MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2591660273 · doi:10.1182/blood.v120.21.470.470

The Relationship of Acute Gvhd and Pre- and Post-Transplant Flow-MRD to the Incidence and Timing of Relapse in Children Undergoing Allogeneic Transplantation for High Risk ALL: Defining a Target Population and Window for Immunological Intervention to Prevent Relapse

2012· article· en· W2591660273 sur OpenAlexaff
Michael A. Pulsipher, Bryan Langholz, Donna A. Wall, Kirk R. Schultz, Nancy Bunin, Julie M. Gastier‐Foster, Michael J. Borowitz, Rakesh K. Goyal, Sharon L. Gardner, William L. Carroll, Elizabeth A. Raetz, Stephan A. Grupp

Notice bibliographique

RevueBlood · 2012
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueAcute Lymphoblastic Leukemia research
Établissements canadiensBC Children's HospitalUniversity of Manitoba
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMedicineCumulative incidenceInternal medicineTransplantationInterquartile rangeIncidence (geometry)PopulationHazard ratioTacrolimusAlemtuzumabCohortMethotrexateOncologyGastroenterologyConfidence interval

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Abstract Abstract 470 We previously reported lower rates of grade II-IV aGVHD, but no improvement in survival with the addition of sirolimus to tacrolimus/methotrexate GVHD prophylaxis in a randomized phase III Children's Oncology Group/Pediatric Blood and Marrow Transplant Consortium trial, ASCT 0431. We performed further analysis of this cohort to test whether the presence or absence of aGVHD combined with detection of pre- and/or post-HCT minimal residual disease (MRD) would allow definition of high-risk populations amenable to early intervention to prevent relapse. MRD was measured on patient bone marrow samples with multi-channel flow cytometry at a single reference laboratory (detection threshold 0.01%). The trial included children ages 1–21yrs with high-risk CR1 and CR2 ALL receiving related and unrelated donor TBI-based allogeneic HCT. The analysis included 144 eligible patients with an estimated median follow up of 757d (interquartile range 558–1022d). Both the absence of grade II-IV aGVHD at day 100 and positive MRD pre-and/or post-HCT were correlated with relapse. To illustrate the effect of aGVHD on relapse, Table 1 shows the cumulative incidence of TRM, relapse, and EFS at 100 days, 1 yr, and 2 yrs after HCT in patients with or without aGVHD. Table 1. Effect of grade II-IV aGVHD by day 100 on TRM, Relapse, and EFS Time post-HCT # of Pts at Risk TRM Relapse EFS yes aGVHD no aGVHD yes aGVHD no aGVHD yes aGVHD no aGVHD yes aGVHD no aGVHD Day 100 69 44 3.0% 6.6% 0.8% 3.7% 35% 51% 1 year 32 55 4.6% 7.4% 5.0% 24% 31% 28% 2 years 17 19 7.0% 7.4% 6.4% 30% 27% 22% Thirty eight percent of patients developed grade II-IV aGVHD (most (89%) by day +50). Analysis of patients who did or did not experience aGVHD by day 100 showed that patients who developed aGVHD rarely experienced TRM or relapse from that time forward (7.0 and 6.4% with TRM and relapse at 2 yrs post-HCT, respectively). Conversely, patients who did not develop aGVHD had a small risk of early relapse (3.7% at d100) but a steadily increasing rate of relapse starting day 200 post-HCT. Patients who did not develop grade II-IV aGVHD relapsed nearly 5 times more than those with aGVHD (30% vs. 6.4 at 2 yrs), with the result that EFS at 2 years was 19% (17/89) in those with no aGVHD vs. 35% (19/55) in those with aGVHD (p=0.001). It is important to note that the occurrence of aGVHD did not impact the rate of TRM. To assess the effect of the MRD status on relapse, we measured MRD by flow cytometry of BM pre-HCT, within 2 wks of engraftment, and at 3, 6, 9, or 12m after HCT and correlated the presence of MRD in these samples with relapse rates. More than 400 samples were analyzed. For patients positive for pre-HCT MRD, the rate ratio (RR) for relapse was 3.7 (1.6–8.2) with an estimated two-year relapse risk of 27.4% (17.4–43.1) and 70.8% (50.4–99.4) in pre-HCT MRD negative and positive patients, respectively. For patients positive for post-HCT MRD, we constructed a Cox regression model to assess the effect of positive post-HCT MRD in the context of other transplant-related variables. In the post-HCT period, an MRD positive result was associated with a 14-fold increase in relapse rate over an MRD negative result (RR=14.3, 95% CI:6.1–33.6). These findings did not change after controlling for risk group, immunophenotype, donor type and pre-HCT MRD status. Finally, we did an analysis of the combined effect of aGVHD and MRD status. Patients who developed grade II-IV aGVHD had low rates of post-HCT MRD and relapse, and a combined predictive effect of MRD status in patients with aGVHD could not be assessed. However, among patients who did not develop aGVHD, pre- and post-HCT MRD statuses were found to be independent risk factors for relapse (Table 2). Table 2. Effect of Pre- and Post-HCT MRD on Relapse risk of Patients without aGHVD Pre-HCT MRD Post HCT MRD RR for Relaspe (CI) - - 1 (reference) + - 2.5 (1.0-5.8) - + 12.7 (4.2-38.2) + + 31.2 (7.5-129.3) In summary, measurement of flow MRD on BM samples pre- and early post-HCT is feasible and positive results along with absence of grade II-IV aGVHD is highly predictive of relapse. There is a brief “window of opportunity” after day 50 and before day 200 post-HCT when most patients who will get aGVHD have experienced it, and the large majority of high-risk patients identified by MRD and aGHVD status have yet to relapse. It is imperative that novel post-HCT interventions be developed and given during this window in order to decrease relapse in the very high-risk patients we have defined. Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,002
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,002
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,010

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0020,005
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0010,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,014
Tête enseignante GPT0,286
Écart entre enseignants0,272 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations5
Publié2012
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueBloodMême sujetAcute Lymphoblastic Leukemia researchTravaux en français237 207