4.7 Article

CD19 CAR T-cells for pediatric relapsed acute lymphoblastic leukemia with active CNS involvement: a retrospective international study

Journal

LEUKEMIA
Volume 36, Issue 6, Pages 1525-1532

Publisher

SPRINGERNATURE
DOI: 10.1038/s41375-022-01546-9

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Dotan research center in hemato-oncology
  2. Israel Cancer Association

Ask authors/readers for more resources

CAR T-cell therapy shows effectiveness in treating relapsed BCP-ALL patients with CNS involvement, but the risk of neurotoxicity and CNS relapse remains.
Relapse of B-cell precursor acute lymphoblastic leukemia (BCP-ALL) may occur in the central nervous system (CNS). Most clinical trials of CAR T-cell therapy excluded patients with active CNS leukemia, partially for concerns of neurotoxicity. Here, we report an international study of fifty-five children and adolescents who received CAR T-cell therapy for relapsed BCP-ALL with CNS involvement at the time of referral. All patients received bridging therapy, 16 still having active CNS disease at the time of lymphodepletion. Twelve patients received CD28-based CAR T-cells, 9 being subsequently treated with allogeneic hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation (allo-HSCT). Forty-three patients received 4-1BB-based CAR T-cells. Cytokine-release syndrome (CRS) and neurotoxicity occurred in 65% and 38% of patients, respectively, more frequently following treatment with CD28-based CARs. Fifty-one of 54 evaluable patients (94%) achieved complete response following this therapy. Relapse occurred in 22 patients: 19/43 following 4-1BB-based CARs (12 CNS relapses), and 3/12 after CD28-based CARs with subsequent HSCT (no CNS relapse). Patients treated with tisagenlecleucel for an isolated CNS relapse had a high incidence of a subsequent CNS relapse (6 of 8). CAR T-cells were found to be effective in this cohort, though the risk of CNS relapse was not completely mitigated by this approach.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available