4.6 Article

Increased Plasma-Immune Cytokines throughout the High-Dose Melphalan-Induced Lymphodepletion in Patients with Multiple Myeloma: A Window for Adoptive Immunotherapy

期刊

JOURNAL OF IMMUNOLOGY
卷 184, 期 2, 页码 1079-1084

出版社

AMER ASSOC IMMUNOLOGISTS
DOI: 10.4049/jimmunol.0804159

关键词

-

资金

  1. Ligue Nationale Contre le Cancer, Paris, France

向作者/读者索取更多资源

High-dose melphalan (HDM) followed by autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) is a standard treatment for patients with multiple myeloma. However, lymphocyte reconstitution is impaired after HDM. Recent work has suggested that the lymphopenia period occurring after various immunosuppressive or chemotherapy treatments may provide an interesting opportunity for adoptive antitumor immunotherapy. The objective of this study was to determine an immunotherapy window after HDM and ASCT, evaluating T cell lymphopenia, and measuring circulating immune cytokine concentrations in patients with multiple myeloma. The counts of T cell subpopulations reached a nadir at day 8 post-ASCT (day 10 post-HDM) and recovered by day 30. IL-6, IL-7, and IL-15 plasma levels increased on a median day 8 post-ASCT, respectively, 35-fold, 8-fold, and 10-fold compared with pre-HDM levels (P <= 0.05). The increases in IL-7 and IL-15 levels were inversely correlated to the absolute lymphocyte count, unlike monocyte or myeloid counts. Furthermore, we have shown that CD3 T cells present in the ASC graft are,activated, die rapidly when they are cultured without cytokine in vitro, and that addition of TL-7 or IL-15 could induce their survival and proliferation. In conclusion, the early lymphodepletion period, occurring 4-11 d post-HDM and ASCT, is associated with an increase of circulating immune cytokines and could be an optimal window to enhance the survival and proliferation of polyclonal T cells present in the ASC autograft and also of specific antimyeloma T cells previously expanded in vitro. The Journal of Immunology, 2010, 184: 1079-1084.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据