Kinetics of Recovery of Naïve and Memory T Cells in Acute Leukemia Patients after Allogeneic Stem Cell Transplantation Depending on Different GVHD Prophylaxis Regimens

Natalia Popova; Mikhail Drokov; Yulia Davydova; Nikolay Kapranov; Vera Vasilieva; Irina Galtseva; Larisa Kuzmina; Elena Parovichnikova

doi:10.18502/ijhoscr.v18i1.14742

Kinetics of Recovery of Naïve and Memory T Cells in Acute Leukemia Patients after Allogeneic Stem Cell Transplantation Depending on Different GVHD Prophylaxis Regimens

Abstract

Background: Memory T cells are a heterogeneous population of immune cells that provide adaptive immunity. Its full recovery seems essential for graft-versus-tumor reactions that provide an opportunity for biological cure in patients with acute leukemia. The use of mismatched or haploidentical donors has increased, which has become possible because of modifications in graft versus host disease (GVHD) prophylaxis.

Materials and Methods: Sixty-five leukemia patients (acute myeloid leukemia – 40, acute lymphoblastic leukemia – 25), median age 33 (17–61) years, underwent allo-HSCT from 2016 to 2019 in the National Research Centre for Hematology. Patients were divided into three groups based on the impact of GVHD prophylaxis on T cell recovery: horse antithymocyte globulin (ATG)-based regimen (n=32), horse ATG combined with posttransplant cyclophosphamide (PT-Cy) (n=18), and ex vivo T cell depletion (n=15).

Results: The early period after transplantation (before day +100) was characterized by significantly lower absolute numbers of T naïve, memory stem and T central memory cells in peripheral blood in patients after ATG+PT-Cy-regimen or ex vivo T cell depletion than after ATG-based prophylaxis (p<0.05). Moreover, strong depletion of naïve T and memory stem cells prevents the development of GVHD, and determining the absolute number of CD8⁺ naïve T and memory stem cells with a cutoff of 1.31 cells per microliter seems to be a perspective in assessing the risks of developing acute GVHD (p=0.008). The dynamics of T cell recovery showed the involvement of either circulating or bone marrow resident T effector cells shortly after allogeneic transplantation in all patients, but the use of manipulated grafts with ex vivo T cell depletion requires the involvement of naïve and memory stem cells. There was no significant effect of T cell recovery on leukemia relapse after allogeneic transplantation.

Conclusion: These experimental outcomes contribute to providing the best understanding of immunological events that occur early after transplantation and help in the rational choice of GVHD prophylaxis in patients who will undergo allogeneic transplantation. Our study demonstrated the comparable immunological effects of posttransplant cyclophosphamide and ex vivo T cell depletion and immunological inefficiency of horse ATG for GVHD prevention.

