Orazi, Attilio

Abstract “Nonclassical” myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPNs) and myelodysplastic/myeloproliferative neoplasms (MDS/MPNs) represent a heterogeneous group of malignancies characterized by a wide range of clinical manifestations. Unlike classical MPNs, there is no standardized management approach for these conditions, particularly concerning the indications for and management of allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation. To address this gap, the European Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation (EBMT) Practice Harmonization and Guidelines (PH&G) Committee and the Chronic Malignancies Working Party (CMWP) have collaborated to develop shared guidelines aimed at optimizing the selection and management of patients with these rare forms of neoplasms. A comprehensive review of the literature from the publication of the revised fourth edition of the (2016) World Health Organization classification onward was conducted. A multidisciplinary group of experts in the field convened to produce this document, which was developed through multiple rounds of draft circulation. Key recommendations include the early identification of potential transplant candidates, particularly in cases of chronic neutrophilic leukemia, chronic eosinophilic leukemia (CEL)/CEL, not otherwise specified (CEL-NOS), myeloid/lymphoid neoplasm with eosinophilia and tyrosine kinase gene fusions with FGFR1, JAK2, ABL1, and FLT3 rearrangements, MDS/MPN with neutrophilia/atypical chronic myeloid leukemia, and MDS/MPN, NOS. For patients with MPN, NOS/MPN unclassifiable, standard recommendations for myelofibrosis should be applied. Similarly, in MDS/MPN with thrombocytosis, transplantation is recommended on the basis of established MDS guidelines. Given the current lack of robust evidence, this document will serve as a valuable resource to guide future research activities, providing a framework for addressing critical unanswered questions and advancing the field.

Abstract This retrospective analysis aimed to provide evidence-based risk stratification of TP53-mutated (TP53mut) myeloid neoplasms (MNs). Of 580 MNs harboring TP53mut with variant allele frequency (VAF) ≥2%, 219 (37.8%), 194 (33.4%), 92 (15.9%), and 75 (12.9%) were classified as acute myeloid leukemia (AML), myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) with low blasts (MDS-LB), MDS with excess blasts (MDS-EB)-2, and -EB1 according to the revised fourth edition of the World Health Organization (WHO) classification, respectively. Hierarchical analysis identified the following 4 risk groups with distinct survival: (1) MDS-LB, (2) MDS-EB1/EB2/AML VAF <10%, (3) MDS-EB1/EB2 VAF ≥10%, and (4) AML VAF ≥10%. We next evaluated the impact of allelic status, VAF, and complex karyotype (CK). In our cohort, the significance of biallelic status was limited to MDS with <5% blasts and not for blasts 5% to 9%, as proposed by the International Consensus Classification (ICC), or 5% to 19%, as proposed by the fifth edition of the WHO (WHO-5). MDS-EB1 and -EB2 with VAF ≥10% had comparable survival (9.6 vs 7.2 months; P = .12), regardless of allelic status. Contrary to the ICC proposal, MDS-EB1/EB2 with VAF <10% and CK had poor survival compared with those without CK, comparable to MDS-EB1/EB2 with VAF ≥10% (5.6 vs 26.2 vs 6.3 months; P = .003). Survival of TP53mut AML was poor (median 3.9 months) regardless of allelic/CK status. Thus, using ICC or WHO-5 may underestimate prognosis of MDS with blasts 5% to 19% and 5% to 9%, respectively. Collectively, the hierarchical model acknowledges poor survival of 91.9% TP53mut MDS and AML compared with 36.5% and 80.7% by WHO-5 and ICC, respectively.

