Rahman, Zaid Abdel

SummaryWe report a comparative analysis of patients with therapy‐related acute lymphoblastic leukaemia (tr‐ALL) vs de novo ALL. We identified 331 patients with B‐ALL; 69 (21%) were classified as tr‐ALL. The most common prior malignancies were breast (23·2%) and plasma cell disorders (20·3%). Patients with tr‐ALL were older (median 63·2 vs. 46·2 years, P < 0.001), more often female (66·7% vs. 43·5%, P < 0·001), and more likely to have hypodiploid cytogenetics (18·8% vs. 5·0%, P < 0·001). In multivariable analysis, patients with tr‐ALL were less likely to achieve complete remission [odds ratio (OR) = 0·16, P < 0·001] and more likely to be minimal residual disease‐positive (OR = 4·86, P = 0·01) but had similar OS after diagnosis and allo‐haematopoietic cell transplantation.

Objective/background: Despite the success of chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy in patients with aggressive non-Hodgkin lymphoma (aNHL), some patients still fail treatment, and their prognosis is dismal. Methods: We performed a retrospective study of aNHL patients treated with axicabtagene ciloleucel (axi-cel) at two Mayo Clinic centers between 2018 and 2020. We evaluated predictive factors, toxicities, and responses to salvage regimens after CAR T-cell therapy. Results: Thirty-four patients received axi-cel with a median length of hospitalization of 14 days. Cytokine release syndrome (CRS) and immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome of any grade occurred in 91% and 41% of patients, respectively. Furthermore, 71% of patients responded to therapy, with 53% achieving a complete response (CR). The CRS grade and absolute lymphocyte count at leukapheresis (ALC Leuk ) correlated with CR and overall survival (OS), respectively. After a median follow-up of 6.8 months (interquartile range [IQR] 4.6–14.9), 15 patients (44%) showed progressive disease (PD). Most patients (60%) progressed during the first 3 months and had persistent CD19 tumor expression. Elevated C-reactive protein at baseline increased the risk of PD, whereas elevated ferritin increased PD and mortality risk. Twelve patients received salvage therapy, but only three responded. Median OS of relapsed/refractory patients to axi-cel was 3 months (IQR 1.3–5.1). Conclusion: The grade of CRS and ALC Leuk correlated with better outcomes to axi-cel therapy. In addition, elevated inflammatory markers at baseline were associated with PD and shorter survival. Relapses after treatment frequently occur within months after axi-cel infusion; they confer a poor prognosis and create an urgent need for novel and effective treatment options in this patient population.

7022 Background: Philadelphia-like Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia (Ph-like ALL) is a high-risk subset of adult ALL. Until recently, there has not been a systematic platform to recognize this entity in clinical practice. Furthermore, data regarding the role of allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (allo-HCT) is lacking. We conducted this study to identify patients with Ph-like ALL and describe their outcomes in comparison to Ph+ and Ph- ALL with emphasis on the role of allo-HCT. Methods: To identify cases of Ph-like ALL, available diagnostic cytogenetic pellets for patients in the Mayo Clinic ALL cohort (N=365) were tested using a targeted fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) panel developed by the Mayo Clinic Genomics Laboratory and includes probes to detect Ph-like-specific rearrangements (i.e., ABL1, ABL2, PDGFRB, JAK2 and CRLF2). Results: Thirty-three (9%) patients with Ph-like ALL were identified, the remaining patients were classified as Ph+ (N=132, 36%) or Ph- ALL (N=200, 55%). Patients with Ph-like ALL were younger (Median: 39 vs. 50 vs. 49 years, P=.01), had higher WBC (Median: 27.9 vs. 21.5 vs. 4.5 x109/L, P<.001), were