1. Mehta RS, Rezvani K. Immune reconstitution post allogeneic transplant and the impact of immune recovery on the risk of infection. Virulence. 2016; 7(8): 901-16.
2. Huttunen P, Taskinen M, Siitonen S, et al. Impact of very early CD4+/CD8+ T cell counts on the occurrence of acute graft-versus-host disease and NK cell counts on outcome after pediatric allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Pediatr Blood Cancer. 2015; 62(3):522–8.
3. Ogonek J, Kralj Juric M, Ghimire S, et al. Immune Reconstitution after Allogeneic Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation. Front Immunol. 2016; 7:507.
4. Jiménez M, Ercilla G, Martínez C. Immune reconstitution after allogeneic stem cell transplantation with reduced-intensity conditioning regimens. Leukemia. 2007; 21(8): 1628–1637.
5. Bosch M, Dhadda M, Hoegh-Petersen M, et al. Immune reconstitution after anti-thymocyte globulin-conditioned hematopoietic cell transplantation. Cytotherapy. 2012; 14(10):1258-75.
6. Retière C, Willem C, Guillaume T, et al. Impact on early outcomes and immune reconstitution of high-dose post-transplant cyclophosphamide vs anti-thymocyte globulin after reduced intensity conditioning peripheral blood stem cell allogeneic transplantation. Oncotarget. 2018; 9(14): 11451–11464.
7. Krenger W, Blazar BR, Holländer GA. Thymic T-cell development in allogeneic stem cell transplantation. Blood. 2011; 117(25): 6768–6776.
8. Kaech SM, Hemby S, Kersh E, et al. Molecular and functional profiling of memory CD8 T cell differentiation. Cell. 2002; 111(6):837-51.
9. Zheng H, Matte-Martone C, Jain D, et al. Central memory CD8+ T cells induce graft-versus-host disease and mediate graft-versus-leukemia. J Immunol. 2009;182(10):5938-48.
10. Huang W, Chao NJ. Memory T cells: A helpful guard for allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation without causing graft-versus-host disease. Hematol Oncol Stem Cell Ther. 2017; 10(4):211-219.
11. MacVittie TJ, Bennett AW, Cohen MV, et al. Immune cell reconstitution after exposure to potentially lethal doses of radiation in the nonhuman primate. Health Phys. 2014;106(1):84-96.
12. Mackall CL, Fleisher TA, Brown MR, et al. Distinctions between CD8+ and CD4+ T-cell regenerative pathways result in prolonged T-cell subset imbalance after intensive chemotherapy. Blood. 1997;89(10):3700-7
13. Chung B, Barbara-Burnham L, Barsky L, et al. Radiosensitivity of thymic interleukin-7 production and thymopoiesis after bone marrow transplantation. Blood. 2001; 98(5):1601-6.
14. Fletcher AL, Lowen TE, Sakkal S, et al. Ablation and regeneration of tolerance-inducing medullary thymic epithelial cells after cyclosporine, cyclophosphamide, and dexamethasone treatment. J Immunol. 2009; 183(2):823-31.
15. Turner BE, Collin M, Rice AM. Reduced intensity conditioning for hematopoietic stem cell transplantation: has it achieved all it set out to? Cytotherapy. 2010; 12(4):440-54.
16. Jiménez M, Martínez C, Ercilla G, et al. Reduced-intensity conditioning regimen preserves thymic function in the early period after hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Exp Hematol. 2005; 33(10):1240-8.
17. Bahceci E, Epperson D, Douek DC, et al. Early reconstitution of the T-cell repertoire after non-myeloablative peripheral blood stem cell transplantation is from post-thymic T-cell expansion and is unaffected by graft-versus-host disease or mixed chimaerism. Br J Haematol. 2003; 122(6):934-43.
18. Luznik L, O'Donnell PV, Symons HJ, et al. HLA-haploidentical bone marrow transplantation for hematologic malignancies using nonmyeloablative conditioning and high-dose, posttransplantation cyclophosphamide. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2008; 14(6):641-50.
19. Al-Homsi AS, Roy TS, Cole K, et al. Post-Transplant High-Dose Cyclophosphamide for the Prevention of Graft-versus-Host Disease. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2015; 21(4):604-11.
20. Servais S, Menten-Dedoyart C, Beguin Y, et al. Impact of Pre-Transplant Anti-T Cell Globulin (ATG) on Immune Recovery after Myeloablative Allogeneic Peripheral Blood Stem Cell Transplantation. PLoS One. 2015; 10(6):e0130026.
21. Storek J, Mohty M, Boelens JJ. Rabbit anti-T cell globulin in allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2015; 21(6):959-70.
22. Battipaglia G, Labopin M, Kröger N, et al. Posttransplant cyclophosphamide vs antithymocyte globulin in HLA-mismatched unrelated donor transplantation. Blood. 2019; 134(11):892-899.
