Kadia, Tapan M.

Abstract Recent updates to monocyte count thresholds recognize oligomonocytic chronic myelomonocytic leukemia (OM-CMML) as an early form of CMML. However, the clinical validity of these changes remains uncertain without incorporating biological and genomic factors. In this study, we analyzed a cohort of 911 patients (249 with OM-CMML, 359 with overt CMML, and 303 with myelodysplastic syndromes) using unsupervised clustering to evaluate the role of genomic determinants in refining CMML diagnosis. Our findings show that CMML molecular signatures (biallelic TET2 mutations or SRSF2-TET2 comutations) are linked to a distinct transcriptome, monocytic bias, classical monocytosis, and a higher risk of progression to overt CMML in OM-CMML cases. We developed a weighted genomic model and diagnostic workflow showing that combining genomic signatures with bone marrow monocyte frequencies in OM-CMML more accurately predicts progression to overt CMML. These findings support integrating genomic determinants and our clinic-ready diagnostic workflow into the CMML diagnostic framework to improve accuracy. Significance: Through comprehensive clinical and genomic profiling of a large patient cohort, alongside immunophenotypic and transcriptional cellular analyses, this study provides evidence that incorporating genomic determinants into the diagnostic criteria for OM-CMML improves diagnostic accuracy and refines the identification of early-stage CMML, thereby preventing misclassification.

Abstract Introduction Blast transformation (BT) in CMML occurs in 15-30% of patients (pts) with a median overall survival (OS) <6 months (mo). While clonal evolution can be observed, biological mechanisms of BT remain unknown for many pts. Using paired samples from chronic phase (CP) and at BT, this study defines the cytogenetic and molecular landscape of BT-CMML. Methods BT-CMML pts from Mayo Clinic (n=153, 31%), MD Anderson (n=195, 40%), and 7 centers of the Groupe Francophone des Myélodysplasies (n=145, 29%) were included after IRB approval. ICC 2022 criteria defined CMML and AML. Pt data were collected at initial diagnosis or referral at CP and again at BT. Clonal dominance was inferred from a natural log-fold difference of mutation variant allele fractions (VAF). OS was censored at allogeneic stem cell transplant (alloSCT). Single-cell multiomic analyses used the Tapestri platform (Mission Bio). Statistics used R. Results Among 1,883 cases of CMML with a median follow up of 96 mo, 493 (26%) underwent BT. The median age at CP and BT was 69 and 71 years, respectively. BT-CMML pts were predominantly male (69%) and had proliferative CMML (53%) or CMML-1 (69%) in CP; 39% and 33% were considered high-risk by CPSS-Mol and BLAST-Mol criteria, respectively. The median time to BT was 16 mo (interquartile range 7-35 mo) and was not different in males vs females (p=0.60). Compared to their CP parameters (p<0.001 each), pts at BT had lower median hemoglobin (10.8 vs 9.2 g/dL) and platelets (100 vs 44 x109/L) but higher leukocytes (13.9 vs 16.3 x109/L), peripheral blasts (0% vs 14%), and bone marrow blasts (6% vs 32%). Blasts exhibited mostly monocytic (57%) or immature myeloid (40%) differentiation. Abnormal karyotypes (AK) were more prevalent at BT (25% vs 62%, p<0.001). Among 318 pts with paired karyotype data, 221 (69%) had a normal karyotype (NK) in CP, of which 123 (56%) remained normal at BT and 98 (44%) acquired new abnormalities. Conversely, 97 (31%) pts had an AK in CP, of which 67 (69%) acquired abnormalities or increased clonal metaphases (6%), 23 (24%) remained stable, and 7 (7%) reverted to a NK at BT. Overall, 46% acquired and 8% lost a clonal cytogenetic abnormality, while 46% remained unchanged. Numeric (37%) and structural (30%) changes were most common. Complex (12% vs 3%) and monosomal (5% vs 2%) karyotypes were more frequent at BT than in CP. Only 6 (2%) pts acquired an AML-defining rearrangement at BT. Mutational data were available for 248 paired cases. The