Analysis of Chip Mutations Pre-and Post-Transplant in Multiple Myeloma (MM): Expanded Results from a Prospective Longitudinal Study
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background: Despite the clinical significance of Clonal Hematopoiesis of Indeterminate Potential (CHIP) mutations in MM, there remains limited longitudinal research detailing how these mutations evolve under different therapeutic pressures. To address this gap, we are conducting a prospective study of CHIP in IMID-naïve patients (pts) from pre-transplant and at several time points post-transplant, encompassing the introduction of lenalidomide (LEN) maintenance. Here, we expand our initial report of 66 pts (Khan, ASH 2023) with mutation testing performed pre-transplant in146 patients and 3 months (mos) post-transplant in 81 pts. Additionally, in a separate analysis we align our mutation calls with a high-fidelity list of candidate CHIP variants recently described by Vlasschaert et al.(Blood 2023), derived from data from 550,000 individuals in the UK Biobank and the All of Us Research Program. Methods: ARCH 001 trial is a prospective, longitudinal study evaluating evolution of CHIP in a transplant-eligible MM population testing at time points pertinent to therapy (pre-transplant using non-IMID containing induction, post-transplant at 3 mos before LEN maintenance, 1 year and 2 years on LEN maintenance). Using a minimum sequencing depth of 4000x, mutation calls produced by SmMIP-tools were subjected to various filters to reduce the likelihood of false positives (Medeiros et al. Bioinformatics, 2022). These filters include a minimum number of single-stranded consensus reads and the requirement that mutations be present in sequencing replicates. Moreover, variant allele frequency (VAF) thresholds of 1-30% were used for somatic variant calls (referred to hereon as M1 filters), with <1% allele frequency permitted for mutations detected above threshold in subsequent samples. In addition to the M1 filters, mutations were restricted to candidate drivers described by Vlasschaert et al. in a separate analysis (referred to hereon as M2 filters). Results: The total cohort is typical for a transplant-eligible population with median age at diagnosis 64 years (range 33-73), male predominance 60%, IgG subtype 63%, high-risk FISH cytogenetics 36% (35/98). All patients received the non-IMiD containing induction regimen CyBorD. Using M1 filters, a total of 65 CHIP mutations were identified pre-transplant in 52/146 pts (36%) with most common mutated genes: DNMT3a (48%), TET2 (17%), and PPM1D (11%). Nine patients (6%) had ≥1 mutation. Mean allele frequency was 6.8% (range 0.3-34.2%). At the 3-mo post-transplant time point, 41 mutations were detected in 29/81 pts (35%). 10% pts carried ≥1 mutation. The mean allele frequency was 4%. DNMT3a remained the most frequent mutation (61%), followed by TET2 (19%) and PPM1D (10%). Of the 81 pts with pre-and 3 mos post-transplant samples, a total of 54 unique mutations were identified in 39 pts, of which 26 (48%) were shared across the 2 time points. Testing from additional 1 and 2 year post-transplant time points is ongoing. Using the additional M2 filter, the mutation incidence pre-transplant and post-transplant were 39/146 (27%) and 25/81 (31%), respectively, with missense mutations in DNMT3A, ASXL1 and PPM1D being the most frequently filtered mutations. Conclusion: Our results using deep SmMIP sequencing and M1 filters reveal a mutation prevalence of 36% in IMiD-naive MM pts pre-transplant, and 35% in the early post-transplant period. Despite changes in individual mutations across time points, both mutation prevalence and affected genes, as well as the VAFs of shared mutations, remain consistent from pre- to post-transplant. Although our mutation prevalence rates may appear higher than those typically reported, mutation rates vary in the literature, with some MM studies reporting similar rates. It is likely differences in assay sensitivity, variations in filtering approaches, selection of targeted genes, and deliberate use of low VAF threshold may impact results. While mutation rates are reduced by a more stringent filtering, pattern of frequent mutations, as well as proportion of mutations that are shared across pre and post-transplant time points remains similar. Given the paucity of data exploring the evolution of CHIP mutations in MM over extended time and treatments, we feel that using a less stringent filtering strategy may identify small but clinically significant mutations important for longitudinal tracking.
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 enseignantsNi 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.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,005 | 0,006 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
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.
score_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 découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».