2018
DOI: 10.1158/2159-8290.cd-18-0297
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

CARs versus BiTEs: A Comparison between T Cell–Redirection Strategies for Cancer Treatment

Abstract: The redirection of T cells against tumors holds much promise for the treatment of cancer. Two main approaches for T-cell redirection involve their genetic modification with chimeric antigen receptors (CAR), or the use of recombinant proteins designated bispecific T-cell engagers (BiTE). These approaches have demonstrated dramatic effects in patients with hematologic cancers, although limited effect against solid cancers. Here, we review and compare the successes and challenges of these two types of immunothera… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
157
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
9
1

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 182 publications
(168 citation statements)
references
References 113 publications
(138 reference statements)
0
157
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Unlike CAR T-cell therapies, bispecific antibody constructs themselves do not proliferate but rather act by inducing expansion of antigenexperienced T cells. Although it is unclear how to directly compare the immune expansion capability of bispecific antibody constructs and CAR T-cell therapies, it has been noted that the expansion of antigen-experienced T cells by bispecific antibody constructs can be order of magnitudes lower than the self-expansion of CAR T-cell therapies [81]. Because the resolution of malignant disease could require continued action of T cells over prolonged time periods, differences in T-cell expansion and persistence between bispecific antibody constructs and CAR T-cell therapies could lead to differences in durability of remission, though there is currently insufficient clinical data for BCMAtargeted therapies to date to make direct comparisons [81].…”
Section: Discussion and Future Perspectivesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Unlike CAR T-cell therapies, bispecific antibody constructs themselves do not proliferate but rather act by inducing expansion of antigenexperienced T cells. Although it is unclear how to directly compare the immune expansion capability of bispecific antibody constructs and CAR T-cell therapies, it has been noted that the expansion of antigen-experienced T cells by bispecific antibody constructs can be order of magnitudes lower than the self-expansion of CAR T-cell therapies [81]. Because the resolution of malignant disease could require continued action of T cells over prolonged time periods, differences in T-cell expansion and persistence between bispecific antibody constructs and CAR T-cell therapies could lead to differences in durability of remission, though there is currently insufficient clinical data for BCMAtargeted therapies to date to make direct comparisons [81].…”
Section: Discussion and Future Perspectivesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Given their potential for enhancing T-cell activation, agonistic antibodies targeting costimulatory receptors (e.g., CD137/4-1BB, OX40) are also under investigation (41). domain, to bypass major histocompatibility complex (MHC)-dependent binding to TAAs, and intracellular signaling domains for T-cell activation/costimulation (43). T-cell activation is initiated following immune synapse (IS) formation, which facilitates lytic granulemediated apoptosis of the target cell.…”
Section: Disease Progressionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As such, several anticancer drugs have been developed that specifically target these enzymes. More recently, non-cancer cells infiltrating tissues are attracting attention as potential therapeutic targets [17][18][19]. In this approach, drugs target non-cancer cells that are in close proximity to cancerous cells rather than targeting tumor cells directly.…”
Section: Current Status Of Drug Development Targeting the Stroma Of Cmentioning
confidence: 99%