Cost-effectiveness of chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy in adults with relapsed or refractory follicular lymphoma

Engineering signalling pathways in mammalian cells

In mammalian cells, signalling pathways orchestrate cellular growth, differentiation and survival, as well as many other processes that are essential for the proper functioning of cells. Here we describe cutting-edge genetic-engineering technologies for the rewiring of signalling networks in mammalian cells. Specifically, we describe the recombination of native pathway components, cross-kingdom pathway transplantation, and the development of de novo signalling within cells and organelles. We also discuss how, by designing signalling pathways, mammalian cells can acquire new properties, such as the capacity for photosynthesis, the ability to detect cancer and senescent cell markers or to synthesize hormones or metabolites in response to chemical or physical stimuli. We also review the applications of mammalian cells in biocomputing. Technologies for engineering signalling pathways in mammalian cells are advancing basic cellular biology, biomedical research and drug discovery.

Advances in manufacturing chimeric antigen receptor immune cell therapies

Biomedical research has witnessed significant strides in manufacturing chimeric antigen receptor T cell (CAR-T) therapies, marking a transformative era in cellular immunotherapy. Nevertheless, existing manufacturing methods for autologous cell therapies still pose several challenges related to cost, immune cell source, safety risks, and scalability. These challenges have motivated recent efforts to optimize process development and manufacturing for cell therapies using automated closed-system bioreactors and models created using artificial intelligence. Simultaneously, non-viral gene transfer methods like mRNA, CRISPR genome editing, and transposons are being applied to engineer T cells and other immune cells like macrophages and natural killer cells. Alternative sources of primary immune cells and stem cells are being developed to generate universal, allogeneic therapies, signaling a shift away from the current autologous paradigm. These multifaceted innovations in manufacturing underscore a collective effort to propel this therapeutic approach toward broader clinical adoption and improved patient outcomes in the evolving landscape of cancer treatment. Here, we review current CAR immune cell manufacturing strategies and highlight recent advancements in cell therapy scale-up, automation, process development, and engineering.

Cost-Effectiveness of Axicabtagene Ciloleucel for Adult Patients With Relapsed or Refractory Follicular Lymphoma in the United States

OBJECTIVES

The results of a recent single-arm trial (ZUMA-5) of axicabtagene ciloleucel (axi-cel) for relapsed/refractory (r/r) follicular lymphoma (FL) demonstrated high rates of durable response and tolerable toxicity among treated patients. To quantify the value of axi-cel compared with standard of care (SOC) to manage r/r FL patients who have had at least 2 prior lines of systemic therapy (3L+), a cost-effectiveness model was developed from a US third-party payer perspective.

METHODS

A 3-state partitioned-survival cost-effectiveness model was developed with a lifetime horizon. Patient-level analyses of the 36-month ZUMA-5 (axi-cel) and SCHOLAR-5 (SOC) studies were used to extrapolate progression-free and overall survivals. After 5 years of survival, an estimated 40% of the modeled population was assumed to experience long-term remission based on literature. Results include the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) measured as incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained. One-way sensitivity analysis, probabilistic sensitivity analysis, and scenario analyses were performed. All outcomes were discounted 3% per year.

RESULTS

Axi-cel led to an increase of 4.28 life-years, 3.64 QALYs, and a total cost increase of $321 192 relative to SOC, resulting in an ICER of $88 300 per QALY. Across all parameters varied in the one-way sensitivity analysis, the ICER varied between $133 030 and $67 277. In the probabilistic sensitivity analysis, axi-cel had a 99% probability of being cost-effective across 5000 iterations using a $150 000 willingness-to-pay threshold.

CONCLUSIONS

Given the robustness of the model results and sensitivity analyses, axi-cel is expected to be a cost-effective treatment in 3L+ r/r FL.

Medicare Utilization and Cost Trends for CAR T Cell Therapies Across Settings of Care in the Treatment of Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma

INTRODUCTION

Chimeric antigen receptor T-cell (CAR T) therapies have transformed diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) treatment. It is important to better understand their use in Medicare Fee-for-Service (FFS) patients, who often differ from commercially insured populations in important ways.

