IDH1-R132 changes vary according to NPM1 and other mutations status in AML

Meijide JB, et al. CAR T-cells targeting FLT3 have potent activity against FLT3-ITD+AML and act synergistically with the FLT3inhibitor crenolanib. Leukemia. 2018;32:1168–79. 6. Li L-P, Lampert JC, Chen X, Leitao C, Popović J, Müller W, et al. Transgenic mice with a diverse human T cell antigen receptor repertoire. Nat Med. 2010;16:1029–34. 7. Obenaus M, Leitão C, Leisegang M, Chen X, Gavvovidis I, Van Der Bruggen P, et al. Identification of human T-cell receptors with optimal affinity to cancer antigens using antigen-negative humanized mice. Nat Biotechnol. 2015;33:402–7. 8. Wander SA, Levis MJ, Fathi AT. The evolving role of FLT3 inhibitors in acute myeloid leukemia: quizartinib and beyond. Ther Adv Hematol. 2014;5:65–77. 9. Sykulev Y, Joo M, Vturina I, Tsomides TJ, Eisen HN. Evidence that a single peptide-MHC complex on a target cell can elicit a cytolytic T cell response. Immunity. 1996;4:565–71. 10. Morgan RA, Dudley ME, Wunderlich JR, Hughes MS, Yang JC, Sherry RM, et al. Cancer regression in patients after transfer of genetically engineered lymphocytes. Science (80-). 2006;314:126–9. 11. Parkhurst MR, Yang JC, Langan RC, Dudley ME, Nathan DAN, Feldman SA, et al. T cells targeting carcinoembryonic antigen can mediate regression of metastatic colorectal cancer but induce severe transient colitis. Mol Ther. 2011;19:620–6. 12. Morgan Ra, Yang JC, Kitano M, Dudley ME, Laurencot CM, Rosenberg Sa. Case report of a serious adverse event following the administration of t cells transduced with a chimeric antigen receptor recognizing ERBB2. Mol Ther. 2010; 18:843–51. 13. Mackarehtschian K, Hardin JD, Moore KA, Boast S, Goff SP, Lemischka IR. Targeted disruption of the flk2/flt3 gene leads to deficiencies in primitive hematopoietic progenitors. Immunity. 1995;3:147–61. 14. DeLapeyriere O, Naquet P, Planche J, Marchetto S, Rottapel R, Gambarelli D, et al. Expression of Flt3 tyrosine kinase receptor gene in mouse hematopoietic and nervous tissues. Differentiation. 1995;58:351–9. 15. Manz BN, Jackson BL, Petit RS, Dustin ML, Groves J. T-cell triggering thresholds are modulated by the number of antigen within individual T-cell receptor clusters. Proc Natl Acad Sci. 2011;108:9089–94.