ABSTRACTA total of 142 patients with myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPNs) or acute myeloid leukemia (AML) associated with multihit TP53 mutations (mTP53 MUT) were accessed from the Mayo Clinic database and included (i) chronic phase MPN (MPN‐CP; N = 19), (ii) accelerated phase MPN (MPN‐AP; N = 14), (iii) blast phase MPN (MPN‐BP; N = 28), and (iv) AML (N = 81). Concurrent ASXL1 MUT, EZH2 MUT, IDH1,MUT and IDH2 MUT were more common in MPN‐MUTBP‐mTP53 compared to AML‐mTP53 MUT. At median of 11.6 months follow‐up, 124 (87%) deaths and 19 (13%) allogeneic stem cell transplantations (ASCT) were documented. Overall survival (OS), calculated from the time of mTP53 MUT detection, was similar between MPN‐BP‐mTP53 MUT (median 4.6 months) and MPN‐AP‐mTP53 MUT (5.6 months; p = 0.5) but both were inferior to MPN‐CP‐mTP53 MUT (11.6 months, p < 0.01). OS in MPN‐CP‐mTP53 MUT was similar to that of AML‐mTP53 MUT (median 7.4 months, p = 0.07). In multivariable analysis, OS was favorably affected by ASCT (HR 0.4, p = 0.03) and disease stage (i.e., chronic phase disease) or achieving response to pre‐transplant chemotherapy (HR 0.2, p < 0.01) and unfavorably by the presence of concurrent TET2 MUT or DNMT3A MUT (HR 2.7, p < 0.01). Based on these risk factors, a 3‐tiered risk model was constructed: low (no risk factors; N = 18; median OS 23.8 months); intermediate (one risk factor; N = 44; 11.1 months); and high (two or more risk factors; N = 80; 4 months; p < 0.01). The current study highlights the equally detrimental impact of mTP53 MUT on long‐term survival in MPN and AML and identifies predictors of short‐term survival.

ABSTRACT The clinical relevance of TP53 mutations ( TP53 MUT ) in myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPN) and their prognostic interaction with MPN subtype designation has not been systematically studied. In the current study, 114 patients with MPN harboring TP53 MUT (VAF ≥ 2%) were evaluated for overall survival (OS), calculated from the time of TP53 MUT detection: chronic phase myelofibrosis (MF‐CP; N = 61); blast‐phase (MPN‐BP; N = 31) or accelerated‐phase (MPN‐AP; N = 16) MPN, and polycythemia vera/essential thrombocythemia (PV/ET; N = 6). Sixty‐five (57%) patients harbored International Consensus Classification (ICC)‐defined multihit TP53 MUT and 56 (49%) monosomal/complex karyotype (MK/CK). Majority of MPN‐BP (90%) and MPN‐AP (81%) while 39% of MF‐CP and none of PV/ET patients harbored multihit TP53 MUT . OS in MPN‐BP and MPN‐AP was equally dismal (median 6 vs. 4.5 months, respectively; p = 1.0), regardless of multihit configuration ( p = 0.44), while OS in TP53 MUT MPN‐BP/AP ( N = 47; median 4 months) was inferior to that of a separate cohort ( N = 49) with TP53 wild‐type MPN‐BP/AP (median 11 months; p < 0.01). OS in MF‐CP was significantly shorter with multihit versus non‐multihit TP53 MUT (median 10 vs. 35 months; HR 2.9; p < 0.01), independent of other MF‐relevant genetic risk factors, including ASXL1/SRSF2/U2AF1 mutations. Multihit TP53 MUT was also associated with inferior survival following allogeneic stem cell transplant (ASCT): median 9 months versus “not reached” in patients with ( N = 9) versus without ( N = 8) multihit TP53 MUT ( p < 0.01). The presence of multihit or non‐multihit TP53 MUT in MPN‐BP/AP or multihit TP53 MUT in MF‐CP is associated with exceptionally poor prognosis and justifies inclusion into the ICC category of “myeloid neoplasms with mutated TP53 .” By contrast, detection of non‐multihit TP53 MUT , by itself, might not endanger short‐term survival in MF‐CP, PV, or ET.

