ALBERT

Description: Nuclear lamina dysfunction triggers a germline stem cell checkpoint Nuclear lamina dysfunction triggers a germline stem cell checkpoint, Published online: 27 September 2018; doi:10.1038/s41467-018-06277-z Otefin is a nuclear lamina protein required for survival of Drosophila germ stem cells. Here the authors show that nuclear lamina dysfunction resulting from loss of Otefin activates a DNA damage-independent germ stem cell-specific checkpoint, mediated by the ATR and Chk2 kinases, which ensures that healthy gametes are passed on to the next generation.

Description: Synthetic antigen-binding fragments (Fabs) against S . mutans and S . sobrinus inhibit caries formation Synthetic antigen-binding fragments (Fabs) against 〈i〉S〈/i〉. 〈i〉mutans〈/i〉 and 〈i〉S〈/i〉. 〈i〉sobrinus〈/i〉 inhibit caries formation, Published online: 05 July 2018; doi:10.1038/s41598-018-28240-0 Synthetic antigen-binding fragments (Fabs) against S . mutans and S . sobrinus inhibit caries formation

Description: Sounds and hydrodynamics of polar active fluids Sounds and hydrodynamics of polar active fluids, Published online: 02 July 2018; doi:10.1038/s41563-018-0123-4 Sound wave propagation is used to quantitatively describe the hydrodynamics of an active colloidal medium.

Description: Background Measurable residual disease (MRD) is associated with inferior outcomes in patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML). MRD monitoring enhances risk stratification and may guide therapeutic intervention. Post-induction MRD is frequently cleared with further therapy and the clearance may lead to better outcomes. In contrast, persistent MRD is associated with poor outcomes. At present it is not possible to predict which patients are likely to clear MRD with further therapy. Here we report a simple, objective, widely applicable and quantitative MFC approach using the ratio of blast/PDC to predict persistent MRD and poor outcomes in AML. Patients and Methods A cohort of 136 adult patients with a confirmed diagnosis of AML by WHO criteria who underwent standard induction therapy at a single center between 4/2014 and 9/2017 was initially included. 69 patients achieved complete morphologic remission (36 MRD-neg. and 33 MRD-pos.). MRD status was assessed by MFC using a different from normal (DfN) approach. PDC were quantified as the percent of total WBC by flow cytometry based on low side scatter, moderate CD45, CD303, bright CD123 and HLA-DR expression. Results The proportion of PDC was markedly decreased in patients with AML (≥20% blasts) (N=136) with a median of 0.016% (interquartile range IQR: 0.0019%-0.071%, Figure 1A), more than 10-fold lower than observed in normal controls (median 0.23%, IQR 0.17%-0.34%) (N=20). While there was no difference between MRD-neg. and normal control groups (median 0.31%, IQR: 0.17%-0.49%; vs. 0.28%, IQR: 0.17%-0.34%), MRD-pos. group had significantly reduced PDC proportion compared to the control (median 0.074%, IQR: 0.022%-0.33%, Wilcoxon rank sum, p=0.019). In an attempt to achieve better separation and to eliminate possible effects of hemodilution, the ratio of blast/PDC was calculated by using the proportions of blasts and PDCs out of total WBCs as quantitated by flow cytometry. A cut-off threshold of the blast/PDC ratio of 10 was chosen to separate each group (Figure 1B). Importantly, a ratio cut-off of 10 had a corresponding specificity of 97.4% for predicting MRD positivity status. MRD positivity was significantly associated with inferior overall survival (OS) and relapse-free survival (RFS) in our study cohort (OS HR 4.11 (95% CI: 1.30-13.03), p=0.016; RFS HR 4.20 (95% CI: 1.49-11.82), p=0.007, Figure 1C and D). The 2-year cumulative incidence of relapse in the MRD-neg. group compared to MRD-pos. group was 10% (95% CI: 2-24%) vs. 37% (95% CI: 18-56%, p=0.014). Importantly, blast/PDC ratio ≥10 was also strongly associated with inferior OS and RFS (OS HR 3.12 (95% CI: 1.13-8.60), p= 0.028; RFS HR 4.05 (95% CI: 1.63-10.11), p=0.003, Figure 1E and F), which is similar in magnitude to MRD positivity. Furthermore, MRD-pos. patients with blast/PDC ratio

