MétaCan
Menu
← Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W3143852803 · doi:10.1182/blood.v130.suppl_1.749.749

A Protective Role of DNA Repair Genes Against Acute Graft Versus Host Disease in Children

2017· article· en· W3143852803 sur OpenAlexaff
Patricia Huezo-Diaz, Chakradhara Rao S. Uppugunduri, Mohamed Aziz Rezgui, Anuj Tyagi, Vid Mlakar, Laurence Lesne, Tiago Nava, Yves Théorêt, Yves Chalandon, Robbert Bredius, Jean‐Hugues Dalle, Peter Bader, Christina Peters, Henrique Bittencourt, Maja Krajinović, Marc Ansari

Notice bibliographique

RevueBlood · 2017
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
ThématiqueDNA Repair Mechanisms
Établissements canadiensUniversité de MontréalCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-Justine
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésGraft-versus-host diseaseBusulfanMethotrexateMedicineCyclophosphamideImmunologyTransplantationTotal body irradiationHematopoietic stem cell transplantationTacrolimusHuman leukocyte antigenCord bloodInternal medicineGastroenterologyChemotherapyAntigen

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Abstract Introduction: Acute Graft versus Host Disease (aGvHD) occurs in 20-50% of pediatric patients who undergo allogeneic stem cell transplantation. Despite advances in HLA-typing methods and post-transplant immune suppression, it remains a significant cause of mortality and morbidity. Conditioning regimens include alkylating agents that exert their effects through their ability to directly or indirectly damage DNA. Unfortunately normal cells are also damaged due to their rapid proliferation cycles, increasing the probability of treatment-related toxicities. The most vulnerable targets among these damaged tissues are the skin, the intestinal epithelium, and the liver: In this study, our aim was to find biomarkers for aGvHD by focussing on how inter-individual differences in DNA repair mechanisms due to genetic variants in genes encoding DNA repair proteins might affect toxicity. Methods: The study included 115 children that had undergone allo-HSCT at four different centers. All patients received a Busulfan(Bu)/Cyclophosphamide(Cy) conditioning regimen. Pharmacokinetic-guided dose adjustment was performed for Bu to obtain a concentration at the steady state (Css) between 600 and 900 ng/ml. Patients received 16 doses of Bu followed by, i.v. Cy (200mg/kg total dose, 80% of patients) or CyVP16 (120mg/kg total dose). Cyclosporine was given as GvHD prophylaxis, and Methotrexate (MTX) or steroids were added to bone marrow and cord blood transplantation, respectively. ATG was given to 75% of patients. HLA matching was as follows: MRD = 37%; MUD = 21%; MMRD = 4%; MMUD = 38%. Acute GvHD was diagnosed according to the 1994 consensus conference up to day 180 post HSCT. Peripheral blood was collected and the DNA was extracted prior to transplant. Fifty-one single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) within seventeen DNA repair genes were chosen for investigation. Cumulative incidence analysis of aGvHD 2-4 was performed using Kaplan-Meier analysis and log-rank test. Multivariate Cox regression was performed to estimate the impact of genotype on clinical outcome in the presence of other covariates. Results: The most significant finding came from one SNP (rs10764881, G>A) located in the promoter of the MGMT gene. Patients with rs10764881 GG genotypes had a lower risk for aGvHD 2-4 incidence (Figure 1). This variant was not associated with any other treatment related toxicities nor relapses. Multivariate analysis including MGMT rs10764881 with known aGvHD risk covariates did not influence the model. In addition, from the expression analysis that we performed on 24 lymphoblastoid cell lines rs10764881 GG carriers showed 1.5 fold higher expression compared to AA or AG carriers (Figure 2). We were able to confirm experimentally with luciferase reporter constructs the impact of this variant on promoter function. Plasmids, which included the promoter sequence with rs10764881 demonstrated higher luciferase protein levels, compared to plasmids with a promoter sequence excluding rs10764881 (p= 0.01), suggesting the presence of an enhancement element close to the variant region (Figure 3). Electrophoretic mobility shift assays confirmed the presence of a Glucocorticoid Receptor Element (GRE) near to this variant. To understand whether the enhancing effects are related to corticosteroids, keratinocytes transfected with the gene reporter plasmids were stimulated with dexamethasone and luciferase expression was examined as previously. Exposing the cells with dexamethasone significantly increased protein expression of luciferase in both plasmids compared to their non-treated plasmid construct. The highest response was seen from the plasmid containing variant rs10764881 G (Figure 3). However, clinically we did not find clear differences between steroid and non-steroids recipients against rs10764881 with regards to aGvHD vulnerability (Figure 4). Conclusions: We hypothesize that the reason why variant rs10764881 GG might have a protective effect against aGvHD is due to its higher expression levels, resulting in more efficient DNA repair, in turn diminishing the immune response, reducing inflammation and hence causing less aGvHD. Thus aGvHD rs10764881 GG could potentially be a biomarker for aGvHD protection. The effects of steroids on MGMT expression needs to be addressed in future studies. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Bader: Novartis, Medac, Amgen, Riemser, Neovii: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Bittencourt: Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel Grant; Amgen Inc.: Consultancy; Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Consultancy.

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)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,001
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 enseignants0,001
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,004

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,001
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 recherche0,0000,000
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 Opus0,006
Tête enseignante GPT0,229
Écart entre enseignants0,224 · 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

Citations0
Publié2017
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueBlood→Même sujetDNA Repair Mechanisms→Travaux en français237 207→