less likely to achieve CR (91% vs. 99% vs. 96%, P=.02), more likely to be MRD+ (64% vs. 34% vs. 36%, P=.03), had a higher relapse rate (5-year: 39% vs. 24% vs. 38%, P=.01) and lower OS (5-year: 41% vs. 64% vs. 49%, P=.02), see Table. Patients who achieved MRD negativity had better OS (MRD+ vs MRD-, P=.01). Importantly, no statistically significant difference in OS, relapse or non-relapse mortality were noted between the 3 groups in patients who underwent allo-HCT in CR1. Conclusions: Ph-like ALL is a high risk subgroup with increased prevalence in younger adults. Allo-HCT appears to offset the poor prognosis associated with this entity. A targeted FISH panel offers timely recognition of this entity in a clinical setting.[Table: see text]

AbstractIntroductionHypoalbuminemia is a known adverse prognostic factor in lymphomas. Yet, it is unknown if axicabtagene ciloleucel (axi‐cel) overcomes the adverse prognostic impact of hypoalbuminemia in relapsed/refractory large B‐cell lymphoma.MethodsWe conducted a retrospective analysis across three Mayo Clinic centers to assess the relationship of hypoalbuminemia (defined as a serum albumin (SA) levels ≤ 3.5 g/dL) on outcomes of patients treated with axi‐cel.ResultsThis analysis included 81 patients. Two patients had no available SA levels preceding axi‐cel infusion. Eighteen patients (22.8%) had hypoalbuminemia with a median SA of 3.3 g/dL. Patients with normal SA had a statistically higher ORR than those without hypoalbuminemia (P = .018). There was no difference in 1‐year PFS and OS between the group with hypoalbuminemia and the group with normal SA levels (48% vs 49%, P = .81) and (74% vs 73%, P = .97), respectively. There was no difference in the severity or median duration of cytokine release syndrome or neurotoxicity between the two groups.ConclusionNotwithstanding the limitations related to the relatively small sample size, axi‐cel therapy appears to overcome the adverse effect of hypoalbuminemia on OS and PFS. Large multicenter clinical studies are certainly needed to validate these findings.

Background: Thrombocytopenia is a frequently encountered laboratory abnormality and a common reason for hematology referrals. Workup for thrombocytopenia is not standardized and frequently does not follow an evidence-based algorithm. We conducted a systematic analysis to evaluate the laboratory testing and outcomes of patients evaluated for thrombocytopenia at hematology clinics in a tertiary referral center between 2013 and 2016. Patient and methods: We performed a comprehensive chart review for patients evaluated for thrombocytopenia during the study period. Patients were followed for 1 year from the initial hematology evaluation and assessed for the development of a hematologic malignancy, rheumatologic, or infectious diseases among other clinical outcomes. Results: We evaluated 472 patients with a median (range) age of 61 (17–94) years. The majority (63.8%) had mild thrombocytopenia. Within 1 year of follow-up, 14 patients (3.0%) were diagnosed with a hematologic malignancy. A higher likelihood of developing a hematologic malignancy was noted in patients with concurrent leukopenia (hazard ratio [HR] 9.97, 95% confidence interval [CI] 3.28–30.32, p < .01) and increasing age (HR per 10-year deciles 1.52, 95% CI 1.03–2.25, p = .03). In patients with asymptomatic isolated mild thrombocytopenia, laboratory testing did not reveal any significant positive findings and patients did not receive any new major diagnosis during the follow-up period. Conclusion: Our findings provide basis and call for development of an evidence-based algorithmic approach for evaluation of patients with thrombocytopenia, testing, and referrals. It also supports a conservative approach mainly driven by physical exam signs, symptoms, and other laboratory findings for patients with isolated mild thrombocytopenia.

