Search

Eosinophilic granulocytes are normally present in low numbers in the bloodstream. Patients with an increased number of eosinophilic granulocytes in the differential count (eosinophilia) are common and can pose a clinical challenge because conditions with eosinophilia occur in all medical specialties. The diagnostic approach must be guided by a thorough medical history, supported by specific tests to guide individualized treatment. Neoplastic (primary) eosinophilia is identified by one of several unique acquired genetic causes. In contrast, reactive (secondary) eosinophilia is associated with a cytokine stimulus in a specific disease, while idiopathic eosinophilia is a diagnosis by exclusion. Rational treatment is disease-directed in secondary cases and has paved the way for targeted treatment against the driver in primary eosinophilia, whereas idiopathic cases are treated as needed by principles in eosinophilia originating from clonal drivers. The vast majority of patients are diagnosed with secondary eosinophilia and are managed by the relevant specialty—e.g., rheumatology, allergy, dermatology, gastroenterology, pulmonary medicine, hematology, or infectious disease. The overlap in symptoms and the risk of irreversible organ involvement in eosinophilia, irrespective of the cause, warrants that patients without a diagnostic clarification or who do not respond to adequate treatment should be referred to a multidisciplinary function anchored in a hematology department for evaluation. This review presents the pathophysiology, manifestations, differential diagnosis, diagnostic workup, and management of (adult) patients with eosinophilia. The purpose is to place eosinophilia in a clinical context, and therefore justify and inspire the establishment of a multidisciplinary team of experts from diagnostic and clinical specialties at the regional level to support the second opinion. The target patient population requires highly specialized laboratory analysis and therapy and occasionally has severe eosinophil-induced organ dysfunction. An added value of a centralized, clinical function is to serve as a platform for education and research to further improve the management of patients with eosinophilia. Primary and idiopathic eosinophilia are key topics in the review, which also address current research and discusses outstanding issues in the field.

IntroductionArginase-1 (ARG1) and Programed death ligand-1 (PD-L1) play a vital role in immunosuppression in myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPNs) and directly inhibit T-cell activation and proliferation. We previously identified spontaneous T-cell responses towards PD-L1 and ARG1 derived peptide epitopes in patients with MPNs. In the present First-in-Man study we tested dual vaccinations of ARG1- derived and PD-L1-derived peptides, combined with Montanide ISA-51 as adjuvant, in patients with Janus Kinase 2 (JAK2) V617F-mutated MPN.MethodsSafety and efficacy of vaccination with ARG1- derived and PD-L1-derived peptides with montanide as an adjuvant was tested in 9 patients with MPN The primary end point was safety and toxicity evaluation. The secondary end point was assessment of the immune response to the vaccination epitope (www.clinicaltrials.gov identifier NCT04051307).ResultsThe study included 9 patients with JAK2-mutant MPN of which 8 received all 24 planned vaccines within a 9-month treatment period. Patients reported only grade 1 and 2 vaccine related adverse events. No alterations in peripheral blood counts were identified, and serial measurements of the JAK2V617F allelic burden showed that none of the patients achieved a molecular response during the treatment period. The vaccines induced strong immune responses against both ARG1 and PD-L1- derived epitopes in the peripheral blood of all patients, and vaccine-specific skin-infiltrating lymphocytes from 5/6 patients could be expanded in vitro after a delayed-type hypersensitivity test. In two patients we also detected both ARG1- and PD-L1-specific T cells in bone marrow samples at the end of trial. Intracellular cytokine staining revealed IFNγ and TNFγ producing CD4+- and CD8+- T cells specific against both vaccine epitopes. Throughout the study, the peripheral CD8/CD4 ratio increased significantly, and the CD8+ TEMRA subpopulation was enlarged. We also identified a significant decrease in PD-L1 mRNA expression in CD14+ myeloid cells in the peripheral blood in all treated patients and a decrease in ARG1 mRNA expression in bone marrow of 6 out of 7 evaluated patients.ConclusionOverall, the ARG1- and PD-L1-derived vaccines were safe and tolerable and induced strong T-cell responses in all patients. These results warrant further studies of the vaccine in other settings or in combination with additional immune-activating treatments.

Myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPN) are chronic cancers of the hematopoietic stem cells in the bone marrow, and patients often harbor elevated numbers of circulating platelets (PLT). We investigated the frequencies of circulating PLT-lymphocyte aggregates in MPN patients and the effect of PLT-binding on CD8 T cell function. The phenotype of these aggregates was evaluated in 50 MPN patients and 24 controls, using flow cytometry. In vitro studies compared the proliferation, cytokine release, and cytoxicity of PLT-bound and PLT-free CD8 T cells. Frequencies of PLT-CD8 T cell aggregates, were significantly elevated in MPN patients. Advanced disease stage and CALR mutation associated with the highest aggregate frequencies with a predominance of PLT-binding to antigen-experienced CD8 T cells. PLT-bound CD8 T cells showed reduction in proliferation and cytotoxic capacity. Our data suggest that CD8 T cell responses are jeopardized in MPN patients. JAK2 and CALR exon 9 mutations – the two predominant driver mutations in MPN – are targets for natural T cell responses in MPN patients. Moreover, MPN patients have more infections compared to background. Thus, PLT binding to antigen experienced CD8 T cells could play a role in the inadequacy of the immune system to control MPN disease progression and prevent recurrent infections.

BackgroundThe calreticulin (CALR) exon 9 mutations that are identified in 20% of patients with Philadelphia chromosome negative chronic myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPN) generate immunogenic antigens. Thus, therapeutic cancer vaccination against mutant CALR could be a new treatment modality in CALR-mutant MPN.MethodsThe safety and efficacy of vaccination with the peptide CALRLong36 derived from the CALR exon 9 mutations was tested in a phase I clinical vaccination trial with montanide as adjuvant. Ten patients with CALRmut MPN were included in the trial and received 15 vaccines over the course of one year. The primary end point was evaluation of safety and toxicity of the vaccine. Secondary endpoint was assessment of the immune response to the vaccination epitope (www.clinicaltrials.gov identifier NCT03566446).ResultsPatients had a median age of 59.5 years and a median disease duration of 6.5 years. All patients received the intended 15 vaccines, and the vaccines were deemed safe and tolerable as only two grade three AE were detected, and none of these were considered to be related to the vaccine. A decline in platelet counts relative to the platelets counts at baseline was detected during the first 100 days, however this did not translate into neither a clinical nor a molecular response in any of the patients. Immunomonitoring revealed that four of 10 patients had an in vitro interferon (IFN)-γ ELISPOT response to the CALRLong36 peptide at baseline, and four additional patients displayed a response in ELISPOT upon receiving three or more vaccines. The amplitude of the immune response increased during the entire vaccination schedule for patients with essential thrombocythemia. In contrast, the immune response in patients with primary myelofibrosis did not increase after three vaccines.ConclusionTherapeutic cancer vaccination with peptide vaccines derived from mutant CALR with montanide as an adjuvant, is safe and tolerable. The vaccines did not induce any clinical responses. However, the majority of patients displayed a marked T-cell response to the vaccine upon completion of the trial. This suggests that vaccines directed against mutant CALR may be used with other cancer therapeutic modalities to enhance the anti-tumor immune response.