METHODS

We analyzed Medicare FFS claims data, focusing on the utilization patterns across three CAR T products-lisocabtagene maraleucel (liso-cel), tisagenlecleucel (tisa-cel), and axicabtagene autoleucel (axi-cel)-which are indicated for the treatment of DLBCL. Our investigation covered the period from 2021 through 2022. This analysis spanned a 180-day period prior to CAR T procedure and extended to a 90-day post-CAR T. Utilization of healthcare services, healthcare spending, and comorbidities were assessed in the pre- and post-periods. Clinical trial and PPS-exempt center claims were removed from the analysis. Statistical comparisons between inpatient and outpatient cohorts were made using Wilcoxon's rank-sum tests for continuous variables and Chi-square tests or Fisher's exact tests for categorical variables.

RESULTS

Among the total 391 CAR T claims assessed, most of the CAR T therapies were administered in the inpatient setting (79%) compared to outpatient (21%). CAR T therapy in the inpatient setting received an average Medicare cost of US$498,723 ($276,138-$1,066,524), while the average Medicare cost for outpatient CAR T claims was $414,393 ($276,980-$849,878). There was a higher 3-month average post-period cost for those hospitals utilizing CAR T in the outpatient setting than the inpatient setting ($15,794 vs. $10,244). Despite the higher post-period cost, when looking at the CAR T procedure and pre- and post-periods as a single episode, beneficiaries receiving outpatient CAR T had less cost for the total episode of care ($587,908 vs. $529,188). Follow-up inpatient claims were also assessed post-CAR T procedure for 30 days. The rate of post-CAR T inpatient re-admission was significantly lower for beneficiaries receiving the index CAR T in the inpatient setting (21%) compared to outpatient CAR T (59%). Days between index CAR T discharge and IP admission were also significantly shorter for OP CAR T compared to IP CAR T (8.0 vs. 14.1 days, p < 0.0001). Additionally, IP CAR T had a longer ALOS on the admission claim (6.9 vs. 6.2 days).

CONCLUSION

CAR T therapy for the treatment of LBCL has become more common within the Medicare population, primarily in the inpatient setting. This study helps understand providers' cost and associated patient care around CAR T administration. The data show that the average cost received by hospitals encompasses the expenses related to both the CAR T drug and the medical services delivered to patients.

Economic Evaluations of Chimeric Antigen Receptor T-Cell Therapies for Hematologic and Solid Malignancies: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to systematically review evidence on the cost-effectiveness of chimeric antigen receptor T-cell (CAR-T) therapies for patients with cancer.

METHODS

Electronic databases were searched in October 2022 and updated in September 2023. Systematic reviews, health technology assessments, and economic evaluations that compared costs and effects of CAR-T therapy in patients with cancer were included. Two reviewers independently screened studies, extracted data, synthesized results, and critically appraised studies using the Philips checklist. Cost data were presented in 2022 US dollars.

RESULTS

Our search yielded 1809 records, 47 of which were included. Most of included studies were cost-utility analysis, published between 2018 and 2023, and conducted in the United States. Tisagenlecleucel, axicabtagene ciloleucel, idecabtagene vicleucel, ciltacabtagene autoleucel, lisocabtagene maraleucel, brexucabtagene autoleucel, and relmacabtagene autoleucel were compared with various standard of care chemotherapies. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for CAR-T therapies ranged from $9424 to $4 124 105 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) in adults and from $20 784 to $243 177 per QALY in pediatric patients. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were found to improve over longer time horizons or when an earlier cure point was assumed. Most studies failed to meet the Philips checklist due to a lack of head-to-head comparisons and uncertainty surrounding CAR-T costs and curative effects.

CONCLUSIONS

CAR-T therapies were more expensive and generated more QALYs than comparators, but their cost-effectiveness was uncertain and dependent on patient population, cancer type, and model assumptions. This highlights the need for more nuanced economic evaluations and continued research to better understand the value of CAR-T therapies in diverse patient populations.

The Rebirth of Radioimmunotherapy of Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma: The Phoenix of Nuclear Medicine?

