A prospective feasibility trial exploring novel biomarkers for neurotoxicity after isolated limb perfusion.

Background: Isolated limb perfusion (ILP) is a regional cancer treatment in which high-dose chemotherapy is administered in an isolated extremity. The main side effect is regional toxicity, which occasionally leads to nerve damage. Measuring neuroaxonal biomarkers, might be a method predicting such complications. Therefore, the primary aim of the study is to investigate if neuronal biomarkers are measurable and alters in an isolated extremity during ILP. Secondly, if postoperative regional toxicity, alterations in sensitivity, and/or muscle strength are correlated to the biomarker levels.
Methods: Eighteen scheduled ILP-patients were included in the study. Glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP), neurofilament light (NfL), and tau concentrations were measured in plasma sampled preoperatively, at the start and end of the ILP, on days 3 and 30, using ultrasensitive Single molecule array (Simoa) technology. The patients were assessed by a physiotherapist pre- and postoperatively.
Results: At ILP end, significantly higher NfL and tau levels were measured in the extremity than in the corresponding systemic circulation (NfL; 17 vs 6 ng/L, p < .01, tau; 1.8 vs 0.6 ng/L, p < .01), and the extremity levels were significantly increased at ILP end (NfL; 66 ± 37%, p < .001, tau; 75 ± 45%, p = .001). On days 3 and 30, significantly increased NfL and GFAP levels were measured systemically (NfL day 3: 69 ± 30%, p < .001; day 30: 76 ± 26%, p < .001; GFAP day 3: 33 ± 22%, p < .002; day 30: 33 ± 23%, p ≤ .004). Finally, no significant correlations were found between regional toxicity or between postoperative muscle or sensitivity decrease and biomarker release.
Conclusion: During ILP, NfL and tau levels increased significantly. No obvious correlations were observed between biomarker release and regional toxicity or decreased muscle strength or sensitivity, although large-scale studies are warranted.
Competing Interests: Declaration of conflicting interestsHZ has served on scientific advisory boards and/or as a consultant for Abbvie, Acumen, Alector, Alzinova, ALZPath, Annexon, Apellis, Artery Therapeutics, AZTherapies, CogRx, Denali, Eisai, Nervgen, Novo Nordisk, Optoceutics, Passage Bio, Pinteon Therapeutics, Prothena, Red Abbey Labs, reMYND, Roche, Samumed, Siemens Healthineers, Triplet Therapeutics, and Wave; has given lectures in symposia sponsored by Cellectricon, Fujirebio, Alzecure, Biogen, and Roche; and is a co-founder of Brain Biomarker Solutions in Gothenburg AB (BBS), which is a part of the GU venture incubator program (outside submitted work). KB has served as a consultant and advisory board for Acumen, ALZPath, BioArctic, Biogen, Eisai, Lilly, Moleac Pte. Ltd, Novartis, Ono Pharma, Prothena, Roche Diagnostics, and Siemens Healthineers; has served at data monitoring committees for Julius Clinical and Novartis; has given lectures, produced educational materials, and participated in educational programs for AC Immune, Biogen, Celdara Medical, Eisai, and Roche Diagnostics; and is a co-founder of Brain Biomarker Solutions in Gothenburg AB (BBS), which is a part of the GU Ventures Incubator Program outside the work presented in this paper. ROB has received institutional research grants from Bristol-Myers Squibb (BMS), Endomagnetics Ltd (Endomag), SkyLineDx, speaker honorarium from Roche, Pfizer, and Pierre-Fabre, and has served on advisory boards for Amgen, BD/BARD, Bristol-Myers Squibb (BMS), Merck Sharp and Dohme (MSD), Novartis, Roche, and Sanofi Genzyme, and is a shareholder in SATMEG Ventures AB and ExoCure Sweden AB. The authors declare no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.