number of somatic mutations was higher at BT (median 3 vs 4, p<0.001). Mutations in RUNX1 (27% vs 39%), NRAS (23% vs 33%), KRAS (11% vs 17%), FLT3 (6% vs 15%), NPM1 (0% vs 11%), IDH2 (5% vs 11%), and CEBPA (3% vs 10%) were more frequent at BT (all p<0.05). At BT, the average VAF of the dominant clone increased in 32%, decreased in 35%, and remained unchanged (delta ≤5%) in 33%. The most frequent dominant clones both in CP and at BT had mutations in TET2 (8% vs 4%) or co-dominant mutations involving SRSF2-TET2 (7% vs 3%). Mutational clonal evolution was observed in 72%, with mutations gained in 45% and lost from the dominant clone in 19%. The most gained mutations at BT were in NRAS (15%) and RUNX1 (13%). Single cell proteogenomic analyses in 4 selected CP and BT pts shed light on the impact of NRAS and RUNX1 mutations on clonal hierarchies and differentiation. Among 196 fully evaluable cases, a new cytogenetic and/or molecular aberration was uniquely gained in 106 (54%) cases and lost in 9 (5%), with 40 (20%) both gaining and losing a genetic alteration. Forty-one (21%) patients had no identifiable genetic change between CP and BT, suggesting driver alterations outside of that detected by routine analyses. Median OS was 31 mo from CMML diagnosis and 5.6 mo from BT. Compared to supportive care, treatment in CP did not prolong median time to BT (14 vs 17 mo, p=0.91) or OS (35 vs 29 mo, p=0.05), regardless of intensity. After BT, median OS was 1.2 mo with supportive care (n=83), 8.7 mo with a hypomethylating agent (HMA, n=39), 10 mo with HMA plus venetoclax (n=37), 7.8 mo with chemotherapy (n=91), and 31 mo in pts who underwent alloSCT (n=57). Conclusions In this large BT-CMML cohort, cytogenetic (46% gained, 8% lost) or mutational (45% gained, 19% lost) driver events were identified in 79% of pts, with 21% having no identifiable changes by conventional testing. Whole genome/transcriptome analyses are underway in this subgroup to identify novel drivers of BT.

Abstract Recent updates to the monocyte count thresholds for diagnosing chronic myelomonocytic leukemia (CMML) have recognized oligomonocytic CMML (OM-CMML) as an early stage within the CMML spectrum. However, the clinical validity of these revised criteria remains uncertain without considering biological factors and might misclassify myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) with mild monocytosis as CMML. To characterize the genomic landscape of OM-CMML, we evaluated OM-CMML (n=249), MDS (n=304) and myelodysplastic CMML (MD-CMML, n=358) patients (pts) treated at three academic institutions. Targeted next-generation sequencing was performed on bone marrow (BM) at initial diagnosis or first referral. OM-CMML was characterized by lower frequencies of biallelic TET2 (biTET2) and RAS pathway (RASp) gene mutations (BRAF, CBL, KRAS, NF1, NRAS and PTPN11) compared to MD-CMML (p<0.001) but higher frequencies than MDS (p<0.001). BM monocyte frequencies, assessed morphologically, were higher in OM-CMML than in MDS (p<0.001) but lower than in MD-CMML (p<0.001), indicating that OM-CMML is a heterogenous group including true CMML and distinct MDS subsets. Unsupervised hierarchical clustering based on genomic alterations across all cases (n=911) identified three distinct clusters: 1) TP53 alterations (predominantly multihit TP53) and complex karyotype (TP53-complex); 2) biTET2 or TET2-SRSF2 co-mutation (biTET2/SRSF2); 3) a heterogenous group lacking these features (not otherwise specifiable [NOS]). Among OM-CMML pts, 11%, 34% and 55% belonged to these clusters, respectively. Model-based unsupervised clustering further identified 9 unique clusters that could be consolidated into 6 groups: 1) TP53-complex; 2) biTET2/SRSF2; 3) SF3B1 (without biTET2 or SRSF2); 4) SRSF2 without TET2 and frequent IDH2 mutations (SRSF2-IDH2); 5) ASXL1 and U2AF1 mutations and copy number alterations (CNA-ASXL1/U2AF1); 6) no somatic mutations (No mutation). biTET2/SRSF2 group exhibited monocytic bias with higher AMC, PB