In Greek mythology, The Phoenix is an immortal bird that dies, but then achieves new life by rising from the ashes of its predecessor. Radioimmunotherapy (RIT) of B-cell Non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) is a field which once began to fly high-with FDA approval of the anti-CD20 RITs Zevalin® and Bexxar® in 2002 and 2003 respectively, as safe and effective therapies of NHL. However, despite their therapeutic efficacy, Bexxar® was withdrawn from the market by the manufacturer in 2014 due to limited commercial demand and Zevalin® has had very limited to no availability of late. I-131 rituximab is used to a limited extent in Australia, India and other countries, as well. But has RIT of NHL been (perhaps prematurely) left for dead by many? Given the current great clinical and commercial interest in radiopharmaceutical therapies of cancer, notably PSMA and SSTR targeting agents in prostate and neuroendocrine cancers, can radioimmunotherapy of NHL-like the mythical Phoenix-now rise from its ashes in an even better form to fly higher, faster, farther and longer than before?

A systematic review on the appropriate discounting rates for the economic evaluation of gene therapies: whether a specific approach is justified to tackle the challenges?

OBJECTIVES

Discounting the cost and effect for health intervention is a controversial topic over the last two decades. In particular, the cost-effectiveness of gene therapies is especially sensitive to the discount rate because of the substantial delay between the upfront cost incurred and long-lasing clinical benefits received. This study aims to investigate the influence of employing alternative discount rates on the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of gene therapies.

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted to include health economic evaluations of gene therapies that were published until April 2023.

RESULTS

Sensitivity or scenario analysis indicated that discount rate represented one of the most influential factors for the ICERs of gene therapies. Discount rate for cost and benefit was positively correlated with the cost-effectiveness of gene therapies, that is, a lower discount rate significantly improves the ICERs. The alternative discount rate employed in some cases could be powerful to alter the conclusion on whether gene therapies are cost-effective and acceptable for reimbursement.

CONCLUSIONS

Although discount rate will have substantial influence on the ICERs of gene therapies, there lacks solid evidence to justify a different discounting rule for gene therapies. However, it is proposed that the discount rate in the reference case should be updated to reflect the real-time preference, which in turn will affect the ICERs and reimbursement of gene therapies more profoundly than conventional therapies.

The new era of immunological treatment, last updated and future consideration of CAR T cell-based drugs

Cancer treatment is one of the fundamental challenges in clinical setting, especially in relapsed/refractory malignancies. The novel immunotherapy-based treatments bring new hope in cancer therapy and achieve various treatment successes. One of the distinguished ways of cancer immunotherapy is adoptive cell therapy, which utilizes genetically modified immune cells against cancer cells. Between different methods in ACT, the chimeric antigen receptor T cells have more investigation and introduced a promising way to treat cancer patients. This technology progressed until it introduced six US Food and Drug Administration-approved CAR T cell-based drugs. These drugs act against hematological malignancies appropriately and achieve exciting results, so they have been utilized widely in cell therapy clinics. In this review, we introduce all CAR T cells-approved drugs based on their last data and investigate them from all aspects of pharmacology, side effects, and compressional. Also, the efficacy of drugs, pre- and post-treatment steps, and expected side effects are introduced, and the challenges and new solutions in CAR T cell therapy are in the last speech.

Budget Impact of Introducing Fixed-Duration Mosunetuzumab for the Treatment of Relapsed or Refractory Follicular Lymphoma After Two or More Lines of Systemic Therapy in the USA

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to assess the budget impact of introducing fixed-duration mosunetuzumab as a treatment option for adult patients with relapsed or refractory follicular lymphoma after at least two prior systemic therapies and to estimate the total cumulative costs per patient in the USA.

METHODS

A 3-year budget impact model was developed for a hypothetical 1-million-member cohort enrolled in a mixed commercial/Medicare health plan. Comparators were: axicabtagene ciloleucel, tisagenlecleucel, tazemetostat, rituximab plus lenalidomide, copanlisib, and older therapies (rituximab or obinutuzumab ± chemotherapy). Costs per patient comprised treatment-associated costs including the drug, its administration, adverse events, and routine care. Dosing and safety data were ascertained from respective package inserts and clinical trial data. Drug costs (March 2023) were estimated based on the average wholesale acquisition cost reported in AnalySource®, and all other costs were based on published sources and inflated to 2022 US dollars. Market shares were obtained from Genentech internal projections and expert opinion. Budget impact outcomes were presented on a per-member per-month basis.

