P859: ANTI-CD38 NANOBODY JK36 ALLOWS RELIABLE MRD DETECTION IN DARATUMUMAB TREATED MULTIPLE MYELOMA PATIENTS

Abstract

Background: The introduction of immunotherapies such as daratumumab, a CD38 monoclonal antibody has improved survival in multiple myeloma (MM), however a few considerations on minimal residual disease (MRD) assessment by flow cytometry have been raised and deserve our attention. In flow cytometry CD38 is frequently used as a gating marker of plasma cells (PCs), but daratumumab can hampering myeloma cell detection. A strategy to overcome this interference is to staining PCs with anti-CD38 nanobody JK36. Nanobodies are single variable domain antibody fragments (VHH) that often expose a long complementarity-determining region 3 (CDR3), feature that allows anti-CD38 nanobody JK36 recognizing a cryptic epitope not masked by anti-CD38 therapies. Aims: To compare the median fluorescence intensity (MFI) of CD38 multiepitope (ME) antibody and anti-CD38 nanobody in bone marrow samples from MM patients not treated with daratumumab. Secondly, to compare flow cytometric MRD data obtained using CD38-ME and anti-CD38 nanobody from daratumumab treated MM patients. Methods: Samples were obtained from 10 MM patients not treated with daratumumab to compare the MFI of CD38-ME vs CD38-nanobody at baseline and after incubation with daratumumab at a concentration of 10 nM for 60 min at room temperature. Marrow samples were stained using panel CD38/CD56/CD19/CD138/CD45 with variable CD38, CD38-ME vs anti-CD38 nanobody. Data were analyzed using Kaluza 2.1.1 software (Beckman Coulter). Moreover, 17 bone marrow samples were processed using bulk lysis and subsequently stained using the MM-MRD EuroFlow 8-color antibody combination panel and tubes 1 and 2 with variable CD38, CD38-ME vs anti-CD38 nanobody. Samples were acquired on CytoFlex flow cytometer (Beckman Coulter) and data were analyzed using Infinicyt 2.0 software (Cytognos). Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS version 24, verifying the assumption of normality of the variable, pairwise comparisons were carried out using the T-tests for related samples. Results: The MFI values of CD38 ME on samples from daratumumab not treated patients was higher than samples after incubation with daratumumab (p=0.003). For CD38 nanobody, no significant differences were observed for the MFI values of samples, independent of daratumumab incubation (p=0,139) (figure 1A). The percentage of loss of MFI were higher in the CD38 ME group (-36,32%) than in the CD38 nanobody group (-0,35%). Regarding 17 patients treated with anti-CD38 therapies, 14 were treated with daratumumab and 3 with isatuximab. Sixteen samples were MRD positive with a sensitivity of 10-5 or 10-6 by both approaches. As shown in figure 1B, CD38-ME and CD38 nanobody both showed high and comparable MFI on PCs from patients treated with anti-CD38 therapies. Image:Summary/Conclusion: The anti-CD38 nanobody JK36 construct has lower coefficient of variation than CD38 ME antibody. It is a viable alternative to CD38 ME antibody to gate PCs by flow cytometry allowing reliable MRD detection to identify PCs in the presence of anti CD38 biologics. Nanobody technology open new avenues in the detection capability of MRD flow cytometry studies in the era of immunotherapy.