4.5 Article

GvL effects in T-prolymphocytic leukemia: evidence from MRD kinetics and TCR repertoire analyses

Journal

BONE MARROW TRANSPLANTATION
Volume 52, Issue 4, Pages 544-551

Publisher

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/bmt.2016.305

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. CEITEC MU [CZ.1.05/1.1.00/02.0068]
  2. EuroClonality
  3. MetaCentrum [LM2010005]
  4. CERIT-SC under program Centre CERIT Scientific Cloud, part of the Operational Program Research and Development for Innovations [CZ.1.05/3.2.00/08.0144]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Allogeneic stem cell transplantation (alloSCT) is used for treating patients with T-prolymphocytic leukemia (T-PLL). However, direct evidence of GvL activity in T-PLL is lacking. We correlated minimal residual disease (MRD) kinetics with immune interventions and T-cell receptor (TCR) repertoire diversity alterations in patients after alloSCT for T-PLL. Longitudinal quantitative MRD monitoring was performed by clone-specific real-time PCR of TCR rearrangements (n = 7), and TCR repertoire diversity assessment by nextgeneration sequencing (NGS; n = 3) Although post-transplant immunomodulation (immunosuppression tapering or donor lymphocyte infusions) resulted in significant reduction (>1 log) of MRD levels in 7 of 10 occasions, durable MRD clearance was observed in only two patients. In all three patients analyzed by TCR-NGS, MRD responses were reproducibly associated with a shift from a clonal, T-PLL-driven profile to a polyclonal signature. Novel clonotypes that could explain a clonal GvL effect did not emerge. In conclusion, TCR-based MRD quantification appears to be a suitable tool for monitoring and guiding treatment interventions in T-PLL. The MRD responses to immune modulation observed here provide first molecular evidence for GvL activity in T-PLL which, however, may be often only transient and reliant on a poly-/oligoclonal rather than a monoclonal T-cell response.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available