Pitfalls of immunotherapy: lessons from a patient with CTLA-4 haploinsufficiency
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Daclizumab is a humanized monoclonal antibody that blocks CD25, the high affinity alpha subunit of the interleukin-2 receptor. Daclizumab therapy targets T regulatory cell and activated effector T cell proliferation to suppress autoimmune disease activity, in inflammatory conditions like relapsing and remitting multiple sclerosis. Here, we present the first report of agranulocytosis with daclizumab therapy in a patient with relapsing and remitting multiple sclerosis. Our patient was a 24-year-old Australian female with a clinical history of atopy, lymphocytic enteritis complicated by B12 deficiency, relapsing and remitting multiple sclerosis, recurrent lower respiratory tract infections, vulval/cervical intraepithelial neoplasia and melanoma. She was commenced on daclizumab therapy after failing several lines of treatment for relapsing and remitting multiple sclerosis. During a hospital admission for lymphocytic enteritis, she was incidentally diagnosed with combined immunodeficiency with hypogammaglobulinaemia and declined proposed regular intravenous immunoglobulin infusions. Following six months of daclizumab therapy, our patient presented to hospital with febrile neutropenia. No clear infective cause was found, despite numerous investigations. However, bone marrow biopsy revealed agranulocytosis with an apparent maturation block at the myeloblasts stage. Neustrophil recovery occurred following cessation of daclizumab and the initiation of T cell immunosuppressive agents including systemic corticosteroids and methotrexate. The patient was further investigated for combined immunodeficiency and whole exome sequencing revealed a novel heterozygous missense variant in cytotoxic T lymphocyte antigen 4 ( CTLA4 ), leading to a diagnosis of CTLA-4 haploinsufficiency with autoimmune infiltration (CHAI). This case demonstrates that autoimmune disease may be the presenting feature of primary immunodeficiency and should be appropriately investigated prior to the commencement of immunotherapy. Genetic clarification of underlying primary immunodeficiency may provide critical clinical information that alters the safety of the proposed treatment strategy.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.009 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".