RESULTS

Compared with a scenario without mosunetuzumab, its introduction over 3 years resulted in a budget increase of $69,812 (1% increase) and an average per-member per-month budget impact of $0.0019. Among the newer therapies, mosunetuzumab had the second-lowest cumulative per patient cost (mosunetuzumab = $202,039; axicabtagene ciloleucel = $505,845; tisagenlecleucel = $476,293; rituximab plus lenalidomide = $263,520; tazemetostat = $250,665; copanlisib = $127,293) and drug costs, and its introduction only increased total drug costs by 0.1%. By year 3, the cumulative difference in the per patient cost with mosunetuzumab was -$303,805 versus axicabtagene ciloleucel, -$274,254 versus tisagenlecleucel, -$61,481 versus rituximab plus lenalidomide, -$48,625 versus tazemetostat, and $74,747 versus copanlisib. Older therapies were less costly with 3-year cumulative costs that ranged from $36,512 to $147,885.

CONCLUSIONS

Over 3 years, the estimated cumulative per patient cost of mosunetuzumab is lower than most available newer therapies, resulting in a small increase in the budget after its formulary adoption for the treatment of relapsed or refractory follicular lymphoma.

Cost-Effectiveness of Reduced-Intensity Allogeneic Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation for Older Patients With High-Risk Myelodysplastic Syndrome: Analysis of BMT CTN 1102

PURPOSE

BMT CTN 1102 was a phase III trial comparing reduced-intensity allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (RIC alloHCT) to standard of care for persons with intermediate- or high-risk myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS). We report results of a cost-effectiveness analysis conducted alongside the clinical trial.

METHODS

Three hundred eighty-four patients received HCT (n = 260) or standard of care (n = 124) according to availability of a human leukocyte antigen-matched donor. Cost-effectiveness was calculated from US commercial and Medicare perspectives over a 20-year time horizon. Health care utilization and costs were estimated using propensity score-matched cohorts of HCT recipients in the OptumLabs Data Warehouse (age 50-64 years) and Medicare (age 65 years and older). EuroQol 5 Dimension (EQ-5D) surveys of trial participants were used to derive health state utilities.

RESULTS

Extrapolated 20-year overall survival for those age 50-64 years was 29% for HCT (n = 105) versus 13% for usual care (n = 44) and 31% for HCT (n = 155) versus 12% for non-HCT (n = 80) for those age 65 years and older. HCT was more effective (+2.36 quality-adjusted life-years [QALYs] for age 50-64 years and +2.92 QALYs for age 65 years and older) and more costly (+$452,242 in US dollars (USD) for age 50-64 years and +$233,214 USD for age 65 years and older) than usual care, with incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of $191,487 (USD)/QALY and $79,834 (USD)/QALY, respectively. For persons age 50-64 years, there was a 29% chance that HCT was cost-effective using a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of $150K (USD)/QALY and 51% at a $200K (USD)/QALY. For persons age 65 years and older, the probability was 100% at a WTP >$150K (USD)/QALY.

CONCLUSION

Among patients age 65 years and older with high-risk MDS, RIC HCT is a high-value strategy. For those age 50-64 years, HCT is a lower-value strategy but has similar cost-effectiveness to other therapies commonly used in oncology.

CAR-T cells for treating systemic lupus erythematosus: A promising emerging therapy

Chimeric Antigen Receptor T-cell therapy (CAR-T), currently employed routinely for treating B-cell malignancies, has emerged as a groundbreaking approach in addressing severe autoimmune diseases, especially for systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). The immunological rationale for targeting B lymphocytes in autoimmune diseases is well-established, demonstrating success in numerous autoantibody-mediated autoimmune conditions through targeted therapies over several years. However, this approach has often proven ineffective in the context of systemic lupus erythematosus. Recent data on CAR-T usage in lupus, revealed promising results including rapid and prolonged remission without treatment, highlighting the potential of CAR-T therapy in severe lupus cases. This article provides a comprehensive overview of CAR-T cells, tracing their evolution from hematological malignancies to their recent applications in autoimmune disorder, especially in lupus. Clinical trials within a regulated framework are now imperative to assess the procedural aspects in order to validate the considerable promise of CAR-T cell therapy in the field of autoimmune diseases. This includes evaluating safety and long-term efficacy and security of the procedure, the benefit-risk ratio in the field of autoimmunity, the availability and cost-related issues associated with this emerging cellular therapy procedure.