23. Nykolyszyn C, Granata A, Pagliardini T, et al. Posttransplantation cyclophosphamide vs antithymocyte globulin as GVHD prophylaxis for mismatched unrelated hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Bone Marrow Transplant. 2020; 55(2):349-355.
24. Pagliardini T, Harbi S, Fürst S, et al. Post-transplantation cyclophosphamide-based haploidentical versus Atg-based unrelated donor allogeneic stem cell transplantation for patients younger than 60 years with hematological malignancies: a single-center experience of 209 patients. Bone Marrow Transplant. 2019; 54(7):1067-1076.
25. Saad A, Lamb L. Ex vivo T-cell depletion in allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant: past, present and future. Bone Marrow Transplant. 2017; 52(9): 1241-1248.
26. Weiden PL, Flournoy N, Thomas ED, et al. Antileukemic effect of graft-versus-host disease in human recipients of allogeneic-marrow grafts. N Engl J Med. 1979;300(19):1068-73.
27. Falkenburg JHF, Jedema I. Graft versus tumor effects and why people relapse. Hematology Am Soc Hematol Educ Program. 2017;2017(1):693-698.
28. Chang YJ, Zhao XY, Huang XJ. Strategies for Enhancing and Preserving Anti-leukemia Effects Without Aggravating Graft-Versus-Host Disease. Front Immunol. 2018; 9:3041.
29. Ringdén O, Karlsson H, Olsson R, et al. The allogeneic graft-versus-cancer effect. Br J Haematol. 2009;147(5):614-33.
30. Mueller SN, Gebhardt T, Carbone FR, et al. Memory T cell subsets, migration patterns, and tissue residence. Annu Rev Immunol. 2013; 31: 137–61.
31. Becker TC, Coley SM, Wherry EJ, et al. Bone marrow is a preferred site for homeostatic proliferation of memory CD8 T cells. J Immunol. 2005; 174 (3): 1269–73.
32. Blaeschke F, Stenger D, Kaeuferle T, et al. Induction of a central memory and stem cell memory phenotype in functionally active CD4+ and CD8+ CAR T cells produced in an automated good manufacturing practice system for the treatment of CD19+ acute lymphoblastic leukemia. Cancer Immunol Immunother. 2018; 67(7): 1053–1066.
33. Jameson SC. T cell homeostasis: keeping useful T cells alive and live T cells useful. Semin Immunol. 2005; 17(3): 231–7.
34. Bourgeois C, Bourgeois C, Stockinger B. T cell homeostasis in steady state and lymphopenic conditions. Immunol Lett. 2006; 107(2): 89–92.
35. Huang W, Mo W, Jiang J, et al. Donor Allospecific CD44high Central Memory T Cells Have Decreased Ability to Mediate Graft-vs.-Host Disease. Front Immunol. 2019;10:624.
36. Wherry EJ, Teichgräber V, Becker TC, et al. Lineage relationship and protective immunity of memory CD8 T cell subsets. Nat Immunol. 2003; 4(3):225–34.
37. Graef P, Buchholz VR, Stemberger C, et al. Serial transfer of single-cell-derived immunocompetence reveals stemness of CD8(+) central memory T cells. Immunity. 2014; 41(1):116–26.
38. Cieri N, Oliveira G, Greco R, et al. Generation of human memory stem T cells after haploidentical T-replete hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Blood. 2015;125(18): 2865–74.
39. Beilhack A, Schulz S, Baker J, et al. In vivo analyses of early events in acute graft-versus-host disease reveal sequential infiltration of T-cell subsets. Blood. 2005;106(3):1113–22.
40. Wysocki CA, Panoskaltsis-Mortari A, Blazar BR, et al. Leukocyte migration and graft-versus-host disease. Blood. 2005;105(11): 4191–99.
41. Barrett AJ. Mechanisms of the graft-versus-leukemia reaction. Stem Cells. 1997;15(4):248-58.
42. Dickinson AM, Norden J, Li S, et al. Graft-versus-Leukemia Effect Following Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation for Leukemia. Front Immunol. 2017; 8:496.
43. Falkenburg JH, Warren EH. Graft versus leukemia reactivity after allogeneic stem cell transplantation. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2011;17(1 Suppl):S33-8.
44. Bonilla FA, Oettgen HC. Adaptive immunity. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2010; 125(2 Suppl 2): S33-40.

Files	XML PDF (1MB)
Issue	Vol 18, No 1 (2024)
Section	Original Article(s)
DOI	https://doi.org/10.18502/ijhoscr.v18i1.14742
Keywords
GVHD prophylaxis immune reconstitution T memory cells posttransplant Cyclophosphamide T cell depletion horse ATG

Rights and permissions
	This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

How to Cite

Popova N, Drokov M, Davydova Y, Kapranov N, Vasilieva V, Galtseva I, Kuzmina L, Parovichnikova E. Kinetics of Recovery of Naïve and Memory T Cells in Acute Leukemia Patients after Allogeneic Stem Cell Transplantation Depending on Different GVHD Prophylaxis Regimens. Int J Hematol Oncol Stem Cell Res. 2024;18(1):33-46.

Vancouver

Download Citation