Background: Gilteritinib is approved for the treatment of relapsed/refractory (R/R) AML and FLT3-mutation (FLT3mut+). However, the gilteritinib phase 3 ADMIRAL study (Perl et al NEJM 2019) enrolled prior to widespread adoption of either midostaurin as a component of standard intensive induction and consolidation or post-transplant FLT3inhibitor (FLT3i) maintenance. Some mechanisms of drug resistance can be shared across FLT3i's, suggesting response to gilteritinib might differ in patients treated with frontline FLT3i. A better understanding of how prior therapy modulates response to gilteritinib is necessary to clarify this novel agent's role in the current FLT3-mutated AML treatment algorithm. Methods: This is an ongoing multi-institutional analysis from 13 US centers identifying patients who received gilteritinib alone or as combination therapy for the treatment of R/R FLT3mut+ AML. Patients who received gilteritinib as a part of an ongoing trial were excluded. Response criteria were identical to the ADMIRAL trial. For patients with available data and a composite complete remission (CRc), we defined clinically measurable residual disease (cMRD) negative status by bone marrow flow cytometry using a cutoff of &lt;1 x 10x105 cells as well as polymerase chain reaction (PCR) for FLT3 mutation with a minimum sensitivity of 5%. Survival from the time of gilteritinib initiation was recorded. Multivariate analysis included all variables collected to determine interaction with patient outcome (CR and survival data). Kaplan-Meier curves and log rank test were used for survival analysis after gilteritinib initiation. Results: 72 patients treated with prior FLT3i exposure received gilteritinib for treatment of R/R FLT3mut+ AML. Patient characteristics are presented in table-1 with 46 (64%) previously receiving midostaurin, 19 (26%) sorafenib, and 7 (10%) other FLT3i. 8 (11%) received more than one prior TKI. NGS at diagnosis were available in 66 patients (92%) and co-mutations in DNMT3A, NPM1 and NRAS were observed in more than 10% of patients. Average duration of gilteritinib therapy was 5.7 months (range: 0.2-25 months). 27 (37.5%) received stem cell transplant (SCT) before gilteritinib and 15 (21%) underwent SCT after gilteritinib. The composite CR rate (CRc, defined as CR + CRi + CRp) was 51.4% (n= 37 patients). With regard to specific FLT3i's, we found no significant difference in median survival (7.1 months and 6.4 months for midostaurin and sorafenib, respectively) or remission rates (CRc 54% and 47% for prior midostaurin and sorafenib, respectively). The CRc rate for patients who received only prior 7+3 and midostaurin with or without consolidation was 58% with a median survival of 7.8 months. A trend toward higher CRc rate was noted in patients treated with gilteritinib in combination regimens rather than as a single agent (64% vs 43%, respectively, p=0.09 using Chi-square test). No survival advantage for combination therapy was seen over single agent. Survival was longest in patients who obtained a CR, particularly a cMRD negative response; this remained significant after censoring at the time of SCT (figures 1&2). Patients who received SCT after gilteritinib had significantly longer survival than non-transplanted patients (9.3 months vs 5.6 months, respectively, HR 0.44, 95% CI 0.2-0.8)(figure-3). Patients with concurrent mutations of NPM1/DNMT3A had a trend toward a higher CRc compared to FLT3 mutation alone (71% vs 50%, p= 0.2) but similar survival. With regard to mutations associated with drug resistance to other FLT3i's, patients with both FLT3-ITD and FLT3-D835 mutation had similar response and survival to FLT3-ITD alone. However, patients with MAPK pathway activating mutations (e.g. NRAS and PTPN11) had lower CRc (37.5% vs 59.5%) and poorer median survival than other patients (3.3 months vs 7.5 months) (HR 2.2- 95% CI 1.1-4.4) p value &lt;0.01(figure-4). Conclusions: In this multi-center, retrospective analysis, gilteritinib remains a clinically active agent after treatment failure of prior FLT3i's (midostaurin or sorafenib). Mutations activating MAPK pathway have been implicated in secondary gilteritinib resistance but are seldom co-mutated at initial FLT3mut+ AML diagnosis. While further study is required, we hypothesize that their detection after frontline FLT3i therapy may represent treatment-emergent clones with propensity for pan-FLT3i resistance. Disclosures Zeidan: Cardiff Oncology: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other; Trovagene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Otsuka: Consultancy, Honoraria; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Boehringer-Ingelheim: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene / BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Jazz: Consultancy, Honoraria; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy, Honoraria; BeyondSpring: Consultancy, Honoraria; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Honoraria; Taiho: Consultancy, Honoraria; Cardinal Health: Consultancy, Honoraria; Acceleron: Consultancy, Honoraria; Astellas: Consultancy, Honoraria; Aprea: Research Funding; ADC Therapeutics: Research Funding; MedImmune/Astrazeneca: Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Ionis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Epizyme: Consultancy, Honoraria; Astex: Research Funding; CCITLA: Other; Leukemia and Lymphoma Society: Other; Agios: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Incyte: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Yilmaz:Pint Pharma: Honoraria; Pfizer: Research Funding; Daicho Sankyo: Research Funding. Foran:Agios: Honoraria, Research Funding; H3Biosciences: Research Funding; Xencor: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; Kura Oncology: Research Funding; Aptose: Research Funding; Aprea: Research Funding; Actinium: Research Funding; Boehringer Ingelheim: Research Funding; Abbvie: Research Funding; BMS: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pfizer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Servier: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Revolution Medicine: Consultancy. Daver:Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Syndax: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; KITE: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Agios: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Karyopharm: Research Funding; Servier: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Astellas: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novimmune: Research Funding; Gilead: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Trovagene: Research Funding; Fate Therapeutics: Research Funding; ImmunoGen: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Jazz: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Trillium: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Perl:Novartis: Honoraria, Other, Research Funding; Agios: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other; Biomed Valley Discoveries: Research Funding; Jazz: Honoraria, Other; FORMA Therapeutics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other; Syndax: Consultancy, Honoraria; Actinium Pharmaceuticals Inc: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; AbbVie Inc: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other, Research Funding; Loxo Oncology Inc, a wholly owned subsidiary of Eli Lilly & Company: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other; Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; New Link Genetics: Honoraria, Other; Astellas: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: writing/editorial support, travel costs for meeting presentations related to study, Research Funding; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Writing/editorial support, travel costs for meetings, Research Funding; Leukemia & Lymphoma Society, Beat AML: Consultancy; Arog Pharmaceuticals Inc: Other: uncompensated consulting, travel costs for meetings; FUJIFILM Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc: Research Funding; Takeda: Honoraria, Other: Travel costs for meeting. Altman:Kartos: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Boehringer Ingelheim: Research Funding; ImmunoGen: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Aprea: Research Funding; Amphivena: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy; Syros: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Immune Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; ASH: Consultancy; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy; Glycomimetics: Other: Data safety and monitoring committee; Daiichi Sankyo: Other: Advisory Board - no payment but was reimbursed for travel; Kura Oncology: Other: Scientific Advisory Board - no payment accepted, Research Funding; BioSight: Other: No payment but was reimbursed for travel , Research Funding; AbbVie: Other: advisory board, Research Funding; Agios: Other: advisory board, Research Funding; Theradex: Other: Advisory Board; Astellas: Other: Advisory Board, Speaker (no payment), Steering Committee (no payment), Research Funding; PrIME Oncology: Consultancy; PeerView: Consultancy; Cancer Expert Now: Consultancy; France Foundation: Consultancy; Fujifilm: Research Funding. OffLabel Disclosure: Some of the patients we are reporting on received gilteritinib in combination with other agents which is off-label use.

