MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4417011989 · doi:10.1182/blood-2025-2178

Tumor intrinsic mechanisms leading to cevostamab resistance in multiple myeloma

2025· article· en· W4417011989 on OpenAlexaff
Cecília Bonolo de Campos, Umair Munawar, Christina Verbruggen, David Scott, Dor Abelman, Silvia Nerreter, Johanna Lehmann, Seungbin Han, Mariano Arribas, Esther Masih‐Khan, Laura A. Bruins, Ding Wang, Jeffrey N. Bruce, Zhihua Li, Gregory Ahmann, Shaji Kumar, Esteban Braggio, Trevor J. Pugh, Rafael Fonseca, Leo Rasche, Hermann Einsele, Johannes M. Waldschmidt, K. Martin Kortüm, Keith Stewart, Suzanne Trudel

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCAR-T cell therapy research
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFrameshift mutationTranscriptomeRomidepsinMultiple myelomaExome sequencingBone marrowExomeMutation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In this study, we investigated tumor intrinsic mechanisms of resistance to cevostamab, a bispecific T-cell engager targeting Fc receptor-like protein 5 (FCRL5) and CD3 that has shown promising clinical activity and durable responses in advanced MM. Longitudinal bone marrow aspirates from nine MM patients treated with cevostamab were analyzed. All patients had previously been treated with both immunomodulatory drugs (IMiDs) and proteasome inhibitors (PI) and eight patients had received daratumumab prior to cevostamab, which was, on average, the 6th line of treatment (mean treatment duration 220±273 days). Five of nine patients responded with ≥PR. Whole genome and transcriptome sequencing was performed on sorted CD138+ MM cells at baseline, and whole exome and transcriptome sequencing was performed on five and three samples, respectively, following cevostamab discontinuation. Baseline FCRL5 expression levels did not correlate with clinical response. However, in one non-responder patient, FCRL5 expression increased four-fold after 28 days of treatment. Given the location of the FCRL5 gene on chromosome 1q—commonly amplified in advanced MM—we evaluated the presence of Gain(1q) in our study cohort. All patients whose best response was ≤PR (n=6) harbored a Gain(1q), whereas it was absent in those who achieved VGPR and sCR (n=3). Crucially, one of the patients that achieved sCR was initially treated with 60 mg of cevostamab for one year and then escalated to a higher dose cohort (90 mg) in the second year. At progression, a clonal FCRL5E115A missense mutation (allelic frequency = 56%) and a subclonal FCRL5G455Efs*19(allelic frequency = 5%) frameshift deletion mutation were detected, both absent at baseline. The missense mutation was located on the extracellular domain of FCRL5 targeted by cevostamab. To validate the functional impact of FCRL5E115Aand FCRL5G455Efs*19 on the sensitivity to cevostamab in vitro, we generated a FCRL5 knockout (KO) model utilizing CRISPR-Cas9 technology in OPM2 MM cells. In vitro cevostamab cytotoxicity assay with PBMCs and pan T cells from healthy donors at various effector to target (E:T) ratios confirmed a complete loss of cevostamab sensitivity in our FCRL5KO models. cDNA encoding patient-derived FCRL5 alterations (FCRL5E115Aand FCRL5G455Efs*19) as well as FCRL5wtwere cloned into mammalian expression vector and reintroduced into FCRL5KO cells. Cevostamab sensitivity was reinstated by FCRL5wt expression in KO cells. In contrast, FCRL5E115A conferred complete resistance to cevostamab (p<0,001) and FCRL5G455Efs*19 depicted a significant decline in cevostamab sensitivity relative to FCRL5wt expressing models. Additional experiment utilizing direct stochastic optical reconstruction microscopy (dSTORM) are ongoing to monitor the membrane localization of FCRL5 mutants. By integrating genomic, transcriptomic and functional data with clinical outcomes, this work is the first to report on acquired FCRL5 mutations causing resistance to cevostamab. We hypothesize that the prolonged treatment duration may have contributed to the acquisition of the target mutations and note a subsequent durable sCR response to BCMA-targeted immunotherapy in the same patient, suggesting immune-related factors such as T cell exhaustion, were not drivers of cevostamab resistance. Due to the limited sample size, these findings require validation in larger cohorts. Nonetheless, our findings begin to elucidate tumor intrinsic mechanisms associated with cevostamab resistance.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.020
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.273 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBlood→Same topicCAR-T cell therapy research→French-language works237,207→