MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4310096775 · doi:10.1182/blood-2022-168374

Proteomic Profiles of Cytokine Release Syndromes Following Lisocabtagene Maraleucel and Idecabtagene Vicleucel

2022· article· en· W4310096775 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Abu‐Sayeef Mirza, Alexander B. Pine, Yusuf Rasheed, Ramzi Hamouche, Etienne Léveillé, George Goshua, Sean X. Gu, Yuxin Liu, Jennifer VanOudenhove, Noffar Bar, Natalia Neparidze, Francine M. Foss, Lohith Gowda, Iris Isufi, Stephanie Halene, Alfred Ian Lee, Stuart Seropian

Notice bibliographique

RevueBlood · 2022
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueCAR-T cell therapy research
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésCytokineImmunologyMedicine

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Introduction: Adoptive cell therapy with chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cells has improved responses in refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) and multiple myeloma (MM). Most CAR-T recipients experience cytokine release syndrome (CRS) and immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome (ICANS) - similar yet clinically distinct inflammatory syndromes related to T-cell activation and expansion of multiple cytokines. Differences in tumor biology between MM and DLBCL and how they contribute to differences in cytokine expression is not well understood. Given different CAR T-cell constructs have varying levels of activation and toxicity, cytokine profiles between products and between different disease entities may inform management. In this study, we used multiplex proteomic profiling to evaluate differences in plasma cytokine signatures between two CAR T-cell products and diseases. Methods: Between September 2021 and March 2022, 20 patients received CAR T-cell therapy and consented to the Yale School of Medicine hematologic disease tissue bank (HIC#1401013259). Two longitudinal cohorts were prospectively enrolled: (1) patients who received lisocabtagene maraleucel (liso-cel) for DLBCL refractory after two lines of therapy, and (2) those who received idecabtagene vicleucel (ide-cel) for MM refractory after 4 lines of therapy. For each patient, the first sample was collected prior to lymphodepleting chemotherapy on day -5 with subsequent samples collected on days 0 (prior to CAR T-cell infusion) and 1, 2, 3, and 7 (after CAR T-cell infusion). Plasma samples were processed and frozen within 1 hour of collection. Proteomic profiling was performed at Eve Technologies (Calgary, Alberta, Canada). The Human 71-Plex Discovery Assay measuring 71 total cytokines and chemokines was used to interrogate each sample time point. Statistical analysis was performed in GraphPad Prism (GraphPad Software, San Diego, CA) and R (R Core Team). Levels of individual proteins were compared using Wilcoxon tests. P-values <0.05 were considered statistically significant. Results: Among 13 patients who received liso-cel for DLBCL (including 2 with transformed follicular lymphoma and 3 with double/triple hit pathology), the median age was 66 years (44-82), 7 (54%) were males, 8 (62%) had KPS ≥ 90, 8 (62%) had bulky disease, median lines of therapy were 4 (2-10), and 11 (85%) received systemic bridging therapy. Seven patients (54%) had any grade CRS, with one patient having grade 3 CRS; 2 (15%) had grade 1 and 2 ICANS. Four patients (31%) received an IL-6 inhibitor. At 3 months of follow-up, the objective response rate was 77% (10/13), of whom two patients had a complete response and 60% (6/10) had any grade CRS. Among 7 patients who received ide-cel for MM, with R-ISS score of 1, 2, and 3 in 4 (57%), 1 (14%), and 2 (29%) patients, respectively, the median age was 61 years (54-79), 5 (71%) were males, 4 (57%) had KPS ≥ 90, 3 (43%) had extramedullary disease, median lines of therapy were 7 (4-13), and 5 patients (71%) received systemic bridging therapy. Six patients (86%) had any grade CRS with no patients having grade ≥ 3 CRS; 3 (43%) had grade 1 ICANS. Four patients (57%) received an IL-6 inhibitor. Five patients (63%) received growth factor support on day 7. At 3 months of follow-up, the objective response rate was 86% (6/7) of whom two patients had a complete response and 83% (5/6) had any grade CRS. In a longitudinal analysis, significantly higher levels of IL-3, IL-5, IL-6, IL-10, IL-15, IL-309, and TNFα were noted during CRS (panel 1). In a comparison between CAR constructs, ide-cel was characterized by significantly higher levels of Eotaxin-2, FLT-3L, IL-5, IL-6, IL-15, I-309, MCP-1, and MCP-4 compared to liso-cel (panel 2). Many of these elevated cytokine proteins are implicated as chemoattractants for other leukocyte subtypes including but not limited to neutrophils, monocytes, eosinophils which may contribute to inflammation and may modulate response, toxicity, or relapse. Conclusions: Ide-cel is associated with a distinct cytokine and chemokine signature compared to liso-cel. This study provides pre-clinical evidence for the role of IL-5 inhibitors to treat or prevent CRS following MM-directed CAR T-cell therapy. Further studies with larger cohorts of patients are needed to validate these findings. Figure 1View largeDownload PPTFigure 1View largeDownload PPT Close modal

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)0,000
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: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,001
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,003

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
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 Opus0,022
Tête enseignante GPT0,282
Écart entre enseignants0,260 · 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

Citations1
Publié2022
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueBloodMême sujetCAR-T cell therapy researchTravaux en français237 207