| Literature DB >> 31940591 |
Benjamin A Derman1, Yuanyuan Zha2, Todd M Zimmerman3, Rebecca Malloy2, Andrzej Jakubowiak2, Michael R Bishop2, Justin Kline2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Progression after high-dose melphalan with autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) in multiple myeloma (MM) may be due in part to immune dysfunction. Regulatory T (Treg) cells reconstitute rapidly after ASCT and inhibit immune responses against myeloma cells.Entities:
Keywords: autologous stem cell transplant; multiple myeloma; regulatory T cell depletion; regulatory T cells
Year: 2020 PMID: 31940591 PMCID: PMC7057425 DOI: 10.1136/jitc-2019-000286
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Immunother Cancer ISSN: 2051-1426 Impact factor: 13.751
Figure 1Flow cytometry gating strategy to identify peripheral blood Tregs. (A) Lymphocyte population was identified by forward scatter (FSC)/side scatter (SSC) gating. (B) Frequency of CD3+CD4+ T cells. (C) CD4+CD127lo T cells. (D) After gating on CD4+CD127lo cells, Treg cells were identified as CD25+FoxP3+ cells. Flow cytometry analysis was performed using MACSQuant analyzer (Miltenyi Biotec).
Figure 2EVTRD from an autologous stem cell graft using anti-CD25 microbeads and the CliniMACS device. The predepletion lymphocyte population is identified in (A), and relative CD4+CD25+/CD4+ T cells are identified in (B). Postdepletion lymphocyte population and relative CD4+CD25+/CD4+ T cells are identified in (C) and (D), respectively. in this example, the relative efficiency of EVTRD was approximately 98%. Flow cytometry analysis was performed using MACSQuant analyzer (Miltenyi Biotec). EVTRD, ex vivo Treg depletion; FITC, fluorescein isothiocyanate; FSC, forward scatter; SSC, side scatter.
Patient characteristics
| Control ASCT (n=5) | IVTRD | EVTRD | |
| Age (years), median | 60.3 | 64.0 | 57.1 |
| Male gender, n (%) | 2 (40) | 3 (75) | 2 (40) |
| Race/ethnicity, n (%) | |||
| Caucasian | 4 (80) | 4 (100) | 1 (20) |
| Black | 1 (20) | 0 (0) | 3 (60) |
| Hispanic/Latino | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | 1 (20) |
| ISS stage, median | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| 1 | 3 | 3 | 3 |
| 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 |
| 3 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| High-risk cytogenetics, n (%) | 2 (40) | 4 (100) | 1 (20)* |
| Induction therapy, n (%) | |||
| RVd | 3 (60) | 3 (75) | 5 (100) |
| KRd | 1 (20) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) |
| Rd | 1 (20) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) |
| Vd | 0 (0) | 1 (25) | 0 (0) |
| Induction cycles. median | 4 | 4 | 4 |
| Best induction response, n (%) | |||
| PR | 3 (60) | 1 (25) | 3 (60) |
| VGPR | 1 (20) | 1 (25) | 1 (20) |
| CR | 0 (0) | 1 (25) | 0 (0) |
| sCR | 1 (20) | 1 (25) | 1 (20) |
| Stem cell dose | 4.6 (2.4–6.5) | 2.9 (2.7–10.8) | 3.5 (2.0–5.2) |
*p<0.05 compared with the IVTRD arm.
ASCT, autologous stem cell transplant; CR, complete response; EVTRD, ex vivo regulatory T-cell depletion;ISS, International Staging System; IVTRD, in vivo regulatory T-cell depletion; KRd, carfilzomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone; PR, partial response; Rd, lenalidomide+dexamethasone; RVd, lenalidomide, bortezomib, and dexamethasone; sCR, stringent complete response; Vd, bortezomib+dexamethasone; VGPR, very good partial response.
Individual patient characteristics and responses
| Patient number | Age (years) | R-ISS | Induction regimen | Pre-ASCT response | Best post-ASCT response | Post-ASCT consolidation | Post-ASCT maintenance |
| Control | |||||||
| 1 | 64 | 2 | VRd | PR | PR | VRd×2 | None* |
| 2 | 50 | 2 | VRd | sCR | MRD-neg sCR | None | R |
| 3 | 60 | 2 | VRd | PR | PR | VRd×4 | VRd |
| 4 | 56 | 3 | Rd | VGPR | sCR | None | R |
| 5 | 71 | 2 | KRd | PR | MRD-neg sCR | None | R |
| IVTRD | |||||||
| 6 | 49 | 2 | VRd | PR | VGPR | None | R |
| 7 | 62 | 1 | Vd | MRD-neg sCR | sCR | VRd×2 | R |
| 8 | 65 | 1 | VRd | VGPR | MRD-neg sCR | VRd×4 | R |
| 9 | 65 | 1 | VRd | CR | sCR | None | R |
| EVTRD | |||||||
| 10 | 57 | N/A | VRd | PR | MRD-neg sCR | None | R |
| 11 | 46 | 1 | VRd | sCR | sCR | VRd×2 | R |
| 12 | 67 | 2 | VRd | PR | MRD-neg sCR | VRd×2 | R |
| 13 | 64 | 2 | VRd | VGPR | MRD-neg sCR | KRd×8 | R |
| 14 | 53 | 1 | VRd | PR | MRD-neg sCR | None | R |
*Patient declined maintenance therapy.
