Utility of assessing CD3+ cell chimerism within the first months after allogeneic hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation for acute myeloid leukemia.

After allogeneic hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation (alloHSCT), the chimerism assay is used to monitor cell engraftment and quantify the respective proportions of donor/recipient cells in blood or bone-marrow samples. Here, we aimed to better assess the utility of determining CD3+ cell chimerism within the first 6 months post alloHSCT. One hundred and thirty five patients diagnosed with acute myeloid leukemia were enrolled in this study. We observed significantly lower overall survival and relapse free survival for patients without full donor chimerism (<95%, <98%, <99%) in whole blood at Day 30, as well as at Day 90 after alloHSCT, than for patients with full donor chimerism. This outcome was not observed when assessing selected CD3+ cells. However, at Day 90, patients with discordant whole blood versus selected CD3+ cell chimerism showed both significantly lower overall survival and relapse free survival, giving an interest to assess selected cells chimerism.

A one-step assay for sorted CD3+ cell purity and chimerism after hematopoietic stem cell transplantation.

A hematopoietic chimerism assay is the laboratory test for monitoring engraftment and quantifying the proportions of donor and recipient cells after hematopoietic stem cell transplantation recipients. Flow cytometry is the reference method for determining the purity of CD3+ cells on the chimerism of selected CD3+ cells. In the present study, we developed a single-step procedure that combines the CD3+ purity assay (using the PCR-based Non-T Genomic Detection Kit from Accumol, Calgary, Canada) and the qPCR chimerism monitoring assay (the QTRACE qPCR assay from Jeta Molecular, Utrecht, the Netherlands). First, for the CD3+ purity assay, we used a PCR-friendly protocol by changing the composition of the ready-to-use reaction tubes (buffer and taq polymerase) and obtained a satisfactory calibration plot (R2 = 0.8924) with a DNA reference scale of 2 ng/µl. Next, 29 samples (before and after CD3 positive selection) were analyzed, the mean cell purity was, respectively, 19.6% ± 6.45 and 98.9% ± 1.07 in the flow cytometry assay; 26.8% ± 7.63 and 98.5% ± 1.79 in the PCR-based non-T genomic detection assay. Our results showed that the CD3+ purity assay using a qPCR kit is a robust alternative to the flow cytometry assay and is associated with time savings when combined with a qPCR chimerism assay.

Flow cytometry crossmatching to investigate kidney-biopsy-proven, antibody-mediated rejection in patients who develop de novo donor-specific antibodies.

INTRODUCTION: The appearance of de novo donor-specific anti-human leukocyte antigen antibodies (dnDSAs) after kidney transplantation is independently associated with poor long-term allograft outcomes. The objective of the present study was to evaluate the predictive value of a flow cytometry crossmatching (FC-XM) assay after the appearance of dnDSAs related to antibody-mediated allograft rejection (ABMR) after kidney transplantation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 89 recipients with dnDSAs after transplantation were included. The crossmatching results were compared with the dnDSA profile (the mean fluorescence intensity (MFI), the complement-binding activity, and the IgG subclass profile) and the biopsy's morphological features. RESULTS: Of the 89 patients, 59 (66%) were positive in an FC-XM assay, 17 (19%) had complement-binding DSAs, 55 (62%) were positive for IgG1 and/or IgG3 in a solid phase assay, and 45 (51%) had morphological biopsy features linked to ABMR. CONCLUSION: An FC-XM assay was unable to discriminate between cases with or without ABMR on biopsy findings; it had a low positive predictive value (<70%) and a low negative positive predictive value (<42.9%), taking into account the sensitivity of our assay (limit of detection: DSAs with an MFI >3000). In this context, the height of the MFI of the dnDSAs might be enough for a high positive predictive value for ABMR and additional testing for complement binding activity can remain optional.

Protein biosynthesis, a target of sorafenib, interferes with the unfolded protein response (UPR) and ferroptosis in hepatocellular carcinoma cells.

Sorafenib is the first line treatment for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). We explored its impact on the proteostasis of cancer cells, i.e. the processes that regulate the synthesis, maturation and turn-over of cellular proteins. We observed that sorafenib inhibits the production of the tumour marker alpha-foetoprotein (AFP) in two different HCC cell lines, an effect that correlated with a radical inhibition of protein biosynthesis. This effect was observed at clinically relevant concentrations of sorafenib and was not related to the effect of sorafenib on the transport of amino acids across the plasma membrane or the induction of the unfolded protein response (UPR). Instead, we observed that sorafenib inhibits translation initiation and the mechanistic target of rapamycin (mTOR) signaling cascade, as shown by the analysis of phosphorylation levels of the protein 4EBP1 (eukaryotic translation initiation factor 4E binding protein 1). We explored the consequences of this inhibition in HCC cells. We observed that overall sorafenib is a weak inducer of the UPR that can paradoxically prevent the UPR induced by tunicamycin. We also found no direct synergistic anticancer effect between sorafenib and various strategies that inhibit the UPR. In agreement with the possibility that translation inhibition might be an adaptive stress response in HCC cells, we noted that it protects cancer cell from ferroptosis, a form of oxidative necrosis. Our findings point to the modulation of protein biosynthesis and mTOR signaling as being important, yet complex determinants of the response of HCC cells to sorafenib.