Introduction: Population studies have identified genes with germline polymorphisms associated with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) risk and outcome. However, somatic mutations in these genes have not been reported in an AML clinical population and whether they are associated with epidemiologic exposures, clinical AML phenotypes and outcome after therapy. Methods: We systemically interrogated PubMed database (1998-2018), to identify genes with germline polymorphisms associated with AML risk, response to chemotherapy or outcome. To determine the prevalence and relevance of somatic mutations in these genes in an unselected AML population, we performed an analysis using Whole-Exome Sequencing (WES) on remnant diagnostic cytogenetic pellets from 98 patients from the Mayo Clinic AML Epidemiology Cohort, a detailed and highly-annotated cohort of 295 consecutive AML patients treated at Mayo Clinic Florida & Arizona between October, 2000 and December, 2011. Patient characteristics are shown in Table 1. Samples were sequenced at a depth of ~100 million paired-end 100bp reads using Agilent SureSelectXT Human All Exon V5 + UTRs target enrichment kit. Sequencing reads were aligned to human reference genome, and somatic mutations including non-synonymous and truncating single nucleotide variants and small INDELs were identified and filtered using Exome Sequencing Project, 1000 genome, HapMap, & Mayo Clinic internal biobank genetic variants database. Copy number aberrations were identified & filtered using public copy number polymorphism databases. The association analyses were performed at the gene level, with a primary endpoint of whether a given patient harbored a somatic mutation in any genes linked to AML risk or outcome in literature, and to determine the associations of these mutations with epidemiologic exposures, AML phenotype and clinical outcomes. Results: From the literature search, we identified 77 unique genes with known germline polymorphisms associated with AML risk, response to chemotherapy or outcome. Fifty-eight of these were found to be somatically mutated in our WES dataset, with subsequent analysis focusing on the 11 genes (ABCB1, CYP1A1, CYP2B6, EPHX1, ERCC1, ERCC2, ERCC5, JAK2, MEFV, MTRR, and TERT) that had greater than 5 patients with nonsynonymous somatic mutations in the given gene. Significant associations with epidemiologic exposures and outcomes were noted in patients with somatic mutations in ERCC2, CYP1A1 and ERCC5 genes. Table 2 shows a comparison of patient characteristics and associations according to the presence of somatic mutations in these genes. Patients with mutations in CYP1A1 had a significantly younger age at AML diagnosis (Median: 51.7 vs. 71.0 years, P=.02) and significantly shorter OS in age-adjusted analysis (HR=4.45, P=.003). The former is a novel finding, whereas the latter is consistent with previous reports. Patients with mutations in ERCC2 more commonly used statins (66.7% vs. 21.7%, P=.03). Patients with ERCC5 mutations had a lower rate of tobacco use (20.0% vs. 54.5%, P=.049). In unadjusted analysis, there was a significant association between presence of somatic mutations in JAK2 and poorer survival after AML diagnosis (HR=2.83, P=.017), but this attenuated and did not retain significance when adjusting for age at AML diagnosis (HR=2.22, P=.067). Conclusion: Our exploratory study describes a novel association of CYP1A1 somatic nonsynonymous mutations with age of AML onset, as well as novel associations of ERCC2 and ERCC5 mutations with epidemiologic exposures in an unselect cohort of patients with AML. We confirm the association of CYP1A1 with inferior overall survival after AML diagnosis. These findings suggest that some genes associated with AML risk may also harbor somatic mutations that are clinically relevant. These results will guide a planned confirmatory prospective study to determine frequency and impact of both germline and somatic mutations of risk genes in AML patients, and may contribute to a better understanding leukemia risk assessment and potentially to prevention strategies. Disclosures Finn: Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Speakers Bureau; Seattle Genetics: Speakers Bureau. Cerhan:BMS/Celgene: Research Funding; NanoString: Research Funding. Foran:Revolution Medicine: Consultancy; Servier: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Abbvie: Research Funding; BMS: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pfizer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Boehringer Ingelheim: Research Funding; H3Biosciences: Research Funding; Xencor: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; Kura Oncology: Research Funding; Aptose: Research Funding; Aprea: Research Funding; Actinium: Research Funding; Agios: Honoraria, Research Funding.

AbstractDonor cell leukemia is a very rare cause of relapse after allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (alloHCT). Herein, we describe an unprecedented case of donor cell‐derived chronic myelomonocytic leukemia (CMML) presenting seven years after a 51‐year‐old man received a matched‐related alloHCT from his 59‐year‐old brother for T‐cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia.