Importance Essential thrombocythemia, a clonal myeloproliferative neoplasm with excessive platelet production, is associated with an increased risk of thrombosis and bleeding. The annual incidence rate of essential thrombocythemia in the US is 1.5/100 000 persons. Observations Patients with essential thrombocythemia have a persistent platelet count of 450 × 10 9 /L or greater. The differential diagnosis includes myeloproliferative neoplasms (polycythemia vera, primary myelofibrosis, chronic myeloid leukemia); inflammatory conditions such as rheumatoid arthritis and systemic lupus erythematosus; infections; splenectomy; iron deficiency anemia; and solid tumors such as lung cancer. Approximately 90% of individuals with essential thrombocythemia have genetic variants that upregulate the JAK-STAT (signal transducer and activator of transcription 5) signaling pathway, including Janus kinase 2 (JAK2, 64%), calreticulin (CALR , 23%), and myeloproliferative leukemia virus oncogene (MPL , 4%). The median age at diagnosis of essential thrombocythemia is 59 years. The median overall survival exceeds 35 years in those diagnosed at 40 years or younger. Patients with essential thrombocythemia are at increased risk of arterial thrombosis (11%), venous thrombosis (7%), and hemorrhagic complications (8%). Thrombosis risk is increased among those with a history of thrombosis, age older than 60 years, a JAK2 gene variant, and cardiovascular risk factors (eg, hypertension, diabetes mellitus, hyperlipidemias, tobacco use). Use of aspirin (81-100 mg/d) is suggested for most patients with essential thrombocythemia to lower thrombosis risk. In a retrospective study of 300 affected patients with a low thrombosis risk (younger than 60 years with no prior thrombosis), those not taking aspirin (100 mg/d) had a risk of arterial thrombosis of 9.4/1000 patient-years and a venous thrombosis risk of 8.2/1000 patient years; cardiovascular risk factors were associated with a higher risk of arterial thrombi (incidence rate ratio, 2.5 [95% CI, 1.02-6.1]), and a JAK2 gene variant was associated with increased risk of venous thrombosis (incidence rate ratio, 4.0 [95% CI, 1.2-12.9]). In a randomized trial of 114 patients at higher risk for thrombosis (age older than 60 years or a prior thrombotic event), cytoreduction with hydroxyurea significantly lowered the risk of arterial or venous thrombotic events compared with no cytoreductive therapy (3.6% vs 24%; P &amp;lt; .01). At a median of 8.5 years from diagnosis, approximately 10% of patients with essential thrombocythemia develop myelofibrosis and about 3% develop acute myeloid leukemia. Conclusions Essential thrombocythemia is a rare clonal myeloproliferative neoplasm associated with an increased risk of venous and arterial thrombosis, hemorrhage, myelofibrosis, and acute myeloid leukemia. Based on individual risk factors for thrombosis, persons with essential thrombocythemia may be treated with low-dose aspirin, either alone or in combination with a cytoreductive drug such as hydroxyurea.

