The hematologic oncology field is shifting from innovation to implementation when it comes to using novel cellular therapies for patients with multiple myeloma, leukemia, lymphoma, and other malignancies, according to Zahra Mahmoudjafari, PharmD, MBA, BCOP, FHOPA.
In the wake of the 2026 National Immune Cell Effector Therapy (ICE-T) Congress in Charlotte, North Carolina, Mahmoudjafari, a conference director, spoke with CancerNetwork® about highlights from the meeting. She described the key takeaways that emerged from sessions dedicated to innovations in CAR T-cell therapies and advances in bispecific antibodies, as well as the keynote lecture regarding the field’s future.
Mahmoudjafari, a clinical pharmacy manager in the Division of Hematologic Malignancies and Cellular Therapeutics at the University of Kansas Health System, also detailed the critical themes that presenters will explore at the upcoming National ICE-T Conference in Orlando, Florida, which will take place in July. Future research, she said, will focus on operationalizing outpatient models and community-based administration to further elevate the quality of care for patients.
CancerNetwork: One of the key sessions from the ICE-T conference in Charlotte focused on CAR-T and cellular therapy innovations. What were some key takeaways from that session, particularly as they relate to possible advances in multiple myeloma, lymphoma, and leukemia?
Mahmoudjafari: One of the biggest takeaways from the ICE-T conference and the CAR-T and cellular therapy session was how quickly we’re moving from innovation to optimization in diseases like multiple myeloma, lymphoma, and even some leukemias. The question is no longer, “Does CAR-T work?” It’s, “How do we deliver it better and earlier to more patients?” We’re seeing strong momentum toward earlier-line use, particularly in multiple myeloma and large B-cell lymphoma. Along with ongoing work to improve durability of response and reduce relapse, there is also a lot of discussion around next-generation constructs—things like dual-targeting [chimeric antigen receptors (CARs)] and strategies to overcome antigen escape. From an operational standpoint, the conversation has shifted toward access. This access is something we’ve talked about for a long time, but this is inclusive of not only reducing vein-to-vein time [but] expanding manufacturing capacity and then building outpatient models safely, where I think the pharmacists, health systems, and other interdisciplinary team members are playing a critical role in translating these advances into something not only scalable but sustainable.
Another session was dedicated to bispecific antibodies and T-cell engagers. What developments in those areas have the potential to elevate the quality of care for different patient populations?
The bispecific antibodies and T-cell–engagers are redefining accessibility in immune effector cell therapy. Unlike CAR-T cells, these are off-the-shelf options, and these allow us to treat patients much more quickly, especially those who may not be candidates for cellular therapy in the traditional sense. What stood out at the meeting is how rapidly these agents are evolving, not just in multiple myeloma, but across lymphoma and some of the solid tumors as well. We’re seeing improved step-up dosing strategies and better mitigation of toxicity, such as cytokine release syndrome, and we are growing comfortable with outpatient administration.
What’s most exciting is their potential to bridge gaps in care for our patients in perhaps rural locations. They can serve as a bridge to CAR [T-cell therapy]. They can be an alternative for patients who relapse after CAR-T or even move into earlier lines of therapy, and we use them earlier altogether. From a systems perspective, they are forcing us to rethink care delivery models because we now need infrastructure that supports both high acuity monitoring but also outpatient flexibility.
What were some key takeaways from the meeting’s keynote lecture on the future of cellular therapies and bispecific antibodies?
The keynote is always a special event. It highlighted that we’re entering a phase of convergence across our immune effector platforms. We now have CAR-T, bispecifics, and newer approaches like trispecific antibodies and allogeneic cell therapies that are starting to blur our traditional treatment lines. A few key things that stood out [included] the push toward off-the-shelf cellular therapies, which is going to significantly reduce some of the logistical barriers that we have come to appreciate with our currently available products.
Second, the development of multi-targeted approaches to improve durability and prevent resistance is another important target. Lastly, the integration of these therapies into earlier lines of treatment requires being able to have more patients be eligible for these types of therapies. From a clinical practice standpoint, what this means is we’re moving toward a more complex decision-making landscape. It won’t be about choosing whether or not you’re going to use immune effector therapy, but which one, when, and in which sequence. That has major implications for care coordination, toxicity management, and payer strategy, too.
How will the next ICE-T meeting in Orlando this July build upon the ideas brought up in Charlotte? What will be the key themes of this upcoming meeting?
All of the ICE-T meetings build on this shift from innovation to implementation. The Orlando meeting is no different. Our goal with ICE-T is to expand access to our community locations and our community providers and meet them where they are. The Charlotte [meeting] highlighted what was possible. The Orlando [meeting] will focus not only on possibility, but on operationalizing. [We will be] looking at outpatient models, community-based delivery, and standardizing toxicity management across settings. Of course, [we are] hoping to have a deeper dive into those bispecific integrations, particularly as they move into earlier lines of therapy.
What makes ICE-T rather unique is that it’s not just about the science; it’s about the “how”. How do we build the workflows, train the teams, and ensure safety while trying to scale these therapies to more patients? The conversation remains top of mind, and as something we’re hoping to accomplish with all our ICE-T conferences.
