BackgroundAcute myeloid leukemia (AML) is a hematopoietic malignancy which is biologically, phenotypically and genetically very heterogeneous. Outcome of patients with AML remains dismal, highlighting the need for improved, less toxic therapies. Chimeric antigen receptor T-cell (CART) immunotherapies for patients with refractory or relapse (R/R) AML are challenging because of the absence of a universal pan-AML target antigen and the shared expression of target antigens with normal hematopoietic stem/progenitor cells (HSPCs), which may lead to life-threating on-target/off-tumor cytotoxicity. CD33-redirected and CD123-redirected CARTs for AML are in advanced preclinical and clinical development, and they exhibit robust antileukemic activity. However, preclinical and clinical controversy exists on whether such CARTs are myeloablative.MethodsWe set out to comparatively characterize in vitro and in vivo the efficacy and safety of 41BB-based and CD28-based CARCD123. We analyzed 97 diagnostic and relapse AML primary samples to investigate whether CD123 is a suitable immunotherapeutic target, and we used several xenograft models and in vitro assays to assess the myeloablative potential of our second-generation CD123 CARTs.ResultsHere, we show that CD123 represents a bona fide target for AML and show that both 41BB-based and CD28-based CD123 CARTs are very efficient in eliminating both AML cell lines and primary cells in vitro and in vivo. However, both 41BB-based and CD28-based CD123 CARTs ablate normal human hematopoiesis and prevent the establishment of de novo hematopoietic reconstitution by targeting both immature and myeloid HSPCs.ConclusionsThis study calls for caution when clinically implementing CD123 CARTs, encouraging its preferential use as a bridge to allo-HSCT in patients with R/R AML.

No abstract

In the European LeukemiaNet favourable risk category, allogeneic haematopoietic stem cell transplantation (alloSCT) is not indicated in first complete remission for patients with acute myeloid leukaemia (AML) with NPM1 mutations (ELNfav NPM1 AML), although a proportion of these patients will relapse. Given the prognostic importance of measurable residual disease (MRD), CETLAM-12 considered a pre-emptive intervention in patients with molecular failure (MF). We analyzed 110 ELNfav NPM1 AML patients achieving complete remission (CR) after induction chemotherapy. Two-year cumulative incidence of relapse (CIR), overall survival (OS) and leukaemia-free survival (LFS) were 17%, 81Á5% and 82%, respectively. Fortysix patients required additional therapy for MF (n = 33) or haematological relapse (HemR; n = 13), resulting in a molecular LFS (molLFS) and a cumulative incidence of MF at two years of 61% and 38% respectively. Two-year OS for these 46 patients was 66%, with a different outcome between patients with MF (86%) and HemR (42%) (P = 0Á002). Quantitative NPM1 detection at different timepoints was predictive of molLFS; an MRD ratio (NPM1mut/ ABL1 9 100) cutoff of 0Á05 after first consolidation identified two cohorts with a two-year molLFS of 77% and 40% for patients below and above 0Á05, respectively. In conclusion, MRD-based pre-emptive intervention resulted in a favourable outcome for ELNfav NPM1 AML patients.