| Literature DB >> 35663947 |
Nikeshan Jeyakumar1, Melody Smith2.
Abstract
Cellular therapies have transformed the treatment of relapsed/refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (r/r DLBCL), which typically does not respond well to salvage chemotherapy. Recently, approximately 40% of r/r DLBCL patients across three different trials achieved a complete remission at 1 year after receiving treatment with autologous chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cells (auto-CARs). These successes have prompted studies of auto-CARs in second-line settings, in which axicabtagene ciloleucel and lisocabtagene maraleucel both showed improved event-free survival over autologous hematopoietic cell transplantation (AHCT). While encouraging, this data also highlights that 60% of patients relapse or progress following treatment with auto-CARs. Individual disease characteristics and logistical challenges of cell engineering also limit patients' eligibility for auto-CARs. Allogeneic CAR T cells (allo-CARs) may address some of these limitations as they may mitigate delays associated with auto-CARs, thereby reducing the need for bridging chemotherapies and increasing availability of cellular products for patients with aggressive lymphomas. By being sourced from healthy donors who have never been exposed to cytotoxic chemotherapy, allo-CARs can be created from T cells with better fitness. Allo-CARs made from specific cellular subsets (e.g., stem cell memory or naïve/early memory T cells) may also have increased efficacy and long-term persistence. Additionally, allo-CARs have been successfully created from other cell types, including natural killer cells, gamma-delta T-cells and induced pluripotent stem cells. These cell types can be engineered to target viral antigens, enabling precision targeting of virally driven DLBCL. As allogeneic donor cells can be banked and cryopreserved in batches, they can be made more readily available, potentially reducing logistical hurdles and costs compared to engineering auto-CARs. This may ultimately create a more sustainable platform for cell therapies. Challenges with allo-CARs that will need to be addressed include graft versus host disease, alloimmunization, potentially decreased persistence relative to auto-CARs, and antigen escape. In short, the adaptability of allo-CARs makes them ideal for treating patients with r/r DLBCL who have progressed through standard chemotherapy, AHCT, or auto-CARs. Here, we review the published literature on patients with r/r DLBCL treated with allogeneic CAR products manufactured from various cell types as well as forthcoming allogeneic CAR technologies.Entities:
Keywords: DLBCL - diffuse large B cell lymphoma; GVHD; adoptive cell immunotherapy; allogeneic CAR T cells; hematopoietic (stem) cell transplantation
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35663947 PMCID: PMC9158546 DOI: 10.3389/fimmu.2022.887866
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Immunol ISSN: 1664-3224 Impact factor: 8.786
Clinical Outcomes for Patients Treated with Allogeneic CAR Therapies.
| CAR Type | Total number of Patients | Patients with r/r DLBCL | Acute GVHD | Chronic GVHD | Overall Efficacy (BOR) | Efficacy in r/r DLBCL (BOR) | T-cell Chimerism | Costimulatory Domain | Transduction Type |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Axi-cel from allo-HCT donor ( | 7 | 7 | 3 (43%) | 0 (0%) | 3 CR, 1 PR (57%) | Same as overall | 100% in 4/7, NR for others | CD28 | Retrovirus |
| UCB-derived CAR-NK ( | 11 | 2 | 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) | 7 CR, 1 PR (73%) | 1 CR (50%) | N/A | CD28 | Retrovirus |
| EBV-CTL (41 )(NCT01430390) | 10 | 1 | 1 (10%) | 0 (0%) | 7 CR (70%) | 1 CR (100%) | NR | CD28 | Retrovirus |
| Allo-HCT donor-derived CAR ( | 20 | 5 | 0 (0%) | 2 (10%) | 6 CR, 2 PR (40%) | 1 CR, 3 SD (80%) | NR | CD28 | Retrovirus |
| Allo-HCT donor-derived CAR ( | 19 | 2 | 2 (11%) | 1 (5%) | 11 CR (58%) | 1 CR (50%) | NR | CD28 |
|
| Allo-HCT recipient-derived CAR ( | 21 | 1 | 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) | 3 CR (14%) | 1 PD (0%) | NR | CD28 | Retrovirus |
Allo-HCT, allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplant; Axi-cel, axicabtagene ciloleucel; BOR, best overall response; CAR, chimeric antigen receptor; CR, complete remission; DLI, donor leukocyte infusion; EBV-CTL, EBV-specific cytotoxic lymphocytes; GVHD, graft-versus-host disease; NR, not reported; N/A, not available; PR, partial remission; r/r DLBCL, relapsed/refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma; SD, stable disease; UCB, umbilical cord blood.
Advantages and Disadvantages of Potential Cellular Sources for Allogeneic CARs.
| Cell Type | Advantages | Disadvantages |
|---|---|---|
| NK cells ( | Intrinsic killing capability, lack of GVHD, decreased risk of off-target toxicity due to MHC-1 mediated regulation | Decreased persistence and tumor trafficking |
| iNKT cells ( | Lack of GVHD, can kill | Unknown persistence, function may be impaired by lymphodepleting chemotherapy, possibly more challenging to isolate due to rarity of T cell population |
| γδ T cells ( | Capable of MHC-independent killing, lack of GVHD | Unknown persistence, variable transduction efficacy, some subsets may be immunosuppressive |
| iPSC ( | Unlimited replication potential; can facilitate scaling up of cell engineering and customization of antigen specificity | May cause GVHD due to TCR; if TCR removed, persistence may be reduced due to NK cell-mediated destruction |
| EBV-CTL ( | Specific targeting of virally driven DLBCL, minimal risk of GVHD | Unknown persistence, potential for off-target toxicity on other infected tissues that express EBV antigens |
| SCM/early memory T cells ( | Potential for improved engraftment and expansion with less exhaustion due to less-differentiated phenotype | Unknown persistence and cytotoxicity relative to more differentiated T-cell subsets |
CNS, central nervous system; EBV-CTL, Epstein Barr virus cytotoxic T cell; iNKT, invariant natural killer/T; iPSC, induced pluripotent stem cell; MHC, major histocompatibility complex; NK, natural killer; SCM, stem cell memory; TCR, T cell receptor.