This page shows what was measured, who it was measured in, and what that does not settle.
What Afamitresgene Autoleucel does in the body
Unresectable or metastatic synovial sarcoma who have received prior chemotherapy, are HLA-A*02
From the FDA-approved label: TECELRA is a genetically modified autologous T cell immunotherapy consisting of CD4 and CD8 positive T cells transduced with a self-inactivating LV to express an affinity- enhanced TCR specific for human MAGE-A4 on the cell surface. The TCR recognizes an HLA-A*02 restricted MAGE-A4 peptide. MAGE-A4 is an intracellular cancer-testis antigen that has restricted expression in normal tissues and is expressed in synovial sarcoma. Antigen-specific activation of TECELRA via TCR- peptide-HLA-A*02 complex results in T cell proliferation, cytokine secretion, and killing of MAGE-A4/HLA-A*02 expressing synovial sarcoma cells.
What happened in people
RNAWiki has not yet published a reviewed conclusion for this use.
§ A fixed RNAWiki sentence
Where this came from
Wording RNAWiki always uses, not a finding about this substance.
No reviewed claim names a result for any goal on this record.
No source is stored against this line.
The limit that matters most
Not recorded.
Where it acts
Not recorded.
Kind of result
No result is published, so no kind of result applies yet
Supervision
Professional supervision is normally required. A regulator classifies this substance in a way that restricts how it is supplied.
What the registries record it as
The substance registry classes this as structurallydiverse.
FDA substance registry · CUY18BJ7BP · read 2026-08-29
It is recorded as coming from HOMO SAPIENS WHOLE. The part recorded is blood.
FDA substance registry · CUY18BJ7BP · read 2026-08-29
Where each sentence above came from
The recorded explanation is written in label language rather than for a beginner. The page opens with what it is taken for instead, and the recorded explanation follows below.
Shown as the opening line on this page.
No statement of the main limit is recorded.
The four opening statements run to 120 words.
Words this page uses
Four words worth knowing first
Chosen from what this page shows, with each one explained before the word it depends on.
Biomarker
A biomarker is a number from a test that stands in for something about health.
A picture of it, and where the picture fails
A biomarker is like a fuel gauge.
Where that stops being true. A gauge is wired to the tank. Many biomarkers are only loosely tied to health.
What people get wrong. A better number is read as a better life. Several medicines improved a number and helped nobody.
A measurable indicator used as a substitute for a clinical outcome of interest.
Placebo
A placebo is a dummy treatment given so the real one can be compared with it.
A picture of it, and where the picture fails
A placebo is like a blank control in an experiment.
Where that stops being true. A blank does nothing. People given a placebo often do get better.
What people get wrong. A placebo effect is read as imaginary. The improvement is measured and real.
An inactive intervention matched in appearance to the test intervention, used to control for non-specific effects.
Comparator
A comparator is whatever the treatment was measured against.
A picture of it, and where the picture fails
It is like the other runner in a race.
Where that stops being true. A race has one winner. A study can show both arms improved.
What people get wrong. Results are read without asking what the other group got. Beating nothing is not beating a treatment.
The control condition against which the experimental intervention is assessed.
What happened in people◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
What happened in people
Each card is one study: the exact question it asked, who was in it, and whether it showed what it set out to show.
Adverse Events (AE) Including Serious Adverse Events (SAE)
✗ The study did not show it
Who was studied
NCT03132922
How many people
71
Study design
Phase 1
Compared against
Not recorded for this study
Kind of result
A number that stands in for health
What was found
Result not recorded on this page
Repeated elsewhere
Unreplicated
What this does not prove. A study that did not show an effect does not show that no effect exists anywhere.
The limits of this study, and where it came from
Main limit. No limitation is recorded for this study.
How far it carries. This study is recorded from the curated record, not from the registry match.
Form and route. Intravenous
Interval reported. Not recorded in this summary
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim.
openFDA NDC Directory · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
openFDA SPL label · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
FDA label (openFDA SPL) · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
Overall Response Rate (ORR) (Cohort 1)
✗ The study did not show it
Who was studied
NCT04044768
How many people
52
Study design
Phase 2
Compared against
Not recorded for this study
Kind of result
A number that stands in for health
What was found
Result not recorded on this page
Repeated elsewhere
Unreplicated
What this does not prove. A study that did not show an effect does not show that no effect exists anywhere.
