Back

Molecular signature of pediatric B-ALL determines outcomes post CD19 CAR-T cell therapy

Oszer, A.; Pastorczak, A.; Urbanska, Z.; Miarka, K.; Marschollek, P.; Richert-Przygonska, M.; Mielcarek-Siedziuk, M.; Baggott, C.; Schultz, L.; Moon, J.; Aftandilian, C.; Styczynski, J.; Kalwak, K.; Mlynarski, W.; Davis, K. L.

2026-04-13 oncology
10.64898/2026.04.11.26350681 medRxiv
Show abstract

Chimeric antigen receptor T-cell (CAR-T) therapy targeting CD19 has transformed outcomes for children with relapsed or refractory (R/R) B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia (B-ALL), yet the influence of molecular subtype on outcomes remains unclear. We evaluated the impact of cytogenetic and molecular signatures on complete response (CR), overall survival (OS), and leukemia-free survival (LFS) after CD19 CAR-T therapy in eighty-six pediatric patients with R/R B-ALL treated with tisagenlecleucel. CR was assessed 30 days after infusion. Cytogenetic data were available for 84 patients and molecular profiling for 62. Survival analyses included 72 patients who received CD19 CAR-T as the sole cellular therapy. Seventy-seven patients achieved CR (89.5%). Pre-infusion bone marrow blasts of [&ge;]20% were associated with lower CR rates (53.8% vs 95.9%, p<0.0001) and significantly reduced OS and LFS (both p<0.0001). Among molecular markers, RAS mutations correlated with inferior OS (p=0.0222) and LFS (0.0402). In multivariate analysis, bone marrow blasts >20% and RAS mutations independently predicted inferior OS. Post CAR-T, CD19 negative relapses showed almost twice higher prevalence of RAS mutations (66% vs 37.5%). These findings highlight RAS mutations as a key molecular predictor of outcome after CD19 CAR-T therapy and suggest emergence of unique risk stratification for patients receiving CD19-targeting therapy. Key PointsO_LIRAS mutations independently predict unfavorable survival after CAR-T CD19 in pediatric B-ALL. C_LIO_LIRAS mutations increase risk of CD19 negative relapse after CAR-T CD19 therapy in pediatric B-ALL. C_LI

Matching journals

The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Leukemia
39 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
18.8%
2
Blood
67 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
10.2%
3
Haematologica
24 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
9.3%
4
Blood Advances
54 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
7.3%
5
British Journal of Haematology
15 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
6.9%
50% of probability mass above
6
Blood Cancer Journal
11 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
6.4%
7
JCO Precision Oncology
14 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
4.0%
8
Journal of Hematology & Oncology
10 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.6%
9
Journal of Clinical Investigation
164 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.4%
10
Clinical Cancer Research
58 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
1.8%
11
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 57%
1.7%
12
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 53%
1.7%
13
Cancers
200 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.7%
14
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 51%
1.7%
15
Clinical & Translational Immunology
22 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
0.9%
16
Annals of Oncology
13 papers in training set
Top 1.0%
0.8%
17
Frontiers in Genetics
197 papers in training set
Top 10%
0.7%
18
PLOS Medicine
98 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.7%
19
Frontiers in Immunology
586 papers in training set
Top 8%
0.7%
20
International Journal of Molecular Sciences
453 papers in training set
Top 17%
0.7%
21
Oncogene
76 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.7%
22
eLife
5422 papers in training set
Top 64%
0.5%
23
BMJ Open
554 papers in training set
Top 14%
0.5%
24
Cancer Medicine
24 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.5%
25
Biomolecules
95 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.5%
26
Neuro-Oncology
30 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
0.5%
27
Journal for ImmunoTherapy of Cancer
64 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.5%