and BM monocyte % even among OM-CMML cases. This bias was not attributed to higher RAS pathway mutation frequencies, as biTET2/SRSF2 cases had similar RASp mutation frequencies but lower median variant allele frequencies for RASp mutations compared to NOS cases (9% vs. 21%, p=0.029). PB monocyte partitioning using flow cytometry (FC) in a subset of OM-CMML pts (n=50) demonstrated higher frequency of classical monocytosis (>94% CD14+/CD16- monocytes) in biTET2/SRSF2 vs other OM-CMML. To further determine if biTET2/SRSF2 genotype defines a distinct biological subgroup, we performed RNA-sequencing of BM CD34+ cells from healthy donors (n=15) and pts with OM-CMML (n=12), MD-CMML (n=14) and MDS (n=55). Unsupervised clustering based on gene expression profiles revealed that biTET2/SRSF2 clustered irrespective of their diagnostic group with greater dispersion being observed based on diagnosis. MDS and CMML with biTET2/SRSF2 had less differentially expressed genes compared to MDS and CMML with biTET2/SRSF2 relative to other MDS and CMML genotypes. Among 138 OM-CMML pts in whom progression to overt CMML was evaluable, 37 (27%) progressed to overt CMML of which 26 (70%) belonged to the biTET2/SRSF2 group. Competing risk analysis confirmed higher cumulative incidence and shorter time to CMML progression among biTET2/SRSF2 OM-CMML. Using ElasticNet regression we identified BM monocytosis and 14 genomic variables (including biTET2 and TET2-SRSF2) as predictors of overt CMML progression among OM-CMML. We developed a score-based model able to predict progression with high reliability (AUC 0.805, sensitivity 0.70, specificity 0.76). Model accuracy was confirmed by optimism-corrected bootstrap internal validation (AUC 0.668). Monocytic bias, BM classical monocytosis (>94% CD16- monocytes) and higher overt CMML progression in biTET2/SRSF2 was confirmed in a validation cohort (28, 66 and 22 pts with OM-CMML, MDS and MD-CMML, respectively). BM monocytosis of biTET2/SRSF2 was confirmed in this cohort with morphologic and FC monocyte frequency quantification having high concordance (r=0.737, p<0.001). Genomic subgroup analysis discriminated survival outcomes more reliably than diagnostic categories alone. Our findings suggest that the presence of biTET2 or TET2-SRSF2 co-mutations, combined with BM monocytosis, can more reliably identify true CMML cases within the OM-CMML spectrum. Integrating genomic determinants into the CMML diagnostic framework enhances diagnostic accuracy.

Abstract RAS pathway (RASp) mutations induce proliferative features, and promote transformation in chronic myelomonocytic leukemia (CMML). However, the unique clonal landscape and hierarchy of distinct RASp mutations remain unexplored. To characterize the landscape, architecture, and implications of unique RASp mutations in CMML, we evaluated a cohort of 814 patients with CMML. We identified 461 RASp mutations among 342 patients (42%). N/KRAS and CBL mutations were the most common, frequently involved the P-loop or RING domains, respectively, and frequently appeared as dominant events (63% and 65%, respectively). BRAF, NF1, and PTPN11 mutations spanned throughout the gene structure, and frequently appeared as subclonal events (75%, 64%, and 59%, respectively). CBL mutations frequently occurred in codominance with SRSF2 and multihit TET2, and were enriched for KIT mutations. PTPN11 mutations more frequently co-occurred with SETBP1 and DNMT3A mutations, and were infrequently codominant with TET2 or ASXL1. RASp mutations predicted for shorter overall survival (hazard ratio [HR], 1.55; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.15-2.07; P = .0075) and leukemia-free survival (LFS; HR, 1.67; 95% CI, 1.26-2.20; P = .0011), influenced outcomes of myelodysplastic and TET2 mutant CMML, and cooperated with IDH2 and RUNX1 mutations to induce shorter LFS. These data set the bases for refined genomic classifications of CMML, and underscore the need to develop RAS-directed therapies for patients with CMML.

