imm-biopsy: references

Reading queue, source claims and verification status

The initial study summaries come from the supplied review. They have not been independently verified in full for this project. On 21 September 2026, the four supplied publisher/meeting links could not be retrieved with the web tool. The missing Feng citation was located, and its publisher abstract and selected figure captions were accessible. The limited check is recorded below; it does not verify all sampling details.

See the working specification for the extraction rules and the supplied evidence brief for the original wording.

Status markers

• ❌ Not checked. A candidate source or question has not been checked.
• ⚠️ Transcribed, unverified. A claim comes from the supplied brief and still requires checking against the original source.
• ✅ Checked. The specific claim named in the entry has been verified against the stated source passage. This does not imply full-paper review.

Change a marker when the claim has been checked, not when a page is opened.

Reading queue

1. ⚠️ Minopoulou 2024. Verify the negative node with residual marrow cells, the phenotypes and the week-16 pairing. This directly addresses the proposed use of one biopsy to infer another tissue’s result.
2. ⚠️ Teng 2007. Establish the evaluable blood–marrow–synovium pairs and assay-specific denominators before using the larger enrollment count.
3. ⚠️ Albach 2026. Read Figure 2 and Extended Data Figure 3 against patient identity, prior rituximab and exact biopsy timing.
4. ⚠️ Tur 2024/2025. Separate serial nodes from organ specimens supplied by additional patients; check the comparator sampling and assays.
5. ⚠️ Feng 2025. Resolve which patients supplied marrow at which visits, and how residual cells were distinguished from recovering populations.

Sources

Minopoulou et al., ACR 2024

⚠️ Transcribed, unverified. American College of Rheumatology conference abstract: Anti-CD19 chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy induces multicompartmental B-cell depletion in peripheral blood, bone marrow and lymph nodes of systemic lupus erythematosus.

Population and treatment. The brief reports one patient with refractory systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), receiving anti-CD19 CAR-T therapy KYV-101 following fludarabine/cyclophosphamide conditioning.

Sampling and observation. Blood, inguinal node and marrow at week 16; no detectable B cells in blood or node, with a few naïve B cells in marrow. Pretreatment tissue biopsies were not specified.

Use and limit. Candidate example of same-patient cross-tissue discordance. A single conference case cannot estimate its frequency or establish whether remaining cells are pathogenic, persistent or newly generated.

Remaining check. Verify the assay panel, detection threshold, sample amount, pairing and precise wording in the abstract; seek a subsequent report.

Teng et al., Arthritis & Rheumatism, 2007

⚠️ Transcribed, unverified. Immunohistochemical analysis as a means to predict responsiveness to rituximab treatment.

Population and treatment. The brief reports 25 enrolled patients with refractory rheumatoid arthritis (RA), treated with rituximab.

Sampling and observation. Blood and marrow flow cytometry, and synovial immunohistochemistry, before treatment and at week 12. Reported CD20-positive cell depletion and evaluation of synovial CD20-negative/CD79a-positive cells. CD79a is a B-lineage marker; immunohistochemistry identifies cells by staining tissue sections.

Use and limit. Precedent for two tissues plus blood over time. Enrollment is not the verified number of complete matched measurements; phenotypes and assays require separate extraction.

Remaining check. Read methods and results for evaluable pairs, sample amount, assay definitions and the relationship to autoantibody findings.

Albach et al., Nature Medicine, 2026 — COMPARE

⚠️ Transcribed, unverified. Article · Figure 2.

Population and treatment. The brief reports six patients with refractory RA receiving CD19 CAR-T therapy, mivocabtagene autoleucel, after conditioning.

Sampling and observation. The Figure 2 paired marrow/synovium analysis was from one patient; pretreatment samples were four months after rituximab. The brief reports depletion of remaining CD19-positive marrow B cells with persistence of predominantly CD19-negative plasma cells. The week-16 node sample in Extended Data Figure 3 came from a different patient.

Use and limit. A same-patient, two-tissue precedent. Six enrolled patients must not become six matched node–marrow–synovium sets. Prior treatment limits attribution to modality alone.

Remaining check. Confirm patient identifiers, exact post-treatment timing, synovial results, specimen types and assay-specific denominators.

Tur et al., Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases, online 2024 / issue 2025

⚠️ Transcribed, unverified. CD19-CAR T-cell therapy induces deep tissue depletion of B cells.

Population and treatment. The brief reports five CAR-T-treated patients with SLE or systemic sclerosis, five rituximab-treated comparators and three additional CAR-T-treated patients supplying other organ specimens.

Sampling and observation. Inguinal nodes before conditioning and about two months after CAR-T, before blood B-cell reappearance. The brief reports no detectable CD19/CD20-positive nodal B cells after CAR-T, with plasma cells remaining; nodal B cells remained after rituximab despite blood depletion. Colon, kidney and gallbladder specimens each came from an additional patient.

Use and limit. Serial local depletion and a blood–node comparison. Different patients supplying different organs do not establish within-patient node–organ concordance. Treatment groups were not randomized.

Remaining check. Confirm timing, site matching, assay thresholds, tissue amounts and disease/conditioning differences between groups.

Feng et al., Nature Medicine, 2025

⚠️ Sampling details transcribed, partially checked. Co-infusion of CD19-targeting and BCMA-targeting CAR-T cells for treatment-refractory systemic lupus erythematosus: a phase 1 trial. Nature Medicine 31, 3725–3736. DOI: 10.1038/s41591-025-03937-8.

Population and treatment. Fifteen patients with refractory SLE receiving co-infused CD19- and B-cell maturation antigen (BCMA)-directed CAR-T cells following fludarabine/cyclophosphamide conditioning.

Sampling and observation. The supplied brief describes detailed blood and marrow single-cell analyses from three patients before treatment and during immune recovery, addressing plasma cells, autoreactive clones and naïve-cell reconstitution. Preserve mononuclear-cell samples as that specimen type; serial intact-tissue biopsies have not been established.

Use and limit. Relevant to phenotype and clonality during recovery. Dual-target therapy does not validate a node measurement as a marrow surrogate.

Check completed. ✅ On 21 September 2026, the publisher abstract confirmed the cohort size, dual targets and conditioning. The Extended Data Figure 1 caption identifies blood and marrow mononuclear-cell groups from three patients. These checks establish neither complete serial marrow pairing nor marrow sampling at every clinical follow-up visit.

Remaining check. Full methods, Figure 5 and supplements for specimen dates, paired counts, detection thresholds and the basis for claims about clone loss.

Not yet read

• ❌ Human studies of blood–tissue tracking outside this initial selection, including anti-CD20 therapy and T-cell engagers.
• ❌ Biopsy reproducibility studies using separate cores or regions within an organ, including methods for quantifying cellular aggregates.
• ❌ Assay-validation studies for tissue B-cell detection and recovery after processing, including marker interpretation after targeted therapy.

These are search topics, not identified sources. Record citations and screening results when the search is performed.