The limits of this study, and where it came from
Main limit. No limitation is recorded for this study.
How far it carries. This study is recorded from the curated record, not from the registry match.
Form and route. Intravenous
Interval reported. Not recorded in this summary
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim.
openFDA NDC Directory · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
openFDA SPL label · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
FDA label (openFDA SPL) · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
Incidence, duration, and severity of Treatment Emergent Adverse Events as assessed by Investigator Evaluation.
✗ The study did not show it
Who was studied
NCT05642455
How many people
20
Study design
Phase 1/Phase 2
Compared against
Not recorded for this study
Kind of result
A number that stands in for health
What was found
Result not recorded on this page
Repeated elsewhere
Unreplicated
What this does not prove. A study that did not show an effect does not show that no effect exists anywhere.
The limits of this study, and where it came from
Main limit. No limitation is recorded for this study.
How far it carries. This study is recorded from the curated record, not from the registry match.
Form and route. Intravenous
Interval reported. Not recorded in this summary
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim.
openFDA NDC Directory · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
openFDA SPL label · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
FDA label (openFDA SPL) · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
What we know
RNAWiki holds 3 written-up human studies for this substance, each with the question it asked.
How we know it
Each card names the study, the number of people and what the study set out to measure.
What this does not prove
These summaries were written by a person and have not been signed off as reviewed claims.
Why it matters
A study that failed is as informative as one that worked, and both are here.
What we still do not know
No reviewed claim exists, so no exact population, effect size or interval is published yet.
What happened in people◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
How close this is to real life
The top step is something a person would feel or care about. The bottom is a guess from software. Filled steps are where evidence exists for this substance.
□Living longer, or avoiding a major eventNo evidence recorded. Death, a heart attack, a stroke, a hospital stay.No registered study measures this.
□What a body can do day to dayNo evidence recorded. Walking, dressing, breathing, recovering.No registered study measures this.
□Measured performanceNo evidence recorded. How much was lifted, how far was run, how fast.No registered study measures this.
□Symptoms and quality of lifeNo evidence recorded. Pain, tiredness, mood, sleep, as the person rated it.No registered study measures this.
□A number that stands in for healthNo evidence recorded. Cholesterol, blood sugar, bone density. A stand-in, not the thing itself.No registered study measures this.
■A step measured inside a personEvidence recorded. Something measured in human tissue or human cells.A human record sits on the stored organism ladder.
□AnimalsNo evidence recorded. Mice, rats, dogs. Useful for ideas, not proof about people.No animal record is stored.
□Cells in a dishNo evidence recorded. Cells or chemistry on a bench, far from a whole body.No cell or bench record is stored.
□A guess from softwareNo evidence recorded. Nobody measured it. RNAWiki never publishes one as a finding.RNAWiki stores no prediction for this record. Software can suggest a link. RNAWiki does not publish one as a finding.
Higher on these steps means closer to something a person would feel. It does not mean better done.
What is missing or unclear◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
Were people like you studied?
RNAWiki cannot tell whether a study fits you. It can show who was in it, and where the result stops carrying.
Who was studied
People similar to this profile were included.
TECELRA is a melanoma-associated antigen A4-(MAGE-A4)-directed genetically modified autologous T cell immunotherapy indicated for the treatment of adults with unresectable or metastatic synovial sarcoma who have received prior chemotherapy, are HLA-A*02:01P, -A*02:02P, -A*02:03P, or -A*02:06P positive and whose tumor expresses the MAGE-A4 antigen as determined by FDA-approved or cleared companion diagnostic devices.
Who is missing from the studies
Which groups were under-represented in the studies has not been recorded for this substance. Pregnancy, breastfeeding, children, older adults, and people with liver or kidney conditions are commonly excluded from trials; nothing here says whether they were.
What the label states about particular groups
On pediatric, the label states: “The safety and effectiveness of TECELRA have been established in pediatric patients 12 years and older.”
