Secondary graft failure after PT-cy: Modeling a candidate risk assignment biomarker based on lymphocyte reconstitution. Results from the BMT CTN 1801 study.
Abstract
Abstract Introduction: Graft Failure (GF) is a rare but devastating outcome of HCT. Primary GF (PGF), defined as a failure of neutrophil recovery by Day+28, is straightforward to diagnose. Diagnosing secondary GF (SGF) is more challenging, with its broad time-range, multiple confounding diagnoses, and lack of predictive biomarkers. In BMT CTN1703/1801, we analyzed patients receiving RIC HCT for heme malignancies with either Tac/MTX (n=159) or PT-Cy (n=165) GVHD prophylaxis. SGF was defined as donor chimerism <5% after initial donor engraftment. With Tac/MTX, there were 3 PGF and 1 SGF diagnoses. With PT-Cy, there were 4 PGF and 6 SGF. Median SGF diagnosis was Day +64 (range: Day+28-215). There were too few Tac/MTX patients to analyze SGF, but sufficient events with PT-Cy. To identify PT-Cy SGF predictors, we leveraged lymphocyte, T, B, and NK cell reconstitution analysis. In SGF we found an early, profound deficit in the reconstitution of all major lymphocyte populations, including total lymphocytes, T, B, and NK cells, as early as Day+28. This enabled the modeling of a SGF risk classifier based on the Absolute Lymphocyte Count (ALC). Methods: Clinical ALC measurements were performed on all SGF patients (n=6) and on non-GF controls with ALCs available (146 of 155 non-GF patients). Flow cytometry was performed on all PT-Cy SGF patients (n = 6) and from a subset of non-GF controls (n = 18: controls were chosen as patients without relapse or severe GVHD, to reduce confounders introduced by immunologic interventions, and for whom all samples, including from the graft infusion, were available). T, B, and NK counts, as well as T cell subsets, were compared (using Welch's T test) on Days 7, 14, 21, 28, 42, 63, 98, 180, 270, 365, 730, with SGF patients censored on the day of GF diagnosis. To interrogate the optimal ALC cutoff, the cumulative incidence of SGF was computed at Days +28 and +42, with death without GF as a competing risk. Results: We have previously demonstrated that, compared to Tac/MTX, PT-Cy patients exhibited an early decrease in reconstitution of all T cell populations (with normal NK and B cell reconstitution). Here we focused specifically on PT-Cy patients with or without SGF. Graft CD34 counts/kg were not different between SGF patients and non-GF patients (mean CD34/kg = 1.38 x10e6 (SGF) vs 0.67 x10e6 (non-GF, p = 0.61) However, even amidst the overarching early suppression in T cell reconstitution with PT-Cy, SGF patients could be easily distinguished from the larger PT-Cy cohort, based on more profound deficits in ALC, T, B and NK cells reconstitution, measured using 2 strategies: (1) SGF patients demonstrated significant early (Day +28) quantitative defects in the reconstitution of the ALC (mean +/- SEM 262+/-32 cells/µL (non-GF) vs 60 +/- 25 (SGF, p<0.0001), CD4 T cells (62 +/- 12 cells/µL vs 19+/-15, p=0.048), CD8 T cells (15 +/-3 cells/µL vs 3.5 +/-1 p=0.0009), all CD8 T cell subpopulations, as well as NK cells (116+/-31 cells/µL vs 2.9+/-1.4 cells/µL, p= 0.002) and B cells (3.5 +/-1.4 cells/µL vs 0.16+/-0.07 p =0.03). (2) In SGF, there was a significant deficit in the rate of rise of all major lymphocyte populations between Days 28-42-60 vs non-GF, including CD4 T cells (p<0.0001), CD8 T cells (p = 0.0002), B cells (p<0.0001), and NK cells (p =0.048). These discoveries suggested that a classifier could be identified to risk-stratify patients for SGF. We explored an ALC cutpoint, amenable to standard clinical lab analysis. A statistically significant threshold was identified at both Days+28 and +42, with Day+42 being most predictive: A threshold of 120 cells/µL was identified as optimal, with landmark analysis documenting a SGF rate of 34.7% below the cutpoint, and SGF of 1% above it (HR = 45.9, 95% CI 5.7 - 366). Conclusions: Despite the small number of events, PT-Cy patients with SGF demonstrated a distinctive reconstitution trajectory that encompassed an early, substantial, and sustained deficit in all lymphocyte counts, as well as a lack of their longitudinal expansion. This enabled the discovery of a candidate ALC biomarker cutpoint at Day+42 that could distinguish patients who were more likely to develop SGF. If confirmed, these data could generate a predictive biomarker for SGF, which would enable the design of trials evaluating early interventions (e.g. CD34+ boosts, DLI, modification of immunosuppression) to improve outcomes for these patients.
Article Details
Authors (43)
Kayleigh Ingersoll Omdahl
1Boston Children's Hospital, Boston, United States
Steven Siegel
1Boston Children's Hospital/Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard Medical Schol, Boston, United States
Jiayi Dong
Susan DeWolf
Kyle Hebert
Donna Neuberg
Isabella Schichter
1Boston Children's Hospital/Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard Medical Schol, Boston, United States
Alexandre Albanese
1Boston Children's Hospital, Department of Pediatrics, Boston, United States
Paul Keskula
1Boston Children's Hospital, Department of Pediatrics, Boston, United States
Lorenzo Cagnin
1Boston Children's Hospital, Department of Pediatrics, Boston, United States
Kristy Applegate
4The Emmes Company, Rockland, United States
Merav Bar
Saurabh Chhabra
6The Mayo Clinic Arizona, Pheonix, United States
Sung Choi
7University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, United States
William Clark
Suman Das
Department of Chemistry, GITAM University 1 , Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh 530045,
Robert Jenq
1City of Hope, Hematology and HCT, Duarte, United States
Richard Jones
1Johns Hopkins University, Oncology, Baltimore, United States
John Levine
12Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, United States
Brent Logan
2CIBMTR/Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, United States
Michael Martens
13Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, United States
Hemant Murthy
2Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, United States
Armin Rashidi
Marcie Riches
Kura Oncology Inc., San Diego, California, United States
Wael Saber
3CIBMTR® (Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research), Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, United States
Karamjeet Sandhu
11Department of Hematology and Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation, Gehr Family Center for Leukemia Research, City of Hope, Duarte, CA
Anthony Sung
16Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, United States
Karilyn Larkin
17Ohio State University Hospital, Columbus, United States
Monzr M. Al Malki
1City of Hope, Duarte, United States
Mahasweta Gooptu
1Dana Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, United States
Hany Elmariah
Stanford University, Stanford, California, United States
Amin Alousi
20MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, United States
Lyndsey Runaas
13Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, United States
Brian Shaffer
2Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, United States
Andrew Rezvani
21Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, United States
Najla El Jurdi
3CIBMTR® (Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research), Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, United States
Alison Loren
24University of Pennsylvania Medical Center, Philadelphia, United States
Mary Horowitz
2CIBMTR/Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, United States
Javier Bolanos-Meade
1Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Oncology, Baltimore, United States
Shernan Holtan
1Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center, Buffalo, United States
Ami Bhatt
21Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, United States
Miguel-Angel Perales
1Adult Bone Marrow Transplant Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
Leslie Kean
1Boston Children's Hospital/Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard Medical Schol, Boston, United States