Sirolimus and GvHD Control: the Rhesus Macaque GvHD Model Reveals That Sirolimus Preferentially Inhibits T Cell Proliferation While Permitting Breakthrough T cell Activation After MHC-Mismatched Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation

Abstract 2549 Introduction: Given the emerging importance of sirolimus as a therapuetic for graft-versus host disease (GvHD), it is critical to rigorously define the mechanisms by which this agent impacts T cell immunity after hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT). Therefore, we have used our novel rhesus macaque model of haploidentical HSCT and GVHD to probe the mechanisms of sirolimus-mediated GvHD prevention when given as a monotherapy. The insights gained from this study will facilitate the rational design of sirolimus-containing combinatorial therapies to maximize immunosuppressive efficacy. Methods: Transplant recipients were prepared with 8Gy total body irradiation and were then infused with MHC-mismatched donor leukopheresis products(n=3, avg. 6.5×108 TNC/kg, 3.4×107 total T cells/kg). Recipients received sirolimus monotherapy (serum troughs 5–15 ng/mL) alone as post-transplant immunosuppresson. Clinical GvHD was monitored according to our standard primate GvHD scoring system and flow cytometric analysis was performed to determine the immune phenotype of sirolimus-treated recipients compared to a cohort of recipients (n= 3) that were given no GvHD immunoprophylaxis. Results: Sirolimus modestly prolonged survival after MHC-mismatched HSCT compared to no immunosuppression (>19 days versus 6.5 days in the untreated cohort, with GvHD confirmed histopathologically at the time of necropsy). We found that sirolimus significantly inhibited lymphocyte proliferation in transplant recipients: The ALC remained suppressed post-transplant (eg ALC of 0.46 × 106/mL on day 15 post-transplant versus 4.3 × 106/mL pre-transplant, with recovery of other leukocytes: WBC=5.1 × 106/mL, ANC=2.6 × 106/mL). These results suggest that sirolimus can have a profound impact on lymphocyte proliferation, inhibiting GvHD-associated lymphocyte expansion by as much as 200–300-fold compared to untreated controls. Sirolimus had a similar impact on CD4+ and CD8+ subpopulation expansion. Thus, while CD4+ T cells and CD8+ T cells expanded by as much as 300-fold and 2000-fold, respectively, without sirolimus, the expansion of these cells was significantly blunted with sirolimus, with maximal expansion of CD4+ and CD8+ T cells being 4- and 3.6-fold, respectively compared to the post-transplant nadir. Sirolimus-treated recipients also better controlled the upregulation of the proliferation marker Ki-67 on CD4+ or CD8+ T cells. Thus, while untreated recipients upregulated Ki-67 expression by as much as 10-fold after engraftment, (with >80-98% T cells expressing high levels of Ki-67 post-transplant versus 5–10% pre-transplant) sirolimus-treated recipients better controlled Ki-67 expression (17-40% Ki-67-high CD4+ and CD8+ T cells post-transplant). While the impact of sirolimus on T cell proliferation was profound, it failed to completely inhibit activation of T cells, as measured by both Granzyme B and CD127 expression. Thus, when effector CD4+ and CD8+ T cell cytotoxic potential was measured by determining expression levels of granzyme B, we found that sirolimus could not downregulate this key component of immune function and GvHD-mediated target organ damage: Granzyme B expression in both CD4+ and CD8+ CD28-/CD95+ effector T cells was unchanged despite sirolimus monotherapy. Down-regulation of CD127 expression, which identifies activated CD8+ T cells in both humans and rhesus macaques, also demonstrated resistance to sirolimus treatment. Thus, while a cohort of recipients that were treated with combined costimulation blockade and sirolimus maintained stable CD127 levels post-transplant, and untreated animals demonstrated total loss of CD127, up to 60% of CD8+ T cells in sirolimus-treated recipients down-regulated CD127, consistent with breakthrough activation of these cells despite mTOR inhibition. Discussion: These results indicate that while the predominant effect of sirolimus during GvHD prophylaxis is its striking ability to inhibit T cell proliferation, sirolimus-based immunosuppression spares some cellular signaling pathways which control T cell activation. These results imply that therapies that are combined with sirolimus during multimodal GvHD prophylaxis should be directed at inhibiting T cell activation rather than proliferation, in order to target non-redundant pathways of alloimmune activation during GvHD control. Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.