Background: TP53-mutated (TP53mut) myeloid neoplasms (MN) have particularly poor survival. Discrepancies in defining TP53mut MN have impact on diagnostic work up, therapeutic decisions, and clinical trial enrolment. Methods: MN cases harboring TP53mut (variant allele frequency, VAF ≥2%) were classified based on bone marrow (BM) and peripheral blood (PB) blast % using the 4th revision of the WHO classification (WHO-4R). Biallelic loss was defined as (i) ≥2 mutations each with VAF ≥2%; (ii) single TP53mut VAF ≥2% plus 17p loss detected on karyotype, FISH, or SNP; or (iii) single TP53mut VAF ≥50%, whereas monoallelic loss was defined as single TP53mut VAF &lt;50% without 17p loss. Primary endpoint was overall survival (OS) from diagnosis. Conditional Inference Trees (CIT) analysis was used to determine the true effect of a predictor. Results: We identified 580 cases including WHO-4R defined acute myeloid leukemia (AML, BM/PB blasts ≥20%, n=219, 37.8%), myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) with excess blasts-2 (EB-2, BM 10-19% or PB 5%-19%, n=92, 15.9%), MDS with excess blasts-1 (EB-1, BM 5-9% or PB 2-4%, n=75, 12.9%), and the remaining were MDS with low blasts (-LB, BM &lt;5% and PB ≤1%, n=194, 33.4%). Of the 578 cases evaluable for allelic status, 437 (75.6%) and 141 (24.4%) had biallelic and monoallelic TP53 loss, respectively. Higher frequency of biallelic loss was observed with increasing blasts. 63.2%, 73.3%, 78% and 86.3% of cases with MDS-LB, MDS-EB1, MDS-EB2, and AML had bi-allelic TP53 loss (P&lt;0.0001). In a multivariable analysis, WHO-4R categories, VAF ≥10%, and biallelic loss were independent predictors of poor survival. CIT analysis further stratified the cohort into 4 groups with distinct survival: (1) MDS-LB (n=194, 33.4%); (2) MDS-EB1/EB2 and AML with VAF &lt;10% (n=38, 6.6%); (3) MDS-EB1/EB2 with VAF ≥10% (n=149, 25.7%); and (4) AML with VAF ≥10% (n=199, 34.3%). MDS-LB cases could be further stratified based on allelic status and complex karyotype (CK): OS was poor for cases with biallelic TP53 loss and monoallelic TP53mut with CK compared to monoallelic TP53mut without CK, who had the most favorable survival (12.7 vs. 13 vs. 34.8 months, P&lt;0.0001).MDS-EB1/EB2/AML with VAF&lt;10% could also be stratified by CK: MDS-EB1/EB2/AML with VAF&lt;10% cases without CK had the favorable survival compared to their counterparts with CK and MDS-EB1/EB2 with VAF ≥10% cases (26.2 vs. 5.6 vs. 6.3 months, P=0.003).MDS-EB1/EB2 with VAF ≥10% was a homogenous subgroup: Biological characteristics including the proportion of cases with biallelic TP53 loss, CK (P&gt;0.9), monosomal karyotype (MK, P&gt;0.9), del 5q (P=0.6), del 7q (P=0.4), and del 17p (P=0.2) were comparable between MDS-EB1 and -EB2 with VAF ≥10%. Importantly, median OS of MDS-EB1 and EB2 with VAF ≥10% was comparable (9.6 vs. 7.2 months, P=0.12). OS in this group was comparable regardless of the blast %, allelic status, or presence of CK.AML with VAF ≥10% had extremely poor survival: Median OS was 3.9 months. Survival of AML was equally poor irrespective of the mono- or biallelic (3.6 vs. 3.9, P=0.89) and non-CK vs. CK (1.8 vs. 3.9 months, P=0.09). Combined, our model would acknowledge poor survival of 514 (89.1%) cases. In contrast, retrospective application of the 5th edition of the WHO classification (WHO-5) and International Consensus Classification (ICC) would classify only 211 (36.4%) and 468 (80.7%) cases as biallelic/multi-hit TP53mut MN, respectively. Finally, the Harrell's c-index of the proposed model, WHO-5, and ICC was 0.66, 0.571, and 0.617, respectively. Conclusion: We provide evidence for subsequent refinements in classifying MN harboring TP53mut. Our salient findings include: (i) acknowledgement of CK as ‘biallelic equivalent’ in MDS-LB; as well as EB1/EB2/AML with VAF 2 to &lt;10% cases; and (ii) demonstration of poor survival of MDS-EB1 and -EB2 with VAF ≥10% regardless of the allelic status. In conclusion, our proposed model acknowledged poor survival of a higher proportion of cases as TP53mut MN compared to the current models with a higher c- index.

