| Literature DB >> 35874754 |
Nan Xu1, Kai Sun1, Ya-Zhe Wang1, Wen-Min Chen1, Jun Wang1, Ling-Di Li1, Xu Wang1, Yue Hao1, Yan Chang1, Yan-Rong Liu1, Xiao-Jun Huang1, Ya-Zhen Qin1.
Abstract
Background: Acute myeloid leukemia (AML) with t(8;21) needs to be further stratified. In addition to leukemia cells, immune cells in tumor microenvironment participate in tumor initiation, growth and progression. Interleukins (ILs)/interleukin receptors (ILRs) interaction plays important roles in the antitumor immune response. IL7R is reported to be relevant to prognosis in solid tumor and acute lymphoblastic leukemia. However, the prognostic significance of IL7R in t(8;21) AML remains to be clarified.Entities:
Keywords: IL7R; RNAseq; flow cytometry; real-time quantitative PCR; relapse; t(8;21) AML
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35874754 PMCID: PMC9302488 DOI: 10.3389/fimmu.2022.909104
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Immunol ISSN: 1664-3224 Impact factor: 8.786
Figure 1(A) The expression pattern of IL7R transcript level in bone marrow of t(8;21) AML patients at diagnosis; (B) ROC curve analysis based on relapse were performed to determine the optimal cutoff value of IL7R transcript level for grouping.
Figure 2The impact of IL7R transcript level at diagnosis on relapse in t(8;21) AML patients using Kaplan–Meier survival analysis (log-rank test). (A) RFS, with no censoring; (B) RFS, with censoring at the time of allo-HSCT.
Relationship between IL7R expression at diagnosis and other characteristics.
| Variable | All | IL7R transcript level |
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| IL7R-L | IL7R-H | |||
| Number of patients | 156 | 48 | 108 | |
| Age (year, median, range) | 38 (14-67) | 35 (15-60) | 39 (14-67) | 0.50 |
| Males (%) | 80 (51.3%) | 26 (54.2%) | 54 (50.0%) | 0.73 |
| WBC count (×109/L; median; range) | 8.7 (0.7-101.0) | 12.7 (1.2-59.2) | 7.5 (0.7-101.0) | 0.015 |
| Hemoglobin (g/L; median; range) | 76 (31-151) | 79 (38-129) | 76 (31-151) | 0.87 |
| Platelet count (×109/L; median; range) | 31 (3-324) | 30 (5-171) | 33 (3-324) | 0.098 |
| Bone marrow blast (%, median, range) | 48 (8-91) | 55 (12-91) | 46 (8-90) | 0.042 |
| Patients with cytogenetic abnormalities other than t(8;21), n (%)(n=152) | ||||
| No | 64 | 20 (41.7%) | 44 (42.3%) | 1.0 |
| Yes | 88 | 28 (58.3%) | 60 (57.7%) | |
| KIT gene mutation status, n (%) | ||||
| D816/D820 | 35 | 19 (39.6%) | 16 (14.8%) | 0.0010 |
| N822/e8/WT | 121 | 29 (60.4%) | 92 (85.2%) | |
| MRD status, n (%)(n=144) | ||||
| MRD-L | 101 | 23 (53.5%) | 78 (77.2%) | 0.0060 |
| MRD-H | 43 | 20 (46.5%) | 23 (22.8%) | |
Univariate and multivariate analysis of relapse.
| Variables | No. of patients | Univariate analysis | multivariate analysis | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 4-year RFS rate (95%CI) |
|
| ||
| IL7R transcript level | ||||
| ≤13% | 48 | 54.3% (36.7-69.0%) | 0.0027 | 0.28 |
| >13% | 108 | 79.5% (69.0-86.7%) | ||
| Age | ||||
| ≤40 | 91 | 79.9% (68.8-87.4%) | 0.016 | 0.093 |
| >40 | 65 | 57.6% (40.2-71.5%) | ||
| Sex | ||||
| Male | 80 | 77.8% (65.7-86.0%) | 0.21 | – |
| Female | 76 | 65.0% (50.3-76.3%) | ||
| WBC count | ||||
| ≤9×109 | 79 | 71.3% (57.1-81.5%) | 0.89 | – |
| >9×109 | 76 | 71.1% (57.9-80.9%) | ||
| Hemoglobin | ||||
| ≤80g/L | 83 | 68.9% (54.8-79.5%) | 0.99 | – |
| >80g/L | 70 | 72.3% (58.6-82.1%) | ||
| Platelet count | ||||
| ≤30×109 | 76 | 69.0% (54.9-79.5%) | 0.66 | – |
| >30×109 | 79 | 73.0% (59.7-82.5%) | ||
| Bone marrow blast | ||||
| ≤50% | 87 | 70.1% (57.1-79.9%) | 0.72 | – |
| >50% | 64 | 73.1% (58.9-83.0%) | ||
| Patients with cytogenetic abnormalities other than t(8;21) (n=152) | ||||
| No | 64 | 71.9% (56.7-82.6%) | 0.89 | – |
| Yes | 88 | 71.7% (58.9-81.1%) | ||
| KIT mutation status | ||||
| D816/D820 | 35 | 47.9% (28.9-64.7%) | <0.0001 | <0.0010 |
| N822/e8/WT | 121 | 78.1% (67.7-85.5%) | ||
| Treatment modality | ||||
| Allo-HSCT | 55 | 88.3% (73.5-95.1%) | 0.0002 | <0.0010 |
| Chemotherapy alone | 101 | 61.7% (49.2-72.0%) | ||
| MRD status | ||||
| MRD-L | 43 | 81.1% (69.1-88.8%) | 0.0027 | <0.0010 |
| MRD-H | 101 | 62.2% (44.7-75.6%) | ||
Figure 3RFS of patients grouped by KIT or the combination of KIT and IL7R using Kaplan–Meier survival analysis (log-rank test). (A) Comparison between patients grouped by KIT mutation status; (B) Comparison between patients categorized into 4 groups; (C) Comparison between patients categorized into 2 groups.
Figure 4(A) Correlation of IL7R transcript level and FPKM of IL7R (bivariate Spearman correlation test); (B) Significantly down-regulated GO terms for IL7R-L compared with IL7R-H group; (C) Comparison of FPKM of granzymes A/B/H/M between IL7R-L and IL7R-H group; (D) Comparison of FPKM of CCR7, CD28 and CD27 between IL7R-L and IL7R-H group.
Figure 5Comparison of IL7R tested by RQ-PCR and FCM. (A) The frequency of CD127 in different cell subsets, numbers on the figure represent median (range); (B) Correlation of IL7R transcript expression and percentage of CD8+ T in NCs (FCM) (bivariate Spearman correlation test); (C) Correlation of IL7R transcript expression and percentage of CD4+ T in NCs (FCM) (bivariate Spearman correlation test).