We sought to develop a survival model in chronic myelomonocytic leukemia (CMML) that is primarily based on clinical variables and examine additional impact from mutations and karyotype. 457 molecularly-annotated patients were considered. Multivariable analysis identified circulating Blasts ≥2% (1 point), Leukocytes ≥13 x 109/L (1 point), and severe (2 points) or moderate (1 point) Anemia as preferred risk variables in developing a clinical risk Stratification Tool for overall survival (OS), acronymized to "BLAST": low-risk (0 points; median 63 months); intermediate-risk (1 point; median 28 months; HR 2.2, 95% CI 1.6-3.0), and high-risk (2-4 points; median 13 months; 5.4, 4.1-7.3); the corresponding 3/5 year OS rates were 68%/53%, 43%/18%, and 12%/1%. BLAST model performance (AUC 0.77/0.85 at 3/5-years) was shown to be comparable to that of the molecular CMML-specific prognostic scoring system (CMML-mol; AUC 0.73/0.75) and the international prognostic scoring system-molecular (IPSS-M; AUC 0.73/0.74). Multivariable analysis of mutations and karyotype identified PHF6MUT and TET2MUT as being "favorable" and DNMT3AMUT, U2AF1MUT, BCORMUT, SETBP1MUT, ASXL1MUT, NRASMUT, PTPN11MUT, RUNX1MUT, TP53MUT, and adverse karyotype, "unfavorable". Molecular information was subsequently encoded in a combined clinical-molecular risk model (BLAST-mol; AUC 0.80/0.86 at 3/5-years) that included the aforementioned BLAST clinical risk variables and a 3-tiered molecular risk score. BLAST and BLAST-mol were subsequently validated by two separate external cohorts. Independent risk factors for blast transformation included DNMT3AMUT, ASXL1MUT, PHF6WT, leukocytes ≥13 x 109/L, and ≥2% circulating or ≥10% bone marrow blasts. The current study proposes an easy to implement, globally applicable, and molecularly adaptive risk model for CMML.

ABSTRACT Patients with newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia (ND‐AML) derive variable survival benefit from venetoclax + hypomethylating agent (Ven‐HMA) therapy. The primary objective in the current study was to develop genetic risk models that are predictive of survival and are applicable at the time of diagnosis and after establishing treatment response. Among 400 ND‐AML patients treated with Ven‐HMA at the Mayo Clinic, 247 (62%) achieved complete remission with (CR) or without (CRi) count recovery. Multivariable analysis–derived hazard ratios (HR), including 1.8 for European LeukemiaNet (ELN) adverse karyotype, 4.7 for KMT2Ar , 1.7 for TP53 MUT , 2.6 for KRAS MUT , and 2.1 for IDH2 WT were applied to develop an HR‐weighted risk model: low, intermediate, and high; respective median survival censored for allogeneic stem cell transplant (ASCT) (3‐year survival) were “not reached” (67%), 19.1 (33%), and 7.1 months (0%). In patients achieving CR/CRi, adverse karyotype, KMT2Ar , KRAS MUT , IDH2 WT predicted inferior survival, allowing for a complementary response‐stratified risk model. The model was externally validated and was shown to be superior to the ELN 2024 risk model (AIC 179 vs. 195 and AUC 0.77 vs. 0.69). Survival was inferior with failure to achieve CR/CRi or not receiving ASCT; 3‐year survival for high‐risk with or without ASCT was 42% versus 0% ( p < 0.01); intermediate 72% versus 43% ( p = 0.06); and low‐risk 88% versus 78% ( p = 0.53). The Mayo genetic risk models offer pre‐treatment and response‐based prognostic tools for ND‐AML treated with Ven‐HMA. The current study underscores the prognostically indispensable role of achieving CR/CRi and ASCT.

