Peterson, Jess F

Background: The joint College of American Pathologists/American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics Cytogenetics Committee works to ensure the competency and proficiency of clinical cytogenetic testing laboratories through proficiency testing (PT) programs for various clinical tests offered by such laboratories, including the evaluation of cytogenetic abnormalities in solid tumors. Methods: Review and analyze 25 years (1999–2023) of solid tumor chromosome analysis PT results, utilizing G-banded karyograms. A retrospective review of results from 1999 to 2023 was performed, identifying the challenges addressing solid tumors. The chromosomal abnormalities and overall performance were evaluated. Results: A total of 21 solid tumor challenges were administered during the period 1999–2018. No solid tumor challenges were administered during the period 2019–2023. Challenges consisted of metaphase images and accompanying clinical history for the evaluation of numerical and/or structural abnormalities. All 21 cases reached 80% grading consensus for abnormality recognition. However, five cases (24%) failed to reach consensus for nomenclature reporting by participating laboratories. These cases illustrate errors in reporting chromosomal abnormalities, including whole-arm translocations and those involving sex chromosomes. In addition, they highlight the challenges with differentiation of terminal and interstitial deletions, difficulties in identifying correct breakpoints, and omission of brackets in neoplastic cases. Conclusions: This comprehensive 25-year review demonstrates the exceptional proficiency of cytogenetic laboratories in accurately identifying chromosome abnormalities in solid tumors, while also highlighting the challenges of reporting specific types of chromosomal abnormalities.

The MN1::ETV6 gene fusion resulting from t(12;22)(p13;q12) has been rarely reported in myeloid neoplasms. We describe a 69-year-old male with newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia (AML) with erythroid differentiation and t(12;22)(p13;q12) demonstrated by conventional chromosome studies. Subsequent fluorescence in situ hybridization studies demonstrated a balanced ETV6 gene rearrangement (at 12p13). To further characterize this translocation, whole-genome sequencing was performed which confirmed t(12;22) with breakpoints involving the MN1 and ETV6 genes. Herein, we describe our case and review the literature to summarize the clinical and laboratory findings in patients with this rare but recurrent MN1::ETV6 gene fusion observed in myeloid neoplasms. Importantly, this case expands the clinical spectrum associated with the MN1::ETV6 gene fusion to include AML with erythroid differentiation. Lastly, this case demonstrates the importance of moving toward more comprehensive molecular testing to fully characterize the driver events in neoplastic genomes.

AbstractAcute lymphoblastic leukemia (B‐ALL) with intrachromosomal amplification of chromosome 21 (iAMP21‐ALL) represents a recurrent high‐risk cytogenetic abnormality and accurate identification is critical for appropriate clinical management. Identification of iAMP21‐ALL has historically relied on fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) using a RUNX1 probe. Current classification requires ≥ five copies of RUNX1 per cell and ≥ three additional copies of RUNX1 on a single abnormal iAMP21‐chromosome. We sought to evaluate the performance of the RUNX1 probe in the identification of iAMP21‐ALL. This study was a retrospective evaluation of iAMP21‐ALL in the Mayo Clinic and Children's Oncology Group cohorts. Of 207 cases of iAMP21‐ALL, 188 (91%) were classified as “typical” iAMP21‐ALL, while 19 (9%) cases were classified as “unusual” iAMP21‐ALL. The “unusual” iAMP21 cases did not meet the current definition of iAMP21 by FISH but were confirmed to have iAMP21 by chromosomal microarray. Half of the “unusual” iAMP21‐ALL cases had less than five RUNX1 signals, while the remainder had ≥ five RUNX1 signals with some located apart from the abnormal iAMP21‐chromosome. Nine percent of iAMP21‐ALL cases fail to meet the FISH definition of iAMP21‐ALL demonstrating that laboratories are at risk of misidentification of iAMP21‐ALL when relying only on the RUNX1 FISH probe. Incorporation of chromosomal microarray testing circumvents these risks.