To the Editor:
Isocitrate dehydrogenase (IDH1/2) genes encode for ubiquitinously expressed enzymes that catalyze a redox reaction that converts isocitrate to α-ketoglutarate while reducing NADP to NADPH and liberating CO 2 [1]. IDH1 exerts his function in the cytoplasm and peroxisomes whilst IDH2 is localized in the mitochondrial matrix [1]. When mutated, the IDH1 and IDH2 enzymes acquire a neomorphic activity leading to the conversion of α-ketoglutarate to D-2hydroxyglutarate [2][3][4]. The latter compound acts as an oncometabolite by inhibiting the α-ketoglutarate-dependent enzymes that regulates epigenetic modeling, collagen synthesis and cell signaling [1]. IDH1 and IDH2 mutations are mutually exclusive with TET2 mutations that are known to promote leukemia with a similar mechanism [5].
IDH1 gene mutations have been detected in 6.6-7.6% [6,7] of AML patients, most frequently carrying a normal karyotype, and their presence has not been associated with prognostic relevance. They are heterozygous missense mutations confined to a single arginine residue, R132, in the enzyme active site [1]. Five R132 mutations leading to different amino acid exchanges have been described [6,7]: p.R132H, p.R132C, p. R132G, p.R132S, and p.R132L, with R132H being the most frequent [7]. As a whole group, the IDH1-R132 mutations are more frequent in cases carrying NPM1 mutations [6,7] but it is yet unknown how the amino acid substitution of arginine at position 132 correlates with the mutational status of NPM1 and other mutations in AML. Here, combining molecular analyses and immunohistochemistry we demonstrate that the R132H and R132C substitutions show a different distribution pattern among AML genotypes.
We first investigated 140 AML patients with normal cytogenetics enrolled in Northern Italy Leukemia Group (NILG) multicenter clinical trial (NCT00495287), for which both molecular and immunohistochemical data were available (Supplementary Information). In all 140 patients, the results of next generation sequencing (NGS) for IDH1 and NPM1 mutations were blindly compared with those of immunohistochemistry on bone marrow (BM) biopsies using monoclonal antibodies against IDH1-R132H and NPM1, respectively. The antibody against the IDH1-R132H mutant was previously produced by Capper et al. [8] and extensively investigated in various kind of tumors. The antibody directed against the nucleophosmin (NPM1) [9] was generated in BF laboratory. Cytoplasmic nucleophosmin-1 expression was regarded as predictive of NPM1 mutations [9,10] (Supplementary Information). For all studies described below, written informed consent to examine leukemic samples was obtained in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and approval was obtained from Local Ethic Committee.
Molecular analyses revealed NPM1 mutations in 71/140 (51%) cases. These findings were fully confirmed by immunohistochemistry that showed cytoplasmic NPM1 (predictive of NPM1 mutations) (Fig. 1a, c, e) in the same 71 cases. In the remaining 69 cases, NPM1 expression was nucleus-restricted, as expected in cases with NPM1 wild-type status [9].
Molecular analyses revealed IDH1-R132H mutations in 10/ 140 (7%) cases. Notably, these 10 cases were all NPM1mutated and showed cytoplasmic NPM1 at immunohistochemistry (10/71:14%). The same 10 cases, revealed R132H mutant expression at cytoplasmic level ( Fig. 1b, d, f), as expected for the cytosolic function of the enzyme [1]. At diagnosis, the percentage of IDH1-R132H-positive leukemic cells and with aberrant cytoplasmic NPM1 were comparable in 6/10 cases (representative examples are shown in Fig. 1a, b), whilst in 4/10 cases the IDH1-R132H-positive leukemic cells accounted for only a fraction of them, ranging between 3% and 70%, strongly suggesting that they represented a subclone. A representative example showing about 5-10% of IDH1-132Hpositive leukemic cells in shown in Fig. 1d.
Extended molecular analysis of the 140 cases also detected IDH1 mutations other than p.R132H in 8/140 (6%) cases.
Is there any utility to have an anti-IDH1-R132-specific antibody in the NGS era? Although, molecular analyses remain the gold standard for the identification of IDH1 mutations, immunohistochemistry may be a useful adjunct f The same case as (c), showing that the percentage of leukemic cells expressing the IDH1-R132H is slightly inferior to that of NPM1 cytoplasmic-positive cells. As in (e), the IDH1-R132H mutant is present both in mononuclear blast cells and in a megakaryocyte (arrow). The IDH1-R132H negative cells represent normal residual hematopoietic cells (×400). g Massive bone marrow infiltration by leukemic cells with nucleus-restricted positivity for nucleophosmin-1 (predictive of absence of NPM1 mutations, confirmed molecularly) (×400). h Specificity of the antibody against IDH1-R132H is demonstrated by the negativity of leukemic cells molecularly carrying the IDH1-R132C mutation (×400). (a-h) Dako REAL Detection System Alkaline Phosphatase/RED rabbit/mouse to the above techniques, particularly in hematological centers that still use BM biopsies. Under these circumstances, the antibody could be used both at diagnosis and for monitoring of AML after chemotherapy or targeted therapy with IDH1 inhibitors [14]. The antibody would also allow to analyze the genetic lesion at protein level in the tissues and provide information related to the topographical distribution (nearby trabeculae or vessels) of leukemic cells. Moreover, the use of the antibody may be particularly important in cases of "punctio sicca" or myeloid sarcoma, especially when scarce material is available for molecular analyses (e.g. punch biopsies of the skin).

Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons. org/licenses/by/4.0/. Fig. 2 a Molecular and cytogenetic characterization of IDH1-mutated patients. Illustration of all 106 samples, each column represents one patient. All 25 additionally analyzed genes as well as karyotype information are given for each patient. Patients are grouped by IDH1 R132C, R132H, and R132 other. Light gray: wild type, red: mutated, orange: variant of uncertain significance, dark blue: aberrant karyotype, light blue: normal karyotype, white: no data available. The number of additional mutations per patient is illustrated as bar chart above the graph. The mutation frequencies of single genes are given as bar chart at the right. b Spider plot illustrating the mutation frequencies (in %) of ASXL1, NPM1, RUNX1, and SRSF2 mutations for the single groups of IDH1 R132C, R132H, and R132 other