Introduction: Somatic mutations in RAS pathway genes are present in ~30% of patients with chronic myelomonocytic leukemia (CMML) and are usually associated with myeloproliferative features. Whether mutations in distinct RAS pathway genes share similar genomic context and have similar implications remains unknown. Such an understanding might inform future studies evaluating genotype-specific therapies (RAS-codon specific and pan-RAS inhibitors) or cooperative leukemogenic mechanisms. This multicenter study examines the landscape of RAS pathway mutations (RASMT) in CMML. Methods: Newly diagnosed CMML patients evaluated at MD Anderson Cancer Center (n=449, 54%) and Mayo Clinic (n=383, n=46%) were included after IRB approval. Clonal relationships were tested using Pearson goodness-of-fit. Clones with the highest variant allele frequency (VAF), or with VAF close to 40% were defined as dominant, and those present at VAF &lt;20% in the presence of another dominant clone were defined as subclonal. RASMT genes included NRAS, KRAS, BRAF, CBL, CBLC, PTPN11 and NF1. Standard statistical measures were applied. Results: Among 832 CMML patients (median age 71 years, 68% male) 387 (47%) had myeloproliferative (MP) and 445 (53%) had myelodysplastic (MD) CMML. A total of 350 (42%) patients had RASMT with higher prevalence among MP-CMML compared to MD-CMML (55% vs 31%, p&lt;0.001). Among patients with RASMT, 262 (32%), 59 (7%), 20 (2%), 6 (&lt;1%) and 3 (&lt;1%) had 1, 2, 3, 4 or 5 distinct RASMT, respectively. Importantly, 17 patients harbored a RASmt as the only detectable somatic mutation, with KRASMT being the most frequent (n=10, 59%), including 3 (18%) patients with &gt;1 RASMT. Among RASMT patients, a trend for higher hemoglobin (12.7 vs 10.8 g/dL, p=0.054) was observed in NF1MT CMML and lower WBC (14.4 vs 27.9 x109/L, p=0.067) values in CBLMT CMML. In total, 479 somatic mutations in RAS pathway genes were identified the most frequent involving NRAS (n=169, 35%) followed by CBL (n=120, 25%), KRAS (n=102, 21%), PTPN11 (n=38, 8%), NF1 (n=34, 7%), BRAF (n=11, 2%) and CBLC (n=5, 1%). Most frequently involved codons for each RAS pathway gene were as follows: G594 (n=3) for BRAF, R420 (n=22) and C404 (n=15) for CBL, G12 (n=41; G12D: 13, G12C: 3) and A146 (n=16) for KRAS, G12 (n=116; G12D: 74, G12C: 5) for NRAS and A72 (n=8) for PTPN11. CBLMT CMML had higher ASXL1 (58% vs 44%, p=0.011), BRAF (8% vs 4%, p=0.017), IDH2 (10% vs 4%, p=0.024), KIT (5% vs 1%, p=0.038), SRSF2 (54% vs 40%, p=0.004), TET2 (59% vs 47%, p=0.019) and ZRSR2 (10% vs 4%, p=0.014) co-mutation frequency. Of note, DNMT3A mutations were mutually exclusive of CBLMT CMML (0% vs 7%, p=0.007), and multihit TET2 was more common among TET2MT/CBLMT vs TET2MT/CBLWT CMML (82% vs 67%, p =0.039). CMML with NF1 mutations had higher BCORL1 (8% vs 0%, p=0.005), PTPN11 (15% vs 3%, p=0.014) and SETBP1 (23% vs 8%, p=0.022) mutational cooccurrences. NRASMT CMML was enriched for ASXL1 (53% vs 43%, p=0.042), ETNK1 (5% vs 1%, p=0.004), GATA2 (4% vs 1%, p=0.034) and STAG2 (4% vs 1 %, p=0.023) mutations but had lower JAK2 (1% vs 6%, p=0.036) and TP53 (1% vs 5%, p=0.022) mutational frequency. PTPN11 mutations were associated with higher NF1 (29% vs 7%, p=0.014), SETBP1 (27% vs 9%, p=0.01) and WT1 (6% vs &lt;1%, p=0.014) mutational cooccurrences and lower SRSF2 (23% vs 42%, p=0.05) frequency. We evaluated RAS mutant clonal dominance in 253 (72%) RASMT patients. NRAS (63% vs 38%), KRAS (63% vs 38%) and CBL (65% vs 35%) mutations were more frequently observed as dominant clones while PTPN11 (44% vs 56%), BRAF (25% vs 75%) and NF1 (35% vs 65%) mutations were more frequently subclonal events, particularly of TET2, ASXL1 or SRSF2 mutant clones. Presence of a RAS pathway mutation was associated with shorter LFS (36 vs 53 months, HR 1.5, 95% CI 1.1-2.2, p=0.020), with presence of multiple RAS mutations shortening LFS further (53, 43, 27 months for 0, 1 and &gt;1, p=0.017). PTPN11 mutations predicted for shorter OS (18 vs 39 months, HR 1.7, 95% CI 1.0-2.8, p=0.035) and LFS (14 vs 36 months, HR 1.9, 95% CI 1.2-2.9, p=0.008). Presence of &gt;1 RAS pathway mutation was associated with shorter OS in ASXL1MT/TET2MT CMML compared to those with no RAS mutations (24 vs 53 months, HR 4.2, 95% CI 1.6-10.8, p=0.004). Conclusions: RAS mutations exhibit distinct genomic features and clonal hierarchy in CMML and cooperate with other somatic mutations to drive clinical outcomes. This study forms the foundation for assessment of novel RAS pathway inhibitors in CMML.

