Intra-Tumoral Blast Heterogeneity and Implications for Minimal Residual Disease Detection in T-Cell Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia

Introduction:The early treatment response, measured as minimal residual disease (MRD), is the most important tool for treatment stratification in T-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia (T-ALL). Flow cytometry-based MRD (Flow-MRD) monitoring, in addition to the PCR-MRD method, is often important to ensure a sensitive MRD marker. Additionally, Flow-MRD investigation may add biological information to the MRD result itself, and allow cell sorting for biological and functional analyses. Flow-MRD in T-ALL consists of identification of cells with immature T-cell phenotype in bone marrow. However, important pitfalls in Flow-MRD, e.g. treatment-related marker modulation and intra-tumoral immunophenotypic heterogeneity, are poorly described. The aim of this study was to explore the implications of these pitfalls on T-ALL MRD detection and on the concordance between the two MRD methods. Potentially both PCR- and Flow-MRD methods might miss blast subpopulations, which is important if subpopulations have divergent chemosensitivity.

Methods:The patient cohort included 49 Danish T-ALL patients (1-45 years of age) treated according to the NOPHO ALL2008 protocol. Standard PCR- and flow cytometry-based MRD data were obtained as part of routine MRD monitoring. We investigated intra-tumoral heterogeneity of the leukemia-associated immunophenotype by flow cytometry (diagnostic BM samples), including clonal T-cell receptor gene-rearrangements in flow-sorted blast subpopulations (22 patients). Immunophenotypic MRD markers (including assessment of modulation) were re-evaluated at follow-up in MRD-positive patients. Flow-MRD was validated by PCR-MRD analysis in flow-sorted cell populations (61 follow-up BM samples, 32 patients).

Results:At diagnosis, more than 80% of the T-ALL patients had a heterogeneous immunophenotype, most often involving CD1a, CD4, and TdT. The degree of overall heterogeneity, as defined by the number of markers with heterogeneous expression showing distinct blast subpopulations, did not show association to day29 PCR-MRD. Except for one patient, the dominant T-cell receptor clonal gene rearrangements were conserved across phenotypically diverse blasts.

Immunophenotypic changes in MRD-positive patients at early follow-up often included subpopulation-loss and/or marker down-modulation of CD1a, TdT and/or CD4. The marker modulations were frequently independent of each other in different subpopulations.

Overall, flow cytometry-based identification of blasts and normal cells at Flow-MRD time points was verified by PCR in the flow-sorted cells: In patients where at least 90% of the blasts showed aberrant marker expression at diagnosis, the flow-sorted MRD cells were concordantly PCR-positive, and flow-sorted phenotypically normal cells were similarly PCR-negative in all but three samples that had very high MRD levels (>20%). However, many patients had only partly-informative immunophenotypes (less than 90% of blasts having aberrant marker). Three discrepant cases with Flow-MRD underestimation showed loss of CD1a- and TdT and down-modulation of CD99, verified in flow-sorting experiments.

Conclusions and Discussion: We show that intra-tumoral immunophenotypic heterogeneity—a possible result of genetic instability—is common in T-ALL patients and involves several immaturity and T-linage markers commonly used in Flow-MRD. The dominant PCR-MRD targets are in most cases conserved across the diverse blast subpopulations at diagnosis, but in rare cases PCR-MRD might miss a subpopulation. The observed immunophenotypic changes in T-ALL blasts and blast subpopulations at early follow-up, including reduction of immaturity markers, represent important pitfalls in Flow-MRD. Flow-sorting experiments verified that, when all blasts of heterogeneous immunophenotypes were informative, MRD identified by flow cytometry at follow-up was highly concordant with PCR-MRD markers in sorted cells.

The T-ALL blast heterogeneity and marker modulations, which are possibly treatment protocol-specific, are important to take into account to obtain reliable Flow-MRD and thus correct treatment stratification of T-ALL patients.