Cost of implementing CAR-T activity and managing CAR-T patients: an exploratory study

BACKGROUND

Chimeric antigen receptor T cells (CAR-T) represent an innovation but raise issues for healthcare payers because of the uncertainty on impact at market launch, high cost and important organisational impact. The literature has focused on their assessment, appraisal and market access solutions. No evidence on the costs sustained to implement CAR-T is available and a few studies reported the cost of the CAR-T clinical pathway, including the activities that are remunerated through inpatient or outpatient fee-for-service/episode. This paper aims at filling the information gap, assessing the cost of implementing CAR-T activity and the full cost of managing the CAR-T clinical pathway.

METHODS

Cost analysis relied on the Activity Based Costing approach, which was applied to two Italian healthcare organisations, both CAR-T Centres authorized by the regional governments with a minimum of 20 patients treated with the first two CAR-T therapies launched on the market.

RESULTS

The cost of implementing CAR-T was estimated at €1.31 million (calculated for one of the organizations with complete data). Most of these costs (77%) were generated by quality assurance activity. The mean cost per patient entering the CAR-T pathway (59 and 27) and surviving at follow-up (21 and 5) ranges from €48K to €57K and from €96K to €106K, respectively. Fees for hospitalization and infusion of gene therapy accounts for more than 70% of these costs. The actual hospitalisation cost varies greatly across patients and is in general lower than the fee-for-episode paid by the region to the hospital.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite its limitations (exploratory nature; the time spent by staff on activities which are not remunerated through fees was estimated through interviews with the CAR-T coordinators; cost items are not fully comparable), this research highlighted the relevant organisational and economic impact of CAR-T and provided important insights for policy makers and healthcare managers: the necessity to invest resources in CAR-T implementation; the need for assessing activities which are not remunerated through fees for service / episode; the opportunity to shift from fee-for-episode / service to bundled payments for CAR-T clinical pathway.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of mosunetuzumab for treatment of relapsed or refractory follicular lymphoma after two or more lines of systemic therapy in the United States

AIMS

Mosunetuzumab has received accelerated approval by the US Food and Drug Administration for adult patients with relapsed or refractory (R/R) follicular lymphoma (FL) after two or more lines of systemic therapy. We evaluated the cost-effectiveness of mosunetuzumab for the treatment of R/R FL from a US private payer perspective.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A partitioned survival model simulated lifetime costs and outcomes of mosunetuzumab against seven comparators: axicabtagene ciloleucel (axi-cel), tisagenlecleucel (tisa-cel), tazemetostat (taz, EZH2 wild-type only), rituximab plus lenalidomide (R-Len) or bendamustine (R-Benda), obinutuzumab plus bendamustine (O-Benda), and a retrospective real-world cohort (RW) based on current patterns of care derived from US electronic health records (Flatiron Health). Efficacy data for mosunetuzumab were from the pivotal Phase II GO29781 trial (NCT02500407). Relative treatment efficacy was estimated from indirect treatment comparisons (ITCs). Costs included were related to treatment, adverse events, routine care, and terminal care. Except for drug costs (March 2023), all costs were inflated to 2022 US dollars. Costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were used to calculate incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). Net monetary benefit (NMB) was calculated using a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of $150,000/QALY.

RESULTS

Mosunetuzumab dominated taz, tisa-cel, and axi-cel with greater QALYs and lower costs. Mosunetuzumab was projected to be cost-effective against R-Benda, O-Benda, and RW with ICERs of $78,607, $42,731, and $21,434, respectively. Mosunetuzumab incurred lower costs but lower QALYs vs. R-Len. NMBs showed that mosunetuzumab was cost-effective against comparators except R-Len.

LIMITATIONS

Without head-to-head comparative data, the model had to rely on ITCs, some of which were affected by residual bias. Model inputs were obtained from multiple sources. Extensive sensitivity analyses assessed the importance of these uncertainties.

CONCLUSION

Mosunetuzumab is estimated to be cost-effective compared with approved regimens except R-Len for the treatment of adults with R/R FL.