US prescribing information · ab24631f-3364-46e1-8074-7244863bcbab · read 2026-08-30
On older people, the label states: “Clinical studies of TECELRA did not include sufficient numbers of patients aged 65 and over to conclude whether they respond differently from younger patients.”
US prescribing information · ab24631f-3364-46e1-8074-7244863bcbab · read 2026-08-30
On people who are pregnant, the label states: “Risk Summary There are limited available data with TECELRA use in pregnant women.”
US prescribing information · ab24631f-3364-46e1-8074-7244863bcbab · read 2026-08-30
On people who are breastfeeding, the label states: “Risk Summary There is no information regarding the presence of TECELRA in human milk, the effect on the breastfed infant, and the effects on milk production.”
US prescribing information · ab24631f-3364-46e1-8074-7244863bcbab · read 2026-08-30
Where the result stopped carrying
This is a scope explorer, not a diagnosis engine.
It shows who was studied so you can see whether people similar to you were included.
RNAWiki cannot tell whether a study fits you. It can show who was in it.
What it would be like to take◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
Why it might seem to do nothing
A real effect and a noticed effect are different things. These are the recorded reasons the two come apart.
It was studied for a different goal
The studies measured something else entirely.
On this record: Some registered studies measured things that match no goal on this page.
It was studied in different people
The people in the studies were not much like the reader.
On this record: Which groups were under-represented in the studies has not been recorded for this substance. Pregnancy, breastfeeding, children, older adults, and people with liver or kidney conditions are commonly excluded from trials; nothing here says whether they were.
The evidence may simply be wrong
Small early studies often do not hold up.
On this record: RNAWiki has not yet published a reviewed conclusion for this use.
Other reasons RNAWiki checked and found nothing for (10)
A different form was studied
The studied form is not the form on the shelf. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
There was nothing to correct
Where a level is already normal, topping it up may change nothing. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
Something else had to happen too
In the studies it was paired with training, a diet or another treatment. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
The change is too small to feel
A real change can still sit below what a person notices. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
Day-to-day swing hides it
Sleep, food, stress and time of day move most numbers more than this would. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
Not enough time yet
The studies ran longer than the person has waited. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
It was not taken as studied
Missed days change the result, and studies count them. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
Something else changed at the same time
Two changes at once cannot be told apart afterwards. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
The product may not be what it says
Contents of a sold product are not always what the label states. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
No recorded reason
RNAWiki has nothing stored that would explain it. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
None of these is a reason to take more. Taking more is not a step this page ever suggests.
What it would be like to take◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
What taking it involves
The recorded facts about getting hold of it and using it. Nothing here is a suggestion about what you should do.
How it is supplied
Still being tested
❝ Quoted from a source
Where this came from
Copied from a source RNAWiki stored, with the source named.
Read from the recorded approval status.
No source is stored against this line.
Form and route
Intravenous
✎ Source-linked record
Where this came from
A person wrote this into the record with the study named beside it. No reviewer has signed it off.
The form and route recorded on this substance.
No source is stored against this line.
Who oversees it
Professional supervision is normally required. A regulator classifies this substance in a way that restricts how it is supplied.
❝ Quoted from a source
Where this came from
Copied from a source RNAWiki stored, with the source named.
Suppression classes recorded: S7.
No source is stored against this line.
What is in the pack
Sold as injection, suspension, given by the intravenous route.
✎ Source-linked record
Where this came from
A person wrote this into the record with the study named beside it. No reviewer has signed it off.
Recorded notes on how this is sold and what that means for what is in the pack.
No source is stored against this line.
Where it is registered
Regulatory records are listed in the technical disclosure at the foot of this page.
# Counted from records
Where this came from
A count of rows RNAWiki holds. It describes our records, not your body.
Register entries are stored per jurisdiction and shown with their dates.
No source is stored against this line.
Why people stop
Not recorded.
∅ Nothing recorded
Where this came from
RNAWiki holds nothing here and says so rather than guessing.
No record of why people stopped taking it is stored for this substance.
No source is stored against this line.