7523 Background: tALL is a recently appreciated but poorly defined clinical entity. We define tALL as any prior exposure to cytotoxic chemotherapy and/or radiation for another malignancy, and we report a comparative analysis of characteristics, cytogenetics and outcomes for this subset among a modern unselected ALL cohort from the Mayo Clinic Cancer Center (MCCC). Methods: We performed a systematic search in the 3-site MCCC registry and included all patients (pts) diagnosed and received at least 1 cycle of ALL-directed therapy and/or underwent allogeneic transplantation (AlloHCT) between 2008-2018. Comparisons of characteristics between tALL and dnALL were made using a Wilcoxon rank sum test (continuous variables) and Fisher’s exact test (categorical variables). Time-to-event variables were compared using unadjusted Cox proportional hazards regression models. Results: 431 ALL pts were identified during the study period, including n = 69 (16%) classified as tALL. Median follow-up from diagnosis was 2.3 years (range 0-18 years). The most common prior malignancies among tALL pts were Breast (24.6%), Lymphoma (15.9%), Myeloid (15.9%), GU/GYN (14.5%) and Myeloma (11.6%). In comparison to dnALL, pts with tALL were significantly older (63.2 vs 45.2 years, P < 0.001), more often female (65.2% vs 39.8%, P < 0.001), less frequently Hispanic (3.5% vs 13.1%, P = 0.042); more often of B-lineage (92.8% vs 81.8%, P = 0.022). On review of cytogenetics, tALL pts more often had hypodiploidy/near triploidy (Ho/Tr) (21.7% vs 4.1%, P < 0.001), more often had monosomal (MDS-like) (33.3% vs 12.4%, P = 0.0047) and complex karyotype (38% vs 17.3%, P = 0.0069). Importantly, incidence of BCR/ABL-positive (Ph+) ALL was not significantly different. Latency period between exposure to prior cancer therapy and development of tALL was significantly longer for Ph+ compared to Ph-negative ALL (median 9 vs. 4 years, P = 0.007). Patients with tALL had a 3-year OS after diagnosis of 37% [vs 59.7% for dnALL (HR death 1.86, 95% CI 1.31-2.65, P < 0.001)]. However, the two groups did not differ significantly regarding occurrence of AlloHCT (HR = 0.91, 95% CI 0.63-1.31, P = 0.61) or post-AlloHCT survival (HR = 1.29, 95% CI 0.75-2.23, P = 0.35). Conclusions: Therapy-related ALL represents an important & unique clinical entity with poor prognosis & adverse cytogenetic features. Ph+ tALL has a longer latency and similar frequency in both tALL and dnALL. AlloHCT appears to be an appropriate treatment strategy, possibly abrogating the poor prognosis of tALL.

7021 Background: Case-control studies (CCS) have identified germline variants (GVs) & genes associated with AML risk and/or outcome. However, whether these genes also harbor somatic mutations (SMs) in AML and whether these SMs are associated with clinical phenotypes and outcome is unknown. We systemically interrogated PubMed (terms "AML genetic polymorphisms"), yielding 612 reports (1981-2018), from which we identified unique variants/single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in 100 genes associated with AML risk and/or outcome in CCS. To determine the prevalence and relevance of SMs in these genes in an unselected AML population, we performed an analysis using WES of cases in the highly-annotated MCAEC (Finn, Ca Epidemiol 2015). Methods: We performed WES using remnant cytogenetic pellets from AML diagnosis in 98 MCAEC patients with available samples, sequenced at a depth of ~100 million paired-end 100bp reads using Agilent SureSelectXT Human All Exon V5 + UTRs target enrichment kit. Sequencing reads were aligned to human reference genome, and SMs including non-synonymous (NS) and truncating single nucleotide variants (SNVs) and small INDELs were identified and filtered using Exome Sequencing Project, 1000 genome, HapMap, & Mayo Clinic (MC) internal Biobank GV database. Copy number aberrations (CNAs) were identified & filtered using public CN polymorphism databases. For this analysis we evaluated the prevalence of somatic SNVs, INDELs, & CNAs in the 100 nominated genetic risk genes in collaboration with MC Cancer Center to determine their association with clinical phenotype and outcome. Results: Of the 100 unique genes, there were 40 with SM in our dataset, with 126 total mutations. Most were mutated in a very small number of patients, allowing insufficient statistical power to perform association analyses. However, an NS mutation in CYP2B6 (c.785A > G, p.Lys262Arg) had a minor allele frequency of 12.0%; this variant has been reported in association with breast cancer risk, but not with AML. Conclusions: We studied SM’s in AML genetic risk genes using WES of tumor samples. While representing a smaller sample size, this suggests their contribution to AML development may be limited in a broader clinical population. These results & prevalence of the novel CYP2B6 rs2279343 variant in AML must be confirmed in larger cohorts.