Efficacy, safety, and cost-minimization analysis of axicabtagene ciloleucel and tisagenlecleucel CAR T-Cell therapies for treatment of relapsed or refractory follicular lymphoma

Axicabtagene ciloleucel (axi-cel) and tisagenlecleucel (tisa-cel) are chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapies used to treat adult patients with relapsed or refractory follicular lymphoma (rrFL) after two or more lines of systemic therapy. In the absence of head-to-head clinical trials, this study aimed to compare the efficacy, safety, and cost of axi-cel and tisa-cel in the treatment of rrFL after at least two lines of treatment. Overall response rate (ORR) and safety signals were compared using reporting odds ratios (RORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) at p < 0.05. Progression-free survival (PFS), duration of response (DoR), and overall survival (OS) were compared using the Kaplan?Meier method with a log-rank test. Cost and cost-minimization analyses of drug acquisition, drug administration, serious adverse events (AEs), and relapsed management were calculated. Costs were extracted from the IBM-Micromedex Red Book, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, and existing literature. Statistical analyses were conducted using Microsoft Excel and R version 4.0.5. No statistically significant differences were observed between axi-cel and tisa-cel in terms of ORR, DoR, and OS (p > 0.05). PFS was significantly better with tisa-cel (p < 0.05). Axi-cel was significantly associated with higher incidences of CRS, neurologic events, and grade 3-4 AEs than tisa-cel (ROR > 1, p < 0.05). Axi-cel and tisa-cel cost $512,021 and $450,885 per patient, respectively, resulting in savings of US$61,136 with tisa-cel over axi-cel. Tisa-cel appears to have a better safety profile, fewer serious AEs, lower mortality rate, and lower cost than axi-cel.

Mosunetuzumab and the emerging role of T-cell-engaging therapy in follicular lymphoma

Follicular lymphoma (FL) is the most common indolent lymphoma. Since the advent of rituximab, FL has seen a progressive improvement in patient prognosis. While chemotherapy combined with an anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody remains standard first-line therapy, most patients will relapse and require subsequent therapy. T-cell-redirecting therapies can be very potent and are transforming the therapeutic landscape in the relapsed and refractory (R/R) setting. T-cell-dependent bispecific antibodies, of which mosunetuzumab is the first to be approved for R/R FL, are proving to be a highly effective, 'off-the-shelf' option with manageable toxicities. This review covers approved treatments for R/R FL and focuses on preclinical and clinical data available for mosunetuzumab (Lunsumio™), with the goal of determining its role in the treatment of R/R FL.

Thinking "outside the germinal center": Re-educating T cells to combat follicular lymphoma

There have been significant advancements in the management of follicular lymphoma (FL), the most common indolent lymphoma. These include immunomodulatory agents such as lenalidomide, epigenetic modifiers (tazemetostat), and phosphoinotiside-3 kinase inhibitors (copanlisib). The focus of this review is T cell-engager therapies, namely chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy and bispecific antibodies, have recently transformed the treatment landscape of FL. Two CAR T cell products, axicabtagene ciloleucel (axi-cel) and tisagenlecleucel (tisa-cel), and one bispecific antibody, mosunetuzumab, recently received FDA approvals in FL. Several other new immune effector drugs are being evaluated and will expand the treatment armamentarium. This review focuses on CAR T-cell and bispecific antibody therapies, details their safety and efficacy and considers their evolving role in the current treatment landscape of FL.

CAR-T State of the Art and Future Challenges, A Regulatory Perspective

This review is an outlook on CAR-T development up to the beginning of 2023, with a special focus on the European landscape and its regulatory field, highlighting the main features and limitations affecting this innovative therapy in cancer treatment. We analysed the current state of the art in the EU and set out a showcase of the field's potential advancements in the coming years. For this analysis, the data used came from the available scientific literature as well as from the European Medicines Agency and from clinical trial databases. The latter were investigated to query the studies on CAR-Ts that are active and/or relevant to the review process. As of this writing, CAR-Ts have started to move past the "ceiling" of third-line treatment with positive results in comparison trials with the Standard of Care (SoC). One such example is the trial Zuma-7 (NCT03391466), which resulted in approval of CAR-T products (Yescarta™) for second-line treatment, a crucial achievement for the field which can increase the use of this type of therapy. Despite exciting results in clinical trials, limitations are still many: they regard access, production, duration of response, resistance, safety, overall efficacy, and cost mitigation strategies. Nonetheless, CAR-T constructs are becoming more diverse, and the technology is starting to produce some remarkable results in treating diseases other than cancer.