What it would be like to take∅Nothing found in the sources checked
What can go wrong
Sorted by where each line came from. A regulator's label and a report somebody sent in are not the same kind of fact.
∅Nothing found in the sources checked
No harm is recorded against this substance in the sources RNAWiki checked. Finding nothing is not the same as showing there is nothing.
The sources listed were searched and held nothing. That is not the same as nothing existing.
Over a long time. No completed tested study window is recorded, so long-term effects are not established by the registry record.
Groups the studies covered thinly. Which groups were under-represented in the studies has not been recorded for this substance. Pregnancy, breastfeeding, children, older adults, and people with liver or kidney conditions are commonly excluded from trials; nothing here says whether they were.
What is missing or unclear◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
Does the exact form matter?
Evidence belongs to the exact thing that was tested. A different salt, a different mixture or a different preparation is a different question.
The form that was studied
Intravenous
✎ Source-linked record
Where this came from
A person wrote this into the record with the study named beside it. No reviewer has signed it off.
The form used in the studies cited on this page.
No source is stored against this line.
What is sold
Not recorded.
∅ Nothing recorded
Where this came from
RNAWiki holds nothing here and says so rather than guessing.
Nothing further is recorded about which forms are sold.
No source is stored against this line.
What is recorded as being sold
1 product lists this as an active ingredient in the United States drug directory. 1 of them contain it and nothing else.
FDA National Drug Code directory · 83205-0001 · read 2026-08-29
They are sold as injection, suspension, taken intravenous.
FDA National Drug Code directory · 83205-0001 · read 2026-08-29
1 published label names it as an active ingredient. 1 of them describe this substance alone, which is where its own label text on this page comes from.
US prescribing information · ab24631f-3364-46e1-8074-7244863bcbab · read 2026-08-29
Those labels are classed as cellular therapy.
US prescribing information · ab24631f-3364-46e1-8074-7244863bcbab · read 2026-08-29
TECELRA is intravenous at 3 DOSAGE FORMS AND STRENGTHS TECELRA is a cell suspension for intravenous infusion., recorded as fda label in effect 2026-07-15 in the United States.
US prescribing information · ab24631f-3364-46e1-8074-7244863bcbab · read 2026-08-30
Evidence carries across two names for one substance. It does not carry across a salt, a mirror form or a mixture.
What it would be like to take◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
What you could measure
This one is decided with a clinician, so this section holds questions to ask rather than a plan to run.
Self-experiment planning is not offered for a prescription or clinician-supervised medicine. The questions below are for a clinician or pharmacist.
Questions worth asking
Which of the trials of Afamitresgene Autoleucel studied people like me?
What was measured, and for how long?
Was the result a laboratory value or a health outcome?
What would we watch for, and when would we stop?
Tracking can show whether something changed for you. It cannot show what caused it.
RNAWiki records evidence. It does not say whether this substance is right for you.
What is missing or unclear◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
What nobody knows yet
Open questions, each with why it is open and what would close it.
How much did people take in the studies?
The sources RNAWiki checked hold nothing for this field.
Why it matters. A result belongs to an amount. Without the amount the result floats free.
What would answer it
A stored source that records it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
Missing populations
Which groups were under-represented in the studies has not been recorded.
Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.
What would answer it
A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
Missing long-term data
No completed tested study window is recorded.
Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.
What would answer it
A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
No reviewed conclusion
RNAWiki has not yet published a reviewed conclusion for this use.
Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.
What would answer it
A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
Missing interaction studies
No interaction was found in the registers checked. Not finding one is not the same as showing there is none.
Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.
What would answer it
A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
Formulation uncertainty
Several salts, forms or products of Afamitresgene Autoleucel are recorded. Results from one form may not transfer to another.
Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.
What would answer it
A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
Mechanism not reviewed
No reviewed mechanism story exists for this substance.
Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.
What would answer it
A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
What happened in people◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
Check any of this yourself
Every line above traced back to the study it came from. This is the technical layer, and the vocabulary changes here.
Where else this substance is registered
FDA substance identifier (UNII)
CUY18BJ7BP
RxNorm concept
2690269
Checks this page had to pass
✓ Passed
Identity resolved
no open identity hold
✓ Passed
No unresolved merge across substance families
no quarantine open
✓ Passed
Every public sentence names a source
The opening statement carries the origin: Written into the record, not signed off.