Background The prognostic relevance of TP53 mutations (TP53MT) in acute myeloid leukemia (AML) and myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) has been extensively studied and the information accessed for defining the new International Consensus Classification (ICC) category of “myeloid neoplasms with mutated TP53” (Blood 2022;140:1200). The latter designation requires ≥10% TP53 variant allele frequency (VAF) for AML and MDS/AML and in case of MDS, multi-hit TP53 or ≥10% VAF associated with complex karyotype (CK). We examined the prognostic relevance of TP53MT in myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPN), specified by subtype and disease stage. Methods The current study was conducted under an institutional review board approved minimum risk protocol. Additional informative cases from the University of Florence, Italy and the South Australian Myeloid Neoplasm Registry were included. Diagnostic criteria and assignment of TP53 allelic state were according to the ICC. Next-generation sequencing (NGS) and cytogenetic studies were performed according to institutional standard protocols. Conventional statistical methods were employed. Survival analyses were censored for allogeneic stem cell transplantation (ASCT) and were calculated from the time of first detection of TP53MT. Results 115 patients with MPN and documented pathogenic TP53MT were considered (median age 68.5 years). ICC-defined subtype designations, at time of TP53MT detection, were polycythemia vera (PV) or essential thrombocythemia (ET) (N=9), chronic phase myelofibrosis (MF-CP; N=63), accelerated phase MPN (MPN-AP; N=16), and blast phase MPN (MPN-BP; N=27). Driver mutation distribution was JAK2 64%, CALR 18%, MPL 8%, and triple-negative 10%. Karyotype was monosomal (MK) in 42%, CK 9%, and normal (NK) 35%. Frequent co-mutations were ASXL1 (28%), TET2 (14%), and SRSF2 (14%). TP53MT were classified as ICC-defined multihit in 67 (58%) cases; karyotype in the latter was MK (58%), CK (16%), non-MK/CK (13%), or NK (13%). TP53 VAF was ≥50% in 27 (24%) patients and &lt;10% in 25 (22%). TP53MT included one (N=96) or ≥2 (N=19). MPN subtype- and stage-specific distributions for multihit TP53MT were 91% for MPN-BP, 88% MPN-AP, 44% MF-CP, and 0% ET/PV. In order to examine disease subtype- and stage-specific prognostic contribution of TP53MT, the study population was divided into 10 operational groups: 1) PV/ET non-multihit/non-MK/CK (N=8; VAF range 3-32%); 2) MF-CP non-multihit/non-MK/CK with TP53MT VAF &lt;10% (N=10); 3) MF-CP non-multihit VAF ≥10% and non-MK/CK (N=11); 4) PV/ET/MF-CP non-multihit with MK/CK (N=5); 5) MF-CP multihit/non-MK/CK (N=8); 6) MF-CP multihit and MK/CK (N=20); 7) MPN-BP/AP non-multihit/non-MK/CK (N=2); 8) MPN-BP/AP non-multihit with MK/CK (N=2); 9) MPN-BP/AP multihit/non-MK/CK (N=9); and 10) MPN-BP/AP multihit with MK/CK (N=30). The corresponding median survivals were “not reached”, 55, 42, 6, 18, 10, “not reached”, 4, 4, and 6 months (p&lt;0.01). Survival was similar between groups 1, 2, and 3 (p&gt;0.2 for all comparisons) now referred to as “PV/ET/MF-CP non-multihit/non-MK/CK (N=39)”. Survival was similarly dismal for groups 8, 9, and 10 (p values &gt; 0.3 for all comparisons) now referred to as “MPN-BP/AP with or without multihit TP53MT or MK/CK (N=43)”. Survival was also similar between groups 4, 5, and 6 (p values &gt;3 for all comparisons) now referred to as “PV/ET/MF-CP with multihit TP53MT or MK/CK (N=33)”. The three consolidated groups were subsequently compared for survival that showed a significantly worse outcome for “MPN-BP/AP with or without multihit TP53MT or MK/CK” with median survival of 4 months, compared to 12 months for “PV/ET/MF-CP with multihit TP53MT or MK/CK” (HR 2.3; 95% CI; 1.3-3.9) and 55 months for “PV/ET/MF-CP non-multihit/non-MK/CK” (10.9; 95% CI 5.3-22.4); survival in the latter two groups was also significantly different, in favor of PV/ET/MF-CP non-multihit/non-MK/CK (HR 4.8; 95% CI 2.3-10.1). Conclusions: The presence of multi-hit TP53MT or MK/CK, in MF-CP, and possibly in ET/PV, warrants their inclusion in the ICC category of “myeloid neoplasms with mutated TP53”. By contrast, non-multihit TP53MT in ET/PV/MF-CP, regardless of VAF and in the absence of MK/CK, does not appear to compromise short-term survival. The observations from the current study also suggest a prognostic hierarchy with blast percentage being the most unfavorable, followed by MK/CK and multihit TP53MT.