ASCT, autologous stem cell transplant; CR, complete response; EVTRD, ex vivo Treg depletion; IVTRD, in vivo Treg depletion;KRd, carfilzomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone; MRD-neg, minimal residual disease negative; PR, partial response; R, lenalidomide;Rd, lenalidomide+dexamethasone; R-ISS, Revised-International Staging System; sCR, stringent complete response;Vd, bortezomib+dexamethasone; VGPR, very good partial response; VRd, bortezomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone .
Figure 3EVTRD from ASC grafts is highly efficient. Frequencies of CD4+CD25+ Treg cells in each ASC graft are shown prior to and following the EVTRD procedure (p=0.0049). ASC, autologous stem cell; EVTRD, ex vivo Treg depletion.
Figure 4Kinetics of Treg cell depletion and recovery following IVTRD and EVTRD. Median Treg frequencies by treatment arm at the indicated timepoints are shown. The asterisk (*) indicates p=0.025 for comparison of median Treg cell frequencies in the EVTRD versus control arm at day +21. Color-coded error bars represent the SE of the mean. ASCT, autologous stem cell transplantation; EVTRD, ex vivo Treg depletion; IVTRD, in vivo Treg depletion.
Non-hematological adverse events
| Event | Control ASCT | IVTRD ASCT | EVTRD ASCT | |||
| All | Grade | All | Grade | All grade | Grade | |
| Constitutional symptoms | ||||||
| Fatigue | 4 (80%) | 1 (20%) | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Fever | 3 (60%) | 2 (40%) | 1 (25%) | 1 (25%) | 4 (80%) | 4 (80%) |
| Pain | 2 (40%) | 0 | 1 (25%) | 0 | 1 (20%) | 0 |
| Weight loss | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 (20%) | 0 |
| Malaise | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 (20%) | 0 |
| Gastrointestinal disorders | ||||||
| Nausea | 2 (40%) | 0 | 1 (25%) | 0 | 1 (20%) | 0 |
| Diarrhea | 1 (20%) | 0 | 1 (25%) | 0 | 1 (20%) | 0 |
| Hepatobiliary disorders | ||||||
| Increased aminotransferase level | 1 (20%) | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 (20%) | 1 (20%) |
| Hyperbilirubinemia | 1 (20%) | 1 (20%) | 0 | 0 | 1 (20%) | 0 |
| Electrolyte disorders | ||||||
| Hypocalcemia | 2 (40%) | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 (20%) | 0 |
| Hypokalemia | 1 (20%) | 0 | 1 (25%) | 0 | 2 (40%) | 1 (20%) |
| Hypophosphatemia | 1 (20%) | 0 | 1 (25%) | 0 | 1 (20%) | 1 (20%) |
| Miscellaneous | ||||||
| Hyperglycemia | 2 (40%) | 1 (20%) | 1 (25%) | 0 | 2 (40%) | 1 (20%) |
| Peripheral neuropathy | 1 (20%) | 0 | 1 (25%) | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Chronic kidney disease | 1 (20%) | 0 | 1 (25%) | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Bone fracture | 0 | 0 | 1 (25%) | 1 (25%) | 0 | 0 |
| Rash | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 (20%) | 1 (20%) |
| Cough | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 (20%) | 0 |
| Lymphadenitis | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 (20%) | 0 |
| Hemorrhoids | 1 (20%) | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Shown are adverse events (irrespective of the relationship to the study drugs) that were reported in at least one patient.
ASCT, autologous stem cell transplant; EVTRD, ex vivo regulatory T-cell depletion; IVTRD, in vivo regulatory T-cell depletion.
Patient outcomes
| Control ASCT (n=5) | IVTRD ASCT (n=4) | EVTRD ASCT (n=5) | |
| Days to neutrophil engraftment, median (range) | 11 (10–12) | 11 (11–13) | 10 (10–11) |
| Days to platelet engraftment, median (range) | 10 (10–11) | 10.5 (9–12) | 11 (10–14) |
| Grade 3/4 infections, n (%) | 2 (40) | 2 (50) | 4 (80) |
| Engraftment syndrome, n (%) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | 1 (20) |
| Received consolidation, n (%) | 2 (40) | 2 (50) | 3 (60) |
| Received maintenance, n (%) | 4 (80) | 4 (100) | 5 (100) |
| Best response prior to ASCT, n (%) | |||
| PR | 3 (60) | 1 (25) | 3 (60) |
| VGPR | 1 (20) | 1 (25) | 1 (20) |
| CR | 0 (0) | 1 (25) | 0 (0) |
| sCR | 1 (20) | 0 (0) | 1 (20) |
| sCR+flow MRD-negative | 0 (0) | 1 (25) | 0 (0) |
| Best response following ASCT, n (%) | |||
| PR | 2 (40) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) |
| VGPR | 0 (0) | 1 (25) | 0 (0) |
| CR | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) |
| sCR | 1 (20) | 2 (50) | 1 (20) |
| sCR+flow MRD-negative | 2 (40) | 1 (25) | 4 (80) |
ASCT, autologous stem cell transplant;CR, complete response; EVTRD, ex vivo regulatory T-cell depletion; IVTRD, in vivo regulatory T-cell depletion; MRD, minimal residual disease (depth between 10−4 and 10−5); PR, partial response; sCR, stringent complete response; VGPR, very good partial response.