| Literature DB >> 34746714 |
Theresa Hahn1, Junke Wang2, Leah M Preus3, Ezgi Karaesmen2, Abbas Rizvi2, Alyssa I Clay-Gilmour4, Qianqian Zhu5, Yiwen Wang2, Li Yan5, Song Liu5, Daniel O Stram6, Loreall Pooler6, Xin Sheng6, Christopher A Haiman6, David Van Den Berg6, Amy Webb7, Guy Brock7, Stephen R Spellman8, Kenan Onel9, Philip L McCarthy1, Marcelo C Pasquini10, Lara E Sucheston-Campbell2,11.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Identification of non-human leukocyte antigen (HLA) genetic risk factors could improve survival after allogeneic blood or marrow transplant (BMT) through matching at additional loci or individualizing risk prediction. We hypothesized that non-HLA loci contributed significantly to 1-year overall survival (OS), disease related mortality (DRM) or transplant related mortality (TRM) after unrelated donor (URD)BMT.Entities:
Keywords: acute leukemia; allogeneic BMT; genome-wide association study; mortality; myelodysplastic syndrome
Year: 2021 PMID: 34746714 PMCID: PMC8548922 DOI: 10.1016/j.eclinm.2021.101093
Source DB: PubMed Journal: EClinicalMedicine ISSN: 2589-5370
DISCOVeRY-BMT Recipient and Donor Characteristics by Cohort.
| Characteristic | Cohort 1, | Cohort 2, | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Recipient Age, years | 0.057 | ||
| <20 | 240 (11%) | 79 (10%) | |
| 20–39 | 527 (25%) | 173 (22%) | |
| 40–59 | 931 (44%) | 340 (44%) | |
| ≥60 | 412 (20%) | 185 (24%) | |
| Recipient Age, years | <0.001 | ||
| Median (standard deviation) | 46.6 (17.5) | 50.0 (17.6) | |
| Donor Age, years | 0.010 | ||
| <20 | 11 (0.5%) | 12 (1.5%) | |
| 20–39 | 1487 (70%) | 569 (73%) | |
| 40–59 | 604 (29%) | 192 (25%) | |
| ≥60 | 8 (0.4%) | 4 (0.5%) | |
| Donor Age, years | <0.001 | ||
| Median (standard deviation) | 32.8 (9.3) | 30.6 (9.6) | <0.001 |
| Male Recipient | 1191 (56%) | 429 (55%) | 0.554 |
| Male Donor | 1437 (68%) | 563 (72%) | 0.025 |
| Disease | <0.001 | ||
| ALL | 483 (23%) | 94 (12%) | |
| AML | 1282 (61%) | 488 (63%) | |
| MDS | 345 (16%) | 195 (25%) | |
| Disease Status | <0.001 | ||
| Early | 1005 (48%) | 386 (50%) | |
| Intermediate | 528 (25%) | 127 (16%) | |
| Advanced | 577 (27%) | 264 (34%) | |
| Graft Source | <0.001 | ||
| Bone Marrow | 745 (35%) | 210 (27%) | |
| Peripheral blood | 1365 (65%) | 567 (73%) |
n (%).
Pearson's Chi-squared test; Fisher's exact test; Early=CR1 or MDS-RA/RARS, Intermediate=CR2+, Advanced=Not in Remission or MDS-RAEB, KPS: Karnofsky Performance Score, LPS: Lansky Performance Score, NMA: non-myeloablative, TBI: total body irradiation.
Fig. 1Circular Manhattan plot of SNP associations with overall survival. Chromosomes are numbered on the outside. p = 5 × 10−8 is marked with dashed red lines. Each SNP p value association with overall survival is a colored dot, with genome-wide significant SNPs as red dots. Results are shown for recipient (outer circle), donor (middle circle) and donor-recipient mismatches (inner circle), respectively.
