I think it all depends on the strength, breadth, a

I think it all depends on the strength, breadth, and duration of immune response to cancer antigens induced by therapeutic or preventive cancer vaccines, as you and ohm have said balanced against the specificity so as not to induce autoimmunity.

CAR-T just introduces engineered T-cells against a cancer antigen. In blood cancers these cells may not persist or the cancer cell population can mutate away from that antigen and there can be recurrence.

Cancer vaccines are hoped to induce a more natural and longer lasting response, perhaps. This could include a broader repertoire where different T cells recognize different epitopes of the cancer antigen molecule. Vaccines can include multiple tumor associated antigens, and can be personalized to a patients tumors neoantigens.

Cart imports limited specific mercenary soldier clones, while vaccines can grow an army of more diverse soldiers against one specific enemy, an army with memory of how to produce a more diverse group of soldiers.

Checkpoint inhibitors are like giving all the soldiers steroids to make them less inhibited killers (with the hope they dont turn against their own civilians). Leronlimab could do the same by limiting TReg cells that keep our soldiers at bay, as well as limiting our enemy movement and choking off their supply lines.

Adoptive engineered cell therapy is making good progress as cellular engineering tech improves, different cell types used and they could be made allogeneic more persistent etc... I still think it easier and cheaper just to teach the bodies own immune system to ramp up against cancer with vaccines and immunomodulators like checkpoint inhibitors or things that improve tumor microenvironment like perhaps leronlimab.

But it is a complex question with a complex answer, and I am just a layman.

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41541-019-0103-y/