MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412693854 · doi:10.1186/s12935-025-03846-3

Targeting cancer stem cells with CAR-based immunotherapy: biology, evidence, and future directions

2025· review· en· W4412693854 on OpenAlexaff
Kaveh Hadiloo, Parsa Mostanadi, Ali Asadzadeh, Siavash Taremi, Abdolreza Esmaeilzadeh

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Cell International · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCAR-T cell therapy research
Canadian institutionsInnovative Medicines Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImmunotherapyCancer stem cellMedicineTumor microenvironmentCancer immunotherapyCancerCancer researchLimitingImmunologyTumor cellsInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cancer stem cells (CSCs) are pivotal in tumor initiation, progression, and relapse, underscoring the need for targeted therapies to achieve lasting responses. This review delves into CSC biology, highlighting their tumor-initiating potential demonstrated through limiting dilution assays and their role in resistance to therapies. Although successful CAR therapies, such as anti-CD19 CAR T-cells, can induce complete responses without directly targeting CSCs, CAR strategies focusing on CSCs may offer promising avenues to prevent recurrence. We assess CAR therapies targeting CSC-specific antigens, including CD133 and GD2, in preclinical and clinical contexts, emphasizing their effectiveness against glioblastoma, breast cancer, and other malignancies. Nevertheless, challenges such as marker specificity and suppression by the tumor microenvironment (TME) persist. Future strategies, which may include dual-targeting and AI-driven marker discovery, aim to improve CSC elimination and advance personalized cancer immunotherapy.

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)0.001
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.393
Teacher spread0.346 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations12
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer Cell InternationalSame topicCAR-T cell therapy researchFrench-language works237,207