Description: Introduction: Mutations localized in the tyrosine kinase domain activation loop of FLT3 (FLT3-TKD), representing point mutations in codon D835/I836 and rarely deletions of codon I836, induce constitutive tyrosine phosphorylation and activation of the receptor tyrosine kinase similarly to FLT3 internal tandem duplication (ITD) mutations. However, the prognostic role of FLT3-TKD in AML, particularly in the presence of NPM1 mutations, is not well established. The phase 3 RATIFY trial [NCT00651261; Stone et al. N Engl J Med. 2017] showed that in combination with standard chemotherapy, midostaurin (PKC412) improved survival outcomes across all 3 FLT3 stratification subgroups (ITD high allelic ratio [≥ 0.7], ITD low allelic ratio [〈 0.7], and TKD) vs placebo in patients with newly diagnosed FLT3-mutated AML. Here, we evaluated the prognostic impact of FLT3-TKD and NPM1 mutations in a post hoc analysis from the RATIFY trial. Methods: In RATIFY, newly diagnosed patients with AML 18-60 years old were randomly assigned to receive midostaurin or placebo together with standard induction and consolidation therapy followed by 12 28-day cycles of maintenance therapy with midostaurin or placebo. FLT3-TKD mutation was detected by PCR and capillary electrophoresis at 9 reference laboratories. Patients were categorized as NPM1 mutated (mut) or NPM1 wild-type (WT) using PCR. Efficacy outcomes included complete remission (CR), overall survival (OS), event-free survival (EFS) and disease-free survival (DFS). EFS and DFS analyses were performed considering CR within a 60-day window. P values presented have not been adjusted for multiplicity. Results: Of the total randomized 162 FLT3-TKD patients, 134 with available NPM1 data had consented for exploratory analysis and thus were included in this study (see Table for subgroup distribution). Overall, 47.8% of patients were male, and the median age was 49 years (95% CI, 45.5-51.1 years). The median white blood cell (WBC) count was higher in patients with NPM1-mut than in patients with NPM1-WT (34.1 vs 15.5 × 109/L, P = .0011). CR rates (during the first 60 days) were higher in patients with FLT3-TKD/NPM1-mut vs FLT3-TKD/NPM1-WT (66% vs 53%); however, this was driven by the higher rate of CR in the midostaurin arm (76% NPM1-mut vs 44% NPM1-WT) rather than the placebo arm (53% NPM1-mut vs 60% NPM1-WT). The overall CR rate (regardless of NPM1 genotype) was 64% for midostaurin and 56% for placebo in FLT3-TKD patients. The prognostic effect of the NPM1 mutation concurrent with FLT3-TKD was seen for all endpoints consistently with hazard ratios (HRs) around 0.50 or lower (Figures 1 and 2 and Table). Overall (regardless of treatment) OS, EFS, and DFS estimates at 3 years were 73% vs 52%, 48% vs 25%, and 74% vs 47%, respectively, in patients with FLT3-TKD/NPM1-mut vs FLT3-TKD/NPM1-WT. Whereas the HRs for midostaurin vs placebo were 0.73 for both OS and EFS, the impact of treatment on outcomes varied between the individual NPM1/TKD subgroups and was not consistently observed when endpoints were censored at stem cell transplant (SCT) (Table). It should be noted that the number of patients in each subgroup was small and therefore the HRs with 95% CIs should be interpreted with caution. Multivariate analyses in these FLT3-TKD patients revealed that NPM1 genotype was an independent prognostic factor for OS, EFS and DFS (2-sided P 〈 .05), whereas study drug, age, sex, WBC at baseline and SCT (no/yes) did not reach this level of significance in the Cox model. Conclusions: This post hoc analysis of the FLT3-TKD patient subset in the RATIFY trial showed the high prognostic value of NPM1 mutational status. Whereas midostaurin showed an overall benefit in the FLT3-TKD patients for OS, EFS, CR and DFS, the impact of treatment on outcome varied between the individual NPM1 subgroups within these FLT3-TKD patients and was not consistently observed.Further analyses using additional endpoints and additional multivariate analyses are planned. Support: U10CA180821, U10CA180882, U10CA180820, U10CA180791, U10CA180888, U10CA180863, (CCSRI) #704970, U24CA196171; ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00651261 Disclosures Voso: Celgene: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Larson:Ariad/Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; BristolMyers Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding. Heuser:Janssen: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; StemLine Therapeutics: Consultancy; Astellas: Research Funding; BergenBio: Research Funding; Karyopharm: Research Funding; Bayer Pharma AG: Consultancy, Research Funding; Tetralogic: Research Funding; Sunesis: Research Funding; Daiichi Sankyo: Research Funding. Wei:Novartis: Honoraria, Other: Advisory committee, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Honoraria, Other: Advisory committee; Amgen: Honoraria, Other: Advisory committee, Research Funding; Abbvie: Honoraria, Other: Advisory board, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Servier: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Advisory committee, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Other: Advisory committee, Research Funding. Brandwein:Lundbeck: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Boehringer Ingelheim: Consultancy, Research Funding. de Witte:Novartis: Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding. Medeiros:Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Genentech: Employment. Tallman:Cellerant: Research Funding; Orsenix: Other: Advisory board; BioSight: Other: Advisory board; ADC Therapeutics: Research Funding; AROG: Research Funding; AbbVie: Research Funding; Daiichi-Sankyo: Other: Advisory board. Schlenk:Pfizer: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Ganser:Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Cheng:Novartis: Employment. Gathmann:Novartis: Employment. Tiecke:Novartis: Employment. Thiede:AgenDix: Other: Ownership; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding. Döhner:AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celator: Consultancy, Honoraria; Sunesis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Honoraria; AROG Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Sunesis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Astellas: Consultancy, Honoraria; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria; AROG Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Celator: Consultancy, Honoraria; Astex Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Honoraria; Bristol Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Agios: Consultancy, Honoraria; Agios: Consultancy, Honoraria; Astellas: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Astex Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Jazz: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Jazz: Consultancy, Honoraria; Pfizer: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Stone:Otsuka: Consultancy; Argenx: Other: Data and Safety Monitoring Board; Amgen: Consultancy; Agios: Consultancy, Research Funding; Orsenix: Consultancy; Ono: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; Astellas: Consultancy; Arog: Consultancy, Research Funding; Merck: Consultancy; Cornerstone: Consultancy; Fujifilm: Consultancy; Jazz: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy, Other: Data and Safety Monitoring Board, Steering Committee; Pfizer: Consultancy; Sumitomo: Consultancy; AbbVie: Consultancy.