MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4405038679 · doi:10.1182/blood-2024-199312

The Use of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment to Predict Neurotoxicity Post CD19 and BCMA CART

2024· article· en· W4405038679 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Hannah Katz, Lauren N Scott, Pilar Thangwaritorn, Jianzheng Wu, William Wesson, Dinesh Pal Mudaranthakam, Shaun DeJarnette, Al-Ola Abdallah, Marc Hoffmann, Forat Lutfi, Sunil Abhyankar, Leyla Shune, Muhammad Umair Mushtaq, Anurag K. Singh, Haitham Abdelhakim, Joseph P. McGuirk, Muhammad Nashatizadeh, Liz Muenks, Nausheen Ahmed

Notice bibliographique

RevueBlood · 2024
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueCancer-related cognitive impairment studies
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésCartMontreal Cognitive AssessmentMedicineCognitionNeurotoxicityInternal medicinePsychologyCognitive impairmentPsychiatryToxicityHistory

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Background: Chimeric antigen receptor T-cell (CART) therapy is approved for non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL), multiple myeloma (MM), and acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL), and is available in many centers across the US. One of the risks of this treatment is immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome (ICANS), which can be potentially fatal. Predicting neurotoxicity with pre-CART evaluations may help risk stratification, determine the need for preemptive strategies, and determine risks with outpatient management. There is sparse literature demonstrating the recommendation of utilizing neurocognitive testing, such as the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), to predict the risk of ICANS in CART (Möhn et al., 2022). This retrospective review of CD19 and BCMA CART patients at the University of Kansas Medical Center aims to identify the correlation between baseline pre-infusion MoCA scores and the incidence of ICANS. Methods: We identified patients who underwent CART infusion for NHL, MM, and ALL from 2017 to 2023. All neurocognitive testing was performed by staff who were MoCA trained. Permission was obtained to utilize the MoCA for retrospective research. The MoCA exam is an 11-question exam scored on a 30-point scale to predict normal cognition (26-30 points), mild cognitive impairment (18-25 points), moderate cognitive impairment (10-17 points), and severe cognitive impairment (<10 points). For this study the MoCA score was categorized into the following: high scores >25 (normal cognition), medium 17-25 (mild cognition impairment), and < 17 low (moderate-severe cognitive impairment). For patients with impaired eyesight or seen via telehealth, a MoCA-BLIND was administered, resulting in a possible 22 points which was converted back to the 30-point scale. Other clinical and laboratory variables that may be associated with the incidence of ICANS were evaluated using univariate logistic regression analysis. Correlation of MoCA score with ICANS incidence, grade of ICANS, and other outcomes of interest such as steroid usage, intensive care unit (ICU) stay, 30-day overall survival (OS), and 100-day OS was reported. Results: 212 patients who had MoCA scores were included in this analysis, (148 NHL, 56 MM, and 8 ALL) leading to comparisons of 155 CD19-directed CAR T patients and 57 BCMA-directed CAR T patients. 99% of these were baseline scores pre-CART infusion. The median age was 65(range 22-84 yrs.). 99 (47%) developed ICANS, including 19% with Grade ≥ 3 ICANS. Overall, 52% of patients obtained high MoCA scores, 44% obtained medium MoCA scores, and 4.2% obtained low MoCA scores. Patients with high scores had a 91% significantly lower odds of developing ICANS (odds ratio=0.09, p-value=0.023) compared to patients with low scores. Patients with medium scores trended towards a decrease in odds of developing ICANS as compared to patients with low scores (odds ratio=0.12, and p-value=0.052). There was no significant difference in the odds of developing ICANS between patients with high scores and medium scores (p-value=0.223). Additionally, low MoCA scores correlated to the need to use steroids (p= 0.042), need for ICU stay (p=0.038), and 30-day OS (p= 0.035), respectively. However, MoCA scores were not correlated with 100-day OS (p=0.478) or prolonged admissions (p=0.612). Other independent factors that are univariately associated with developing ICANS include: age (p= 0.029), types of diagnosis (NHL, MM, ALL) (p<0.001), lower baseline KPS (p=0.007), higher ferritin at infusion (p<0.001), high CRP at infusion (p <0.001), low WBC at infusion (p=0.028) CD19 CART compared to BCMA (p<0.001), and CD28 compared to 4-1BB (p<0.001) Conclusion: This is the largest report of MoCA scores and their association with ICANS in CD19 and BCMA CART recipients. Our results suggest that high MoCA scores (normal cognition) are associated with a significantly decreased risk of developing ICANS, while low scores (moderate-severe cognitive impairment) are associated with an increased risk of ICANS. In addition, patients with low scores are more likely to have increased steroid use, need for ICU stay, and lower 30-day OS. MoCA scores provide critical information to determine risk of ICANS and should be considered when determining eligibility for outpatient administration. Other factors may also affect ICANS outcomes, and further study, including multivariate analysis and multicenter reports, will be important.

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)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut 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 enseignants0,233
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,293

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

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)0,0000,000

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 Opus0,021
Tête enseignante GPT0,287
Écart entre enseignants0,266 · 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.

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

Citations2
Publié2024
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueBloodMême sujetCancer-related cognitive impairment studiesTravaux en français237 207