✗ Not passed
Trial roles classified for highlighted evidence
No registered study is classified as testing this substance.
✓ Passed
No internal keys in reader text
enforced by the copy-contract test over the rendered page
✓ Passed
Safety mode resolved
Suppression classes recorded: S7.
✓ Passed
Canonical metadata present
slug and display name present
What is missing or unclear◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
How this medicine reached us
Kept near the foot of the page. A historical event moves up only when it changes something about this substance today.
What the approval register records
The earliest marketing start date recorded for a listed product is 20240802.
FDA National Drug Code directory · 83205-0001 · read 2026-08-29
What is missing or unclear◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
What to learn next
Ordered by what would most change how you read this page, starting with what is easiest to misunderstand.
This order is fixed in code and does not count clicks or time on the page.
What is not here
8 questions this page could not answer
These sections were prepared and left out because there was nothing to put in them. They are listed rather than hidden, so the gaps in this record are visible.
What was measured, goal by goal — found nothing in the sources checked.
The path through the body — found nothing in the sources checked.
Felt, measured, or meaningful — found nothing in the sources checked.
How long anything takes — found nothing in the sources checked.
What it may clash with — found nothing in the sources checked.
Other ways to the same goal — found nothing in the sources checked.
Claims that go past the evidence — found nothing in the sources checked.
What changed on this page — found nothing in the sources checked.
The record as stored
The full record, for auditing
Everything above is built from what is below. This layer keeps the technical vocabulary, record identifiers and every stored row, so a reader who wants to check the page can.
Recorded evidence blocks (4)
Q2
What did Afamitresgene Autoleucel's largest trial (52 people) and its longest (19 years) measure?
52 people in Afamitresgene Autoleucel's largest registered study, 19 years in its longest registered window, measuring Overall Response Rate (ORR) (Cohort 1). ClinicalTrials.gov · 2026-09-01
2 phase2, 1 phase1; NCT04044768; 2038-04-01; no ageing endpoint recorded
Interpretation These counts include studies where Afamitresgene Autoleucel was a comparison treatment, a background treatment or an exposure in an observational study, and the longest window may be a planned end date. Trial roles have not yet been classified for this record.
Show the evidence
phase2
2
phase1
1
recorded 2026-09-01 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q3
Afamitresgene Autoleucel was tested only in human — what did it show?
Overall Response Rate (ORR) (Cohort 1); Incidence, duration, and severity of Treatment Emergent Adverse Events as assessed by Investigator Evaluation.; latest 2038-07-30
Show the evidence
Trial
NCT04044768
"Spearhead 1 Study in Subjects With Advanced Synovial Sarcoma or Myxoid/Round Cell Liposarcoma"; n 52; "Overall Response Rate (ORR) (Cohort 1)"; 2038-04-01
NCT05642455
"SPEARHEAD-3 Pediatric Study"; n 20; "Incidence, duration, and severity of Treatment Emergent Adverse Events as assessed by Investigator Evaluation."; 2038-07-30
recorded 2026-09-01 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q5
At the median, Afamitresgene Autoleucel's trials enrolled 36 people — anything larger?
Median enrolment
36
Largest enrolment
52
Registered trials counted
2
Where it is registeredIdentifiers, relations and other names
ClinicalTrials.gov — US Government work · Europe PMC — metadata only, under the recorded legal gate · derived from this page's own recorded fields; no external licence · openFDA / DailyMed — US Government work
✗ required summary fields resolved: 4 required field(s) not terminal: Why people use it, Best-supported result, Biggest unanswered question, Human evidence
✓ public claims reviewed: 0 reviewed claim(s); drafts are never rendered
✓ source coverage passed: 4 source rows
✓ no critical contamination: no quarantine open
✓ canonical metadata passed: slug and display name present
✓ no raw internal fields: enforced by the copy-contract test over the rendered page
This is a record of evidence. It is not medical advice, and it does not say this substance suits you. Nothing here says any substance on RNAWiki is appropriate for a child.