Comparative review reveals efficacy and safety trade-offs between CAR-T cells and bispecific engagers in blood cancers, highlighting optimal sequencing to overcome shared resistance.
T-cell redirecting immunotherapies, namely chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy and bispecific T-cell engagers (BsAbs), have reshaped treatment for relapsed or refractory hematologic malignancies, including large B-cell lymphoma, B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia, and multiple myeloma. Both platforms achieve MHC-independent, antigen-specific tumor cytotoxicity, yet differ in structure, kinetics, logistics, and toxicity, shaping how each is used clinically. This review compares autologous CAR T-cell products, engineered as living, self-amplifying cellular therapies, with off-the-shelf recombinant bispecific antibodies across pivotal trials in these three malignancies. CAR T-cell therapy produces deep, durable, treatment-free remissions after a single infusion but requires a multi-week manufacturing period, high upfront cost, and is associated with prolonged cytopenias and severe early cytokine release syndrome and immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome. Bispecific antibodies, in contrast, are immediately available, permit manageable step-up dosing suitable for outpatient use, and generally cause lower-grade acute toxicity, though repeated dosing until progression brings cumulative infection risk from sustained immunosuppression and yields lower complete remission rates. Shared resistance mechanisms, particularly antigen loss, splice-variant escape, and T-cell exhaustion, limit durability across both approaches. We discuss how prior bispecific exposure can compromise subsequent CAR T-cell manufacturing and outcomes, supporting sequencing frameworks that favor cellular therapy earlier when feasible, alongside antigen-switching strategies at relapse. Emerging solutions, including allogeneic off-the-shelf CAR-T platforms, in vivo mRNA delivery, dual-antigen targeting, and logic-gated constructs, aim to merge cellular potency with the accessibility of molecular engagers. Rational sequencing, biomarker-guided selection, and combination strategies will be central to optimizing outcomes and access to both treatment classes.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Giri et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: