| Literature DB >> 36249041 |
Yang Wang1, Zhiqiang Song1, Yuke Geng1, Lei Gao1, Lili Xu1, Gusheng Tang1, Xiong Ni1, Li Chen1, Jie Chen1, Tao Wang1, Weijia Fu1, Dongge Feng2, Xuejun Yu2, Libing Wang1, Jianmin Yang1.
Abstract
Hematotoxicity is the most common long-term adverse event after chimeric antigen receptor T cell (CAR-T) therapy. Here, a total of 71 patients with relapsed or refractory (R/R) B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia (B-ALL) or large B-cell lymphoma (LBCL) were used to develop an early hematotoxicity predictive model and verify the accuracy of this model. The incidences of early hematotoxicity at 3 month following CAR-T infusion in B-ALL and LBCL were 45.5% and 38.5%, respectively. Multivariate analyses revealed that the severity of cytokine release syndrome (CRS) was an independent risk factor affecting early hematotoxicity. The analysis between the peak cytokine levels and early hematotoxicity suggested that tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α) and C-reactive protein (CRP) were closely associated with early hematotoxicity. Then, an early predictive model of hematotoxicity was constructed based on the peak contents of TNF-α and CRP. This model could diagnose early hematotoxicity with positive predictive values of 87.7% and 85.0% in training and validation cohorts, respectively. Lastly, we constructed the nomogram for clinical practice to predict the risk of early hematotoxicity, which performed well compared with the observed probability. This early predictive model is instrumental in the risk stratification of CAR-T recipients with hematotoxicity and early intervention for high-risk patients.Entities:
Keywords: acute lymphoblastic leukemia; chimeric antigen receptor T cell; early predictive model; hematotoxicity; large B-cell lymphoma; risk factors
Year: 2022 PMID: 36249041 PMCID: PMC9561932 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2022.987965
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Oncol ISSN: 2234-943X Impact factor: 5.738
Figure 1The flowchart of this study.
Patient and disease characteristics.
| Variables | Training cohort | Validation cohort |
|---|---|---|
|
| 43 (12-66) | 43 (19-69) |
|
| ||
| Male | 18 (51.4) | 20 (55.6) |
| Female | 17 (48.6) | 16 (44.4) |
|
| ||
| B-ALL | 22 (62.9) | 9 (25) |
| Large B-cell lymphoma | 13 (37.1) | 27 (75) |
|
| ||
| | ||
| Bone marrow blasts, median (%, range) | 8 (0-92) | 26.8 (0-93) |
| | ||
| | ||
| I-II | 2 (15.4) | 4 (14.8) |
| III-IV | 11 (84.6) | 23 (85.2) |
| | ||
| 0-2 | 7 (53.8) | 14 (51.9) |
| 3-5 | 6 (46.2) | 13 (48.1) |
| | 263 (173-1404) | 228 (113-1289) |
|
| 6 (2-18) | 7 (4-16) |
|
| ||
| WBC (×109/L) | 4.82 (0.13-22.61) | 3.7 (1.44-13.03) |
| Neutrophil (×109/L) | 2.92 (0.06-14.11) | 2.49 (0.82-11.91) |
| Hemoglobin (g/dL) | 10 (4.8-14.6) | 10.5 (5.8-13.2) |
| Platelet (×109/L) | 140 (14-294) | 168 (54-401) |
|
| 9 (25.7) | 12 (33.3) |
|
| 7 (20) | 10 (27.8) |
|
| 2.9 (0.35-6.7) | 3 (0.1-11.76) |
|
| ||
| 0 | 5 (14.3) | 4 (11.1) |
| 1 | 14 (40) | 20 (55.6) |
| 2 | 8 (22.9) | 5 (13.9) |
| 3 | 5 (14.3) | 3 (8.3) |
| 4 | 3 (8.5) | 4 (11.1) |
|
| 2 (5.7) | 2 (5.6) |
|
| ||
| WBC (×109/L) | 3.85 (0.02-11.52) | 3.91 (0.17-6.78) |
| Neutrophil (×109/L) | 2 (0.01-5.31) | 1.77 (0.1-3.8) |
| Hemoglobin (g/dL) | 10.3 (3.1-15.8) | 12.3 (6.1-15.8) |
| Platelet (×109/L) | 90 (3-242) | 154 (9-283) |
|
| 20 (57.1) | 26 (72.2) |
B-ALL, B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia; LDH, lactate dehydrogenase; IPI, international prognostic index; CRS, cytokine release syndrome; HSCT, hematopoietic stem cell transplantation; WBC, white blood cell; CAR-T, chimeric antigen receptor T cell; ICANS, immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome.
Figure 2Treatment response and hematological recovery in the training cohort after CAR-T therapy. Treatment response (A) and hematological recovery (B) in patients with B-ALL and LBCL. Compared to patients with B-ALL, lower CR rate while higher BR rate were observed in patients with LBCL. (C) Incidences of severe neutropenia, anemia, and thrombocytopenia in Non-BR patients. CAR-T, chimeric antigen receptor T cell; B-ALL, B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia; LBCL, large B-cell lymphoma; CR, complete response; BR, blood complete recovery; Non-BR, non-blood complete recovery.
Figure 3The effects of hematopoietic recovery on PFS and OS probability in training cohort. The survival analysis revealed that OS (A) and PFS (B) were significantly superior in patients with BR. PFS, progression-free survival; OS, overall survival; BR, blood complete recovery; Non-BR, non-blood complete recovery.
Subgroup analysis of BR at 3 month after CAR-T cell infusion in training cohort.
| Variables | BR (n=20) | Non-BR (n=15) | P value |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| 48 (12-64) | 36 (17-66) | 0.173 |
|
| 0.851 | ||
| Male | 10 (50) | 8 (53.3) | |
| Female | 10 (50) | 7 (46.7) | |
|
| 0.583 | ||
| B-ALL | 12 (60) | 10 (66.7) | |
| Large B-cell lymphoma | 8 (40) | 5 (33.3) | |
|
| |||
| | |||
| Bone marrow blasts, median (%, range) | 4.5 (0-61) | 11.8 (0-92) | 0.396 |
| | |||
| | 0.487 | ||
| I-II | 2 (10) | 0 | |
| III-IV | 6 (30) | 5 (33.3) | |
| | 1.000 | ||
| 0-2 | 4 (20) | 3 (20) | |
| 3-5 | 4 (20) | 2 (13.3) | |
| | 242 (173-891) | 372 (263-1404) | 0.246 |
|
| 6 (2-18) | 7 (3-15) | 0.755 |
|
| |||
| WBC (×109/L) | 4.75 (0.13-22.61) | 4.74 (1.89-15.15) | 0.242 |
| Neutrophil (×109/L) | 3.02 (0.06-14.11) | 2.6 (1.37-10.33) | 0.443 |
| Hemoglobin (g/dL) | 10.7 (6.4-12.6) | 8.9 (4.8-14.6) | 0.121 |
| Platelet (×109/L) | 142 (58-294) | 133 (14-265) | 0.091 |
|
| 11 (55) | 5 (33.3) | 0.214 |
| Autologous, n (%) | 6 (30) | 3 (20) | |
| Allogeneic, n (%) | 5 (25) | 2 (13.3) | |
|
| 2.59 (0.35-6.7) | 3.1 (0.87-4) | 0.287 |
|
| 0.031 | ||
| 0-1 | 14 (70) | 5 (33.3) | |
| 2-4 | 6 (30) | 10 (66.7) | |
|
| |||
| WBC (×109/L) | 4.57 (3.1-11.52) | 3.53 (0.02-7.43) | 0.017 |
| Neutrophil (×109/L) | 2.18 (1.18-5.31) | 1.55 (0.01-3.4) | 0.014 |
| Hemoglobin (g/dL) | 11.1 (8.8-14.9) | 7.8 (3.1-15.8) | 0.002 |
| Platelet (×109/L) | 144 (51-242) | 59 (3-203) | 0.010 |
BR, blood complete recovery; LDH, lactate dehydrogenase; IPI, international prognostic index; CRS, cytokine release syndrome; HSCT, hematopoietic stem cell transplantation; WBC, white blood cell; CAR-T, chimeric antigen receptor T cell.
Figure 4Peak levels and discriminative power of CRS-related cytokines in BR and Non-BR subgroups of training cohort. (A) The peak levels of CRP was significantly lower in BR patients compared to that in Non-BR patients. (B) Discriminative ability of cytokines between BR and Non-BR subgroups. The peak levels of TNF-α and CRP represented good discriminative power with AUC > 0.6. CRS, cytokine release syndrome; BR, blood complete recovery; Non-BR, non-blood complete recovery; CRP, C-reactive protein; TNF-α, tumor necrosis factor-α.
Figure 5The discrimination power and nomogram of early predictive model. (A) Receiver operating characteristic analysis of this early BR predictive model in THE training cohort. This model could early predict hematotoxicity with AUC = 0.877. (B) Validation of this early BR predictive model in an independent cohort. This predictive model showed good accuracy with AUC = 0.850. (C) Nomogram based on the peak contents of TNF-α and CRP to evaluate the possibility of BR. (D) Early predictive model calibration curves comparing predicted probability of BR with observed early BR. The red line is perfect calibration line between the predicted probability and observed. The calibration belts of light gray and dark gray represent the 80% and 95% confidence level of this early predictive model, respectively. The model indicates good fit if calibration belts include the red line and P value > 0.05. BR, blood complete recovery; AUC, area under the curve; CRP, C-reactive protein; TNF-α, tumor necrosis factor-α.