A systematic scoping review of studies investigating the fate of cells administered in clinical and whole organ studies
Madison Cooper1,2, Rhys R Pook1,2, Aaron J Buhagiar1, Lucilia P Mouries3, P. Stephen Patrick4, Mya Thu5, Vladimir Ponomarev6, Colin Wilson1,2,7, Neil Sheerin1,2,8, William E Scott III1,2.
1Translational and Clinical Research Institute, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, United Kingdom; 2NIHR Blood and Transplant Research Unit, Newcastle and Cambridge University, Newcastle upon Tyne, United Kingdom; 3Cell Therapy Safety, Health & Environmental Sciences Institute, Washington DC, United States; 4Centre for Advanced Biomedical Imaging, University College London, London, United States; 5Co-founder and CEO, Visicell Medical Inc., San Diego, United States; 6Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, United States; 7Institute of Transplantation, Freeman Hospital, Newcastle upon Tyne, United Kingdom; 8Renal Services, Newcastle Upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Newcastle upon Tyne, United Kingdom
A major barrier to clinical translation of cellular therapies is the limited understanding of their fate and distribution post-administration. The literature documents multiple approaches to track cells using labels and various modalities such as magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), positron emission tomography (PET), single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) and scintigraphy, however, the terminology is inconsistent and difficult to make cross-study comparisons. To address this, the Health & Environmental Science Institute’s Cell Therapy – Tracking, Circulation and Safety (HESI CT/TRACS) committee established the Data Portal for Imaging Cell Therapies (DPICT) database focused on collating the literature relating to cell fate tracking. Initial attempts to populate the database by academic, regulatory, and industry experts identified 61 articles. To build on these efforts and ensure a comprehensive collection, we performed a systematic review to collate all the methods of tracking cells that have been used in clinical trials and human whole organ studies where cells are administered in vivo as a therapeutic.
In April 2025, Medline Ovid, Pubmed and Scopus databases were systematically searched for papers published in English, post-2001 with the following key word sequence structure: (imaging modality) AND (cell label) AND (cell type) AND (humans OR human study OR human studies OR clinical study OR clinical studies OR clinically OR patient* OR perfusion). Initial DPICT database papers were used as a positive control. Data extracted included; cell type, disease indication, imaging technology used for cell tracking, imaging probe, reporter gene, observation times, region and research funding source.
A total of 78 articles met the inclusion criteria, with most studies tracking PBMCs, specifically DC-vaccines (16.7%), employing scintigraphy (34%) and enrolled patients with a cancer diagnosis (30.8%) including melanoma, glioblastoma and breast cancer. Common themes amongst the articles included a need for a contrast agents with long half-life in longitudinal studies, imaging modalities with high resolution/specificity and cellular therapies that migrate to the target site to work effectively.
The frequent use of PBMCs like DCs reflects their accessibility and established role in clinical trials, particularly in cancer immunotherapy. However, a decline in biodistribution publications after 2015 may indicate growing recognition of limitations in imaging modalities - especially the short maximum tracking durations, with most studies reporting observation periods of ≤1 week. By systematically mapping these trends, this review supports the population of the DPICT database with up-to-date cell tracking articles that have been cultivated to benefit the cell-therapy community. This will guide future research by identifying gaps in the field and limitations of current imaging modalities, contrast agents and cellular therapeutic action.
This study is funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Blood and Transplant Research Unit in Organ Donation and Transplantation (NIHR203332), a partnership between NHS Blood and Transplant, University of Cambridge and Newcastle University. The views expressed are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NIHR, NHS Blood and Transplant or the Department of Health and Social Care.. This study is funded by the Health and Environmental Science Institute (HESI). The ‘HESI’ is organised and operated as a non-profit, charitable and scientific organisation. . I would also like to thank Aaron Buhagiar and Bogdan Metes for advice and training in database searching..
[1] Cell Tracking
[2] Cell Therapy
[3] Imaging Modalities
[4] Systematic Review
[5] DPICT database
[6] Clinical Translation
[7] Health & Environmental Science Institute