFrench-language works237,207