| Literature DB >> 27102298 |
Qin Li1, Lalit Rane1, Thomas Poiret2, Jiezhi Zou1, Isabelle Magalhaes3, Raija Ahmed4, Ziming Du5, Nalini Vudattu6, Qingda Meng2, Åsa Gustafsson-Jernberg7, Jacek Winiarski7,8, Olle Ringdén2,9, Markus Maeurer2,9, Mats Remberger2,9, Ingemar Ernberg1.
Abstract
The level of Epstein-Barr virus DNA in blood has proven to be a biomarker with some predictive value in allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation patients (HSCT). We evaluated the impact of EBV load on survival of 51 patients (32M/19F, median age: 32 years, from < 1 to 68 years old), who had received HSCT for different types of malignancies (49 cases) or non-malignancies (2 cases). The overall survival [1]was compared between patients with extreme and moderate cell bound EBV DNA levels. Different sources of stem-cells (peripheral blood stem, n = 39; bone marrow, n = 9; or umbilical cord blood, n = 3) were used. Twenty patients received reduced-intensity conditioning regimen while the other 31 received myeloablative conditioning. Patients with high or very low level of cell bound EBV-DNA levels had a shorter OS than those with moderate EBV load: OS at 5 years was 67% vs 90% (p < 0.03). There was a conspicuous relationship between EBV load and the reconstitution dynamics of total and EBV-specific T cells, CD4+ and CD4- CD8- (double negative) T cells in the few patients where it was analyzed. This was not statistically significant. Two other factors were associated to early mortality in addition to high or low EBV load: acute GVHD II-IV (p < 0.02) and pre-transplant conditioning with total body irradiation (TBI) ≥6 Gy, (p < 0.03). All the patients meeting all three criteria died within two years after transplantation. This points to a subgroup of HSCT patients which deserve special attention with improvement of future, personalized treatment.Entities:
Keywords: EBV DNA-load; Immune response; Immunity; Immunology and Microbiology Section; T-cell phenotype; aGVHD; stem cell transplantation; total body irradiation
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27102298 PMCID: PMC5058676 DOI: 10.18632/oncotarget.8803
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Oncotarget ISSN: 1949-2553
Characteristics of patients and donors
| Whole population | High+Low | Intermediate | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 51 | 30 | 21 | ||
| 32(<1 −68) | 32 (<1-68) | 34 (7-68) | 0.67 | |
| 17 | 9 (30%) | 8 (38%) | 0.56 | |
| 32/19 | 21/9 | 11/10 | 0.25 | |
| 49/2 | 28/2 | 21/0 | 0.50 | |
| 22/29 | 12/18 | 10/11 | 0.77 | |
| Sibling/MUD/MM | 12/32/7 | 6/19/5 | 6/13/2 | 0.37 |
| 30(0-62) | 30 (0-62) | 28 (13-57) | 0.98 | |
| MAC/RIC | 31/20 | 15/15 | 16/5 | 0.08 |
| TBI ≥6 Gy | 17 | 10 (33%) | 7 (33%) | 1.00 |
| 37 | 21 (70%) | 16 (76%) | 0.75 | |
| CsA+MTX/other | 33/18 | 17/13 | 16/5 | 0.23 |
| BM/PBSC/CB | 9/39/3 | 2/25/3 | 7/14/0 | 0.28 |
| 7.1 (0.1-28.2) | 5.5 (1.8-22.8) | 0.55 | ||
| 9 | 4 | 5 | 0.46 | |
| 4 | 3 | 1 | 0.63 | |
| 23/28 | 15/15 | 8/13 | 0.26 | |
| 75 (42-103) | 57 (42-103) | 86 (44-99) | 0.25 |
Early stage; CR1/CP1 or non-malignant disorder, Late stage; beyond CR1/CP1, MUD; matched unrelated donor, MM; mismatched donor, MAC; myeloablative conditioning, RIC; reduced intensity conditioning, CsA; cyclosporine, MTX; methotrexate, BM; bone marrow, PBSC; peripheral-blood stem cells, CB; cord blood, CMV sero neg/neg; cytomegalovirus pre-SCT serological negative donor and recipient, EBV sero-MM; serological mismatch between donor and recipient, aGVHD; acute graft-versus-host disease.
Figure 1Overall survival depending on EBV DNA levels after HSCT
EBV DNA levels were classified into two groups: intermediate (IM) (n = 21) or high + low (n = 30). The overall survival rates were 90% in EBV intermediate group and 67% in EBV high+low group, respectively; there was a significant difference in the overall survival rate between the two groups (p = 0.03).
Univariate and multivariate analysis of factors associated to Mortality
| Factor | HR | Multivariate | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 0.22 | 0.03 | 0.12, 0.02-0.59, <0.01 | |
| 1.02 | 0.17 | ||
| 0.87 | 0.84 | ||
| 1.16 | 0.80 | ||
| 0.58 | 0.33 | ||
| 1.00 | 0.84 | ||
| 1.03 | 0.17 | ||
| 0.97 | 0.96 | ||
| 1.40 | 0.61 | ||
| 3.27 | 0.07 | 4.72, 1.25-17.8, 0.02 | |
| 1.01 | 0.98 | ||
| 0.93 | 0.92 | ||
| 2.82 | 0.18 | ||
| 2.61 | 0.08 | 3.55, 1.13-11.1, 0.03 |
In the multivariate analysis HR, 95% confidence interval and p-value are presented.
Late stage; beyond CR1/CP1, RIC; reduced intencity conditioning, CsA; cyclosporine, MTX; methotrexate, PBSC; peripheral-blood stem cells, CMV sero neg/neg; cytomegalovirus pre-SCT serological negative donor and recipient, EBV sero-MM; serological mismatch between donor and recipient. TBI ≥6 Gy; total-body irradiation ≥6 Gy.
Figure 2Overall survival after HSCT in patients without (n = 7), with one (n = 18), two (n = 21) and three (n = 5) of the risk-factors found in the multivariate analysis
The risk-factors were: EBV DNA load low + high, acute GVHD II-IV and conditioning containing TBI ≥6 Gy.
Figure 3The frequency of CD4+ cell, CD4-CD8- (DN) T cells, Treg cells and CD3+ cells and Tregsin EBV intermediate, EBVlow and EBVhigh groups in 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 6th and 12th month after stem cell transplantation
Each curve represents one patient. Lines are not shown between dots with the same color when there are data missing between the dots. B2, B5, B7 and B8 are children and the remaining numbers refer to adult patients. B2, and 2, 7 and 17 represent non-survivors.
Figure 4Analysis of EBV specific T cells in patients with different EBV DNA load dynamics
A. EBV load in adult patients No.12 and No.31 in 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 6th and 12th month after stem cell transplantation. B. CD4-CD8- cells specific for lytic EBV antigens (left) and CD4-CD8- cells specific for latent EBV antigens (right) for the same patient at the same time points as in Fig 4A. C. CD8+ cells specific for latent EBV antigens (left) and CD8+ cells specific for lytic EBV antigen (right) in the same patients at the same time points after stem cell transplantation as in Figure 4A.