Lead genome wide significant variants associated with 1-year survival outcomes in DISCOVeRY-BMT.
| BMT outcome | Rsid lead SNP | Chr | Position (hg 19) | Nearest Gene | Genome | Alleles | Effect Allele Freq | HR (95% CI) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| OS | rs9990017 | 3 | 152,206,062 | Recipient | T/G | 0.11 | 1.39 (1.24, 1.56) | 3.3 × 10−8 | |
| rs10927108 | 1 | 244,184,670 | Donor-Recipient allele mismatch | C/T | 0.27 | 1.34 (1.21, 1.48) | 2.0 × 10−8 | ||
| DRM | rs79076914 | 14 | 60,559,239 | Donor | C/A | 0.051 | 1.7 (1.41, 2.05) | 3.15 × 10−8 | |
| rs79498125 | 10 | 63,695,702 | A/G | 0.06 | 1.86 (1.49, 2.31) | 2.8 × 10−8 | |||
| rs2167710 | 10 | 33,877,364 | A/T | 0.65 | 1.5 (1.31, 1.73) | 6.9 × 10−9 | |||
| rs32250 | 5 | 12,465,740 | T/G | 0.55 | 1.44 (1.26, 1.63) | 2.6 × 10−8 | |||
| TRM | rs75868097 | 4 | 75,148,954 | Donor-Recipient allele mismatch | A/T | 0.027 | 2.65 (1.91,3.58) | 5.9 × 10−9 | |
| rs141591562 | 7 | 99,947,974 | Recipient | A/G | 0.03 | 2.33 (1.74, 3.12) | 1.26 × 10−8 |
Variants (SNPs) are within a gene or in LD (r2 > 0.8) with variants in a gene; bolded allele is the effect allele; for mismatch loci the effect allele frequency is the frequency of the associated mismatch across both cohorts
OS: Overall survival, DRM: Disease-related mortality, TRM: Transplant-related mortality, SNP: single nucleotide polymorphism, hg19: human genome 19 position, Freq: frequency, HR: hazard ratio, CI: confidence interval.
Fig. 2Chromosome 3 regional recipient association plot of overall survival. A) Regional meta-analysis SNP –log10(p-values) are plotted as solid black dots in the top panel. The higher the -log10 number, the lower the p-value. Rs9990017, the most significant genome-wide association is labeled and marked with a thin blue line that transverses all panels. The x-axis is the chromosome position in mega bases (Mb). B) Corresponding CADD scores in the region for the variants are shown as solid gray dots. C) Significant MBNL1 eQTLs identified in three separate cohorts: eQTLGen (solid red dots), GEUVADIA (solid blue dots) and TwinsUK (solid green dots). D) Genes in the region are plotted as red boxes on a gray line and annotated with E) HiC data from a lymphoblastoid cell line with the F) ENCODE epigenome roadmap for all blood, T-cell, HSC and B-cells; the cell line numbers shown down the left side (ie., E026, etc.) correspond to specific epigenome road map cell lines. The colors indicate the ChromHMM status as defined in the key on the bottom left of the figure.
Fig. 3Circular Manhattan plot of SNP associations with disease related mortality. Chromosomes are numbered on the outside. p = 5 × 10−8 is marked with dashed red lines. Each SNP p value association with disease-related mortality is a colored dot, with genome-wide significant SNPs as red dots. Results are shown for recipient (outer circle), donor (middle circle) and donor-recipient mismatches (inner circle), respectively.
Fig. 4Circular Manhattan plot of SNP associations with transplant-related mortality. Chromosomes are numbered on the outside. p = 5 × 10−8 is marked with dashed red lines. Each SNP p value association with transplant-related mortality is a colored dot, with genome-wide significant SNPs as red dots. Results are shown for recipient (outer circle), donor (middle circle) and donor-recipient mismatches (inner circle), respectively.
Fig. 5Chromosome 4 regional association plot of transplant related mortality with donor-recipient allele difference. A) Regional meta-analysis SNP –log10(p-values) are plotted as solid black dots at the top of the figure. The higher the -log10 number, the lower the p-value. Rs75868097, the most significant genome-wide association, is labeled and marked with a thin blue line that transverses all panels. The x-axis is the chromosome position in mega bases (Mb). B) shows significant associations in previous GWAS as solid blue dots, including one study of smallpox vaccine cytokine responses. C) Corresponding CADD scores in the region for the variants are shown as solid gray dots. D) Genes in the region are plotted as red boxes on a gray line and annotated with E) HiC data from a lympho blastoid cell line with the F) ENCODE epigenome roadmap for all blood, T-cell, HSC and B-cells; the cell line numbers shown down the left side (ie., E026, etc.) correspond to specific epigenome road map cell lines. The colors indicate the Chrom HMM status as defined in the key on the bottom left of the figure.