MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4385667275 · doi:10.1097/01.hs9.0000972412.18474.98

P1381: DISTINCT CYTOKINE SIGNATURES OF IDECABTAGENE VICLEUCEL COMPARED TO AXICABTAGENE CILEUCEL AND LISOCABTAGENE MARALEUCEL

2023· article· en· W4385667275 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Abu‐Sayeef Mirza, Alexander B. Pine, Ramzi Hamouche, Yusuf Rasheed, 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 Lee, Stuart Seropian

Notice bibliographique

RevueHemaSphere · 2023
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueCAR-T cell therapy research
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésCytokine release syndromeChimeric antigen receptorMedicineImmunotherapyCytokineLymphomaOncologyInternal medicineImmunologyImmune system

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Topic: 24. Gene therapy, cellular immunotherapy and vaccination - Biology & Translational Research Background: 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) related to T-cell activation and expansion of multiple cytokines. Differences in tumor biology between MM and DLBCL and how they contribute to varying rates of CRS are not well understood. Aims: We used multiplex proteomic profiling to evaluate differences in cytokine signatures between three CAR-T cell products. Methods: Between April – December 2022, 27 patients received CAR T-cell therapy and consented to the Yale School of Medicine hematologic disease tissue bank (HIC#1401013259). Three longitudinal cohorts were prospectively enrolled: patients who received (1) axicabtagene cileucel (axi-cel) for DLBCL refractory to 1-2 lines of therapy, (2) lisocabtagene maraleucel (liso-cel) for DLBCL refractory after two lines of therapy, and (3) 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). 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 statistically significant. Results: Among 12 patients with DLBCL, 7 received axi-cel, 5 received liso-cel, median age was 68 years (range 45-84), 9 (75%) were men, 6 (50%) had clinically bulky disease, and 9 (75%) required bridging chemotherapy. Six patients (50%) had any grade CRS, one patient receiving liso-cel had maximum grade 2 CRS, one patient receiving axi-cel had maximum grade 4 CRS, and 5 (42%) patients received IL-6 inhibition. Three patients (25%) had any grade ICANS, with 2 of those patients receiving axi-cel and having grade ≥ 3 ICANS. By 3 months of follow-up, the objective response rate was 83% (10/12). Among 15 patients with MM, the median age was 62 years (48-71), 8 (53%) were men, 4 (27%) had extramedullary disease, and 11 patients (73%) received systemic bridging therapy. Ten patients (67%) had any grade CRS with no patients having grade ≥ 3 CRS; 10 (67%) had grade 1 ICANS with two patients (13%) having grade ≥ 3 ICANS. Nine patients (60%) received IL-6 inhibition. All patients received growth factor support on day 7 prior to discharge. At 3 months of follow-up, the objective response rate was 67% (10/15). In a longitudinal analysis for all 3 CAR constructs, ide-cel was characterized by significantly higher levels of I-309, 6CKine, Fractaline, IFN-g, IL-10, IL-12p40, IL-13, IL-18, IL-9, M-CSF, MCP-2, MCP-4, MIP-1α, MIP-1β, MIP-1δ at ≥ 2 timepoints, compared to axi-cel and liso-cel (figure). In addition, stem cell factor (SCF) and TPO were significantly elevated in patients with MM at ≥ 5 timepoints both before and after ide-cel infusion. Summary/Conclusion This study provides pre-clinical evidence for a monocytic predominant inflammatory cytokine signature for patients receiving BCMA-CART invoking contribution by disease biology which may warrant alternative toxicity management. Baseline monocytic elevations may explain higher risk of Hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis (HLH) or Macrophage Activation Syndrome (MAS) among patients with MM. Further studies with larger cohorts of patients are needed to validate these findings.Keywords: Cellular therapy, Multiple myeloma, Diffuse large B cell lymphoma, CAR-T

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 distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesMéta-épidémiologie (sens strict), Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Expérimental (laboratoire) · Signal consensuel: Expérimental (laboratoire)
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,424
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,002
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)0,0070,000

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 Opus0,037
Tête enseignante GPT0,321
Écart entre enseignants0,284 · 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 tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeExpérimental (laboratoire)
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
Publié2023
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueHemaSphereMême sujetCAR-T cell therapy researchTravaux en français237 207