SummaryWe describe the clinical phenotype, management strategies and outcomes of 22 patients with autoimmune myelofibrosis (AIMF); median age: 45 years; 77% females; 83% with autoimmune disease, pancytopenia in 32% and transfusion‐requiring anaemia in 59%. All informative cases were negative for JAK2 (n = 18) and CALR/MPL mutations (n = 12). Fourteen of nineteen (74%) evaluable patients achieved complete response (CR) based on the resolution of cytopenias. First‐line treatments included steroids +/− immunosuppressive agents, cyclosporin and mycophenolate with CR in 7 of 13 (54%), 1 of 2 (50%) and 1 of 2 (50%) respectively. Rituximab salvage therapy yielded CR in 4 of 5 (80%) cases. The current study provides information on steroid‐sparing treatments for AIMF.

AbstractChronic neutrophilic leukemia (CNL) is a rare BCR::ABL1‐negative myeloproliferative neoplasm (MPN) defined by persistent mature neutrophilic leukocytosis and bone marrow granulocyte hyperplasia. Atypical chronic myeloid leukemia (aCML) (myelodysplastic “[MDS]/MPN with neutrophilia” per World Health Organization [WHO]) is a MDS/MPN overlap disorder featuring dysplastic neutrophilia and circulating myeloid precursors. Both manifest with frequent hepatosplenomegaly and less commonly, bleeding, with high rates of leukemic transformation and death. The 2022 revised WHO classification conserved CNL diagnostic criteria of leukocytosis ≥25 × 109/L, neutrophils ≥80% with <10% circulating precursors, absence of dysplasia, and presence of an activating CSF3R mutation. ICC criteria are harmonized with those of other myeloid entities, with a key distinction being lower leukocytosis threshold (≥13 × 109/L) for cases CSF3R‐mutated. Criteria for aCML include leukocytosis ≥13 × 109/L, dysgranulopoiesis, circulating myeloid precursors ≥10%, and at least one cytopenia for MDS‐thresholds (ICC). In both classifications ASXL1 and SETBP1 (ICC), or SETBP1 ± ETNK1 (WHO) mutations can be used to support the diagnosis. Both diseases show hypercellular bone marrow due to a granulocytic proliferation, aCML distinguished by dysplasia in granulocytes ± other lineages. Absence of monocytosis, rare/no basophilia, or eosinophilia, <20% blasts, and exclusion of other MPN, MDS/MPN, and tyrosine kinase fusions, are mandated. Cytogenetic abnormalities are identified in ~1/3 of CNL and ~15–40% of aCML patients. The molecular signature of CNL is a driver mutation in colony‐stimulating factor 3 receptor—classically T618I, documented in >80% of cases. Atypical CML harbors a complex genomic backdrop with high rates of recurrent somatic mutations in ASXL1, SETBP1, TET2, SRSF2, EZH2, and less frequently in ETNK1. Leukemic transformation rates are ~10–25% and 30–40% for CNL and aCML, respectively. Overall survival is poor: 15–31 months in CNL and 12–20 months in aCML. The Mayo Clinic CNL risk model for survival stratifies patients according to platelets <160 × 109/L (2 points), leukocytes >60 × 109/L (1 point), and ASXL1 mutation (1 point); distinguishing low‐ (0–1 points) versus high‐risk (2–4 points) categories. The Mayo Clinic aCML risk model attributes 1 point each for: age >67 years, hemoglobin <10 g/dL, and TET2 mutation, delineating low‐ (0–1 risk factor) and high‐risk (≥2 risk factors) subgroups. Management is risk‐driven and symptom‐directed, with no current standard of care. Most commonly used agents include hydroxyurea, interferon, Janus kinase inhibitors, and hypomethylating agents, though none are disease‐modifying. Hematopoietic stem cell transplant is the only potentially curative modality and should be considered in eligible patients. Recent genetic profiling has disclosed CBL, CEBPA, EZH2, NRAS, TET2, and U2AF1 to represent high‐risk mutations in both entities. Actionable mutations (NRAS/KRAS, ETNK1) have also been identified, supporting novel agents targeting involved pathways. Preclinical and clinical studies evaluating new drugs (e.g., fedratinib, phase 2) and combinations are detailed.