Leukemia T-cell gene therapy shows progress, but not as effective as hoped

The GLP aggregated and excerpted this blog/article to reflect the diversity of news, opinion and analysis. 

Four years ago, University of Pennsylvania researchers published early but electrifying results. An experimental T-cell therapy eradicated end-stage leukemia in two patients, and put a third in remission.

Soon after that, pharmaceutical giant Novartis partnered with Penn, aiming to commercialize the breakthrough.

Since then, a more modest picture of success has emerged in treating the blood cancer, a type called chronic lymphocytic leukemia that usually strikes in middle age or later.

Of the first 14 CLL patients given the T-cell therapy, four had their cancers disappear – including the first two, who are now about five years cancer-free. Four others got better but then their cancer progressed. And six had no response to the T-cell therapy.

In comparison, Penn’s T-cell therapy has been spectacularly effective in more than 50 children and adults with a fast-progressing type of blood cancer called acute lymphoblastic leukemia. Long-lasting, complete remissions have occurred in more than 60 percent of patients.

The method is complex and costly, and often triggers life-threatening complications. It involves genetically engineering each patient’s disease-fighting T cells to recognize and attack their cancer cells.

When it works, the therapy also offers the hope of a rarity in terminal-stage cancer: a onetime curative treatment. Stem-cell transplantation, a risky, last-resort treatment that can sometimes be curative, is not a suitable option for most patients with CLL.

Read full, original post: T-cell therapy results more modest than hoped for chronic leukemia

Related Articles

Infographic: Global regulatory and health research agencies on whether glyphosate causes cancer

Infographic: Global regulatory and health research agencies on whether glyphosate causes cancer

Does glyphosate—the world's most heavily-used herbicide—pose serious harm to humans? Is it carcinogenic? Those issues are of both legal and ...

Most Popular

ChatGPT-Image-Mar-10-2026-01_39_01-PM
Viewpoint—“Miracle molecule” debunked: Why acemannan supplements don’t work
Wave Crest Over Red Cross
Viewpoint: Here are the election-inspired Trump administration healthcare policy reversals expected in the coming months
p22_spraying_2
How climate change is driving increased pesticide usage
Democratic Donkey Plowing at Sunset
Viewpoint: Democratic tsunami: As the red tide recedes, here are the most likely shifts in food and agricultural policy
Bayer Crop Circle in Golden Wheat
Making fertilizer from thin air: Bayer’s gene-editing innovation could dramatically cut chemical fertilizer use in growing food
ChatGPT-Image-Sep-2-2026-02_03_32-PM
How much of a problem is AI’s water use?
Blue Checklist in Centered Hand
Viewpoint: From Medicaid cuts to MAHA-backed anti-vaccine and chemical hysteria, voters reject Republicans’ science-skeptical agenda
Aerial Sprayer Over Gradient Fields
Farming, food, and chemicals: Post-midterms, the MAHA alliance between Democrats and MAGA Republicans is bruised but not cowed. What comes next?
glp menu logo outlined

Get news on human & agricultural genetics and biotechnology delivered to your inbox.