Abstract The diagnosis of acute promyelocytic leukemia (APL) relies on the identification of PML::RARA fusion. While the majority of APL cases harbor a typical t(15;17)(q24;q21), atypical genetic mechanisms leading to the oncogenic PML::RARA fusion have been reported yet their frequency and scope remain poorly characterized. We assessed the genetic findings of 831 cases with APL investigated with concurrent chromosome banding analysis and dual‐color dual‐fusion fluorescence in situ hybridization (D‐FISH) analysis at our institution over an 18.5‐year timeframe. Seven hundred twenty‐three (87%) cases had a typical balanced t(15;17) with both testing modalities. Atypical karyotypic results including complex translocations, unbalanced rearrangements and insertional events occurred in 50 (6%) cases, while 6 (0.7%) cases were cryptic by conventional chromosome studies despite PML::RARA fusion by D‐FISH evaluation. Atypical FISH patterns were observed in 48 (6%) cases despite apparently balanced t(15;17) on chromosome banding analysis. Two hundred fifty (30%) cases displayed additional chromosome abnormalities of which trisomy/tetrasomy 8 (37%), del(7q)/add(7q) (12%), and del(9q) (7%) were most frequent. Complex and very complex karyotypes were observed in 81 (10%) and 34 (4%) cases, respectively. In addition, 4 (0.5%) cases presented as an apparently doubled, near‐tetraploid stemline clone. This report provides the largest appraisal of cytogenetic findings in APL with conventional chromosome and PML::RARA D‐FISH analysis. By characterizing the frequency and breadth of typical and atypical results through the lens of these cytogenetic testing modalities, this study serves as a pragmatic source of information for those involved in the investigation of APL in both the clinical and research laboratory settings.

Abstract The World Health Organization category of myeloid/lymphoid neoplasms with eosinophilia and PDGFRA rearrangements is composed of a heterogeneous group of neoplasms that can present as a myeloproliferative neoplasm, acute myeloid leukemia, myeloid sarcoma, or lymphoblastic leukemia/lymphoma. The overall outcome of these neoplasms is favorable with imatinib therapy. Herein, we describe an adult female patient with a myeloid neoplasm accompanied by eosinophilia and a novel USP25::PDGFRA gene fusion.

Abstract KMT2A gene rearrangements are a major oncogenic driver in multiple hematologic neoplasms. Apart from t(9;11)(p21;q23) (KMT2A/MLLT3) in acute myeloid leukemia (AML), KMT2A gene rearrangements are considered to convey high risk and poor overall survival. Herein, we report a case of a 7 year old boy with newly diagnosed AML and a cryptic KMT2A/AFDN gene fusion resulting from a 5′KMT2A insertional event. The results of conventional chromosome studies revealed trisomy 8 in all 20 metaphases, with normal-appearing chromosomes 6 and 11. A KMT2A break-apart FISH probe identified 2 intact copies of the KMT2A gene region and an extra 5′KMT2A signal in 85% of interphase nuclei. Subsequent FISH studies using a KMT2A/AFDN dual-color dual-fusion FISH probe revealed positive results for a single fusion in 82% of interphase nuclei, indicating a KMT2A/AFDN gene fusion. Subsequently, metaphase FISH confirmed the location of the KMT2A/AFDN fusion at 6q27. To our knowledge, this represents only the second time in the literature that a cryptic KMT2A/AFDN gene fusion resulting from a 5′KMT2A insertional event was reported.

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.

Abstract The detection of recurrent genetic abnormalities in acute myeloid leukemia (AML), including RUNX1T1/RUNX1 gene fusion, is critical for optimal medical management. Herein, we report a 45 year old woman with newly diagnosed AML and conventional chromosome studies that revealed an apparently balanced t(8;20)(q22;p13) in all 20 metaphases analyzed. A RUNX1T1/RUNX1 dual-color dual-fusion fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) probe set was subsequently performed and revealed a RUNX1T1/RUNX1 gene fusion. Metaphase FISH studies performed on abnormal metaphases revealed a cryptic, complex translocation resulting in RUNX1T1/RUNX1 fusion, t(8;20;21)(q22;p13;q22). This case study shows the importance of performing FISH studies or other high-resolution genetic testing concurrently with conventional chromosome studies for the detection of cryptic recurrent gene fusions in AML, particularly a focused genetic evaluation such as RUNX1T1/RUNX1 gene fusion, when specific abnormalities involving 8q22 are identified.