| Literature DB >> 35058359 |
Alexandre Pellan Cheng1, Matthew Pellan Cheng2,3, Conor James Loy4, Joan Sesing Lenz1, Kaiwen Chen2,3, Sami Smalling1, Philip Burnham5, Kaitlyn Marie Timblin2,3, José Luis Orejas2,3, Emily Silverman2,3, Paz Polak6,7, Francisco M Marty3,8, Jerome Ritz2,8, Iwijn De Vlaminck9.
Abstract
Allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) provides effective treatment for hematologic malignancies and immune disorders. Monitoring of posttransplant complications is critical, yet current diagnostic options are limited. Here, we show that cell-free DNA (cfDNA) in blood is a versatile analyte for monitoring of the most important complications that occur after HCT: graft-versus-host disease (GVHD), a frequent immune complication of HCT, infection, relapse of underlying disease, and graft failure. We demonstrate that these therapeutic complications are informed from a single assay, low-coverage bisulfite sequencing of cfDNA, followed by disease-specific bioinformatic analyses. To inform GVHD, we profile cfDNA methylation marks to trace the cfDNA tissues-of-origin and to quantify tissue-specific injury. To inform infection, we implement metagenomic cfDNA profiling. To inform cancer relapse, we implement analyses of tumor-specific genomic aberrations. Finally, to detect graft failure, we quantify the proportion of donor- and recipient-specific cfDNA. We applied this assay to 170 plasma samples collected from 27 HCT recipients at predetermined timepoints before and after allogeneic HCT. We found that the abundance of solid-organ-derived cfDNA in the blood at 1 mo after HCT is predictive of acute GVHD (area under the curve, 0.88). Metagenomic profiling of cfDNA revealed the frequent occurrence of viral reactivation in this patient population. The fraction of donor-specific cfDNA was indicative of relapse and remission, and the fraction of tumor-specific cfDNA was informative of cancer relapse. This proof-of-principle study shows that cfDNA has the potential to improve the care of allogeneic HCT recipients by enabling earlier detection and better prediction of the complex array of complications that occur after HCT.Entities:
Keywords: cell-free DNA; disease relapse; graft-versus-host disease; hematopoietic cell transplant; infection
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35058359 PMCID: PMC8795552 DOI: 10.1073/pnas.2113476118
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A ISSN: 0027-8424 Impact factor: 12.779
Fig. 1.Study overview. (A) cfDNA origins inform diverse transplant events and complications. (B) Plasma from 27 HCT recipients was serially collected at seven or more predetermined timepoints. (C) Patient cohort characteristics.
Fig. 2.Host-derived cfDNA dynamics before and after HCT. (A) Uniform manifold approximation and projection (UMAP) dimensional reduction of cell and tissue methylation profiles. Individual tissues are colored by UMAP coordinates using a linear gradient where each of the four corners is either cyan, magenta, yellow, or black. (B) Examples of cfDNA dynamics in the case of severe GVHD (patient 003, Top) and no GVHD (patient 017, Bottom) in the first 3 mo posttransplant. (C and D) Effect of conditioning and HCT infusion on cfDNA composition (C) and absolute concentration (D). (E) Solid-organ–derived cfDNA concentration in plasma. Top: solid-organ cfDNA and days posttransplant for each patient timepoint. Bottom: solid-organ cfDNA by timepoint. Samples are removed from analysis if plasma was collected after GVHD diagnosis. *P < 0.05; **P < 0.01; ***P < 0.001.
Fig. 3.Infectome screening in HCT patients. (A) Relative genomic equivalents of Anelloviruses detected before transplant (preconditioning and transplant timepoints) and the 3 mo timepoint. (B) Relative genomic equivalents of human herpesviruses by timepoint. Error bars represent SEM. (C) Concordance between clinically validated BK PCR test (in blood) and BK cfDNA identification. (D) BK abundances in blood (PCR test, Top), plasma (cfDNA, Middle), and urine (PCR test, Bottom) in patient 031.
Fig. 4.(A) Overview of tumor fraction estimation using CNAs. (B) Tumor fractions as measured through ichorCNA at all collected timepoints. Patients without malignant disease and without CNAs (as identified through targeted sequencing) were used to gauge the error in tumor fraction measured by ichorCNA (up to 12%). (C) Example of a CAN profile in a patient with a nonmalignant blood disorder (with no alterations expected). The few outliers in the coverage plot for patient 008 are likely due to errors in sequence mapping. Genome-wide plots in (C–F) (Top only in F) are colored by ichorCNA’s identification of a given region as neutral (blue), gained (red), or lost (green). (D–F) CAN profiles of three patients with measurable CNA-based tumor fractions. (D) Patient 015 was found to have loss of chromosome 7 at the time of engraftment and in all subsequent samples. (E) Patient 031, over the course of their treatment, developed additional, clinically undetected structural variants. (F) Patient 003 (deceased on day 91) had detectable tumor fraction and clinical evidence of GVHD. Solid-organ–derived cfDNA was higher than the tumor load (line plot, Right-hand side). Top: genome-wide coverage plot. Bottom Left: copy number profiles on chromosomes 1 and 5 show a decrease in copy number changes at engraftment (yellow) and subsequent increase at month 3 (blue), when compared to the preconditioning timepoint (black). Bottom Right: Tumor- and solid-organ–derived cfDNA concentration at all available timepoints for patient 003. Patients 003, 008, 015, and 031 were all male–male donor–recipient pairs.
Fig. 5.Donor fractions and days posttransplant in sex-mismatched patients. (A) The donor fraction is measured from the relative coverage of sex chromosomes (Materials and Methods). (B) Donor fraction in all sex-mismatched patients. (C) Donor fraction in two patients who experienced disease relapse.