Introduction HMAs are the only approved therapy for CMML. In order to improve response rates and survival, the addition of VEN has been utilized in both CMML and after blast transformation (CMML-BT) with conflicting results in small single center studies. To clarify the role of upfront HMA+VEN in CMML and CMML-BT, we performed a large multicenter analysis. Methods We included patients with HMA-naïve CMML and CMML-BT treated with combination HMA and VEN from 4 academic centers. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS) with secondary outcomes including overall response rate (ORR) by 2015 MDS/MPN IWG criteria for CMML and 2022 ELN criteria for CMML-BT. To better appreciate the benefit of adding VEN to HMA treatment, we also performed 1:1 propensity score matched (PSM) analysis of patients treated with HMA alone as upfront therapy for CMML or CMML-BT. Matching was based on age, sex, ECOG performance status, CPSS-Mol, blood counts, peripheral and bone marrow blasts. Results Eighty-nine patients were treated with frontline HMA+VEN, 51 CMML and 38 CMML-BT (5 had received HMA alone for prior CMML). The median age was 71 years, 70% were male, and 83% had ECOG 0-1. Among CMML patients, 55% had MP-CMML subtype, 65% had CMML-2 and 12%, 30%, 58% were CPSS-mol intermediate-1, intermediate-2 and high risk, respectively. In the entire cohort, ASXL1 (63%), TET2 (47%), SRSF2 (39%) and RUNX1 (27%) were the most commonly mutated genes and 55% of patients harbored a RAS mutation ( KRAS [20%], NRAS [18%], CBL [13%], NF1 [11%], PTPN11 [9%]). For HMA combination partner, 46 (52%) were treated with azacitidine, 35 (39%) with decitabine, and 8 (9%) with both during their VEN course. During a median follow-up time of 15.8 months (mos) 52 patients (58%) died: 23 (45%) with CMML and 29 (76%) with CMML-BT. Among CMML patients, the ORR was 90%, including complete remission (CR) in 22%, complete cytogenic remission (CCR) in 4%, optimal marrow response (CMR) in 50%, and partial marrow response (PMR) in 6%. The OS of CMML patients was 25.1 mo (95% CI 15.7 - NR). A PSM population of HMA patients matched to HMA+VEN treated patients showing similar baseline characteristics. ORR was significantly higher with HMA+VEN (95%) as compared those treated with HMA alone (46%), p &lt; 0.001. However, there was no significant OS difference between HMA+VEN vs HMA alone (19.1 mos vs 19.1 mos, p = 0.85, Figure 1). For CMML-BT patients, the ORR of HMA+VEN was 81% including CR in 17%, CR with partial hematologic recover (CRh) in 3%, CR with incomplete hematologic recovery (CRi) in 28%, morphologic leukemia-free state (MLFS) in 22% and partial response (PR) in 11%. The OS of CMML-BT patients was 8 mos (95% CI 4.6 - 26.2). A PSM population of CMML-BT patients treated with HMA alone showed a significantly increased ORR with HMA+VEN (82% vs 40%, p = 0.039). However, there was no difference in OS (7.49 mos vs 9.26 mos, p = 0.83, Figure 2). Among HMA-VEN treated patients, achievement of a CR was associated with an improved OS in the CMML (HR 0.31, 95% CI 0.13 - 0.75) and CMML-BT (HR 0.37, 95% CI 0.19 - 0.74). No predictors of response were identified, including the presence of a RAS mutation. In terms of safety, 7 patients (7.9%) had a grade 3/4 (G3/4) neutropenic infection and 2 patients (2.2%) had a G3/4 hemorrhagic event while being treated with HMA+VEN. A total of 29 patients went on to receive allogeneic transplant (alloSCT): 22 (43%) with CMML and 7 (18%) with CMML-BT. CMML patients who underwent alloSCT after HMA+VEN were younger as compared to non-transplanted patients (64 vs 74 years, p &lt; 0.0001), but had otherwise similar baseline characteristics including stage, CPSS-mol category and prevalence of RAS mutations. Similarly, CMML-BT patients bridged to alloSCT were younger (66 vs 74 years, p &lt; 0.002) and had a better ECOG performance status (p = 0.047). Of patients who received alloSCT, 10 patients (34%) died, 5 with CMML and 5 with CMML-BT. The median OS after alloSCT was 26.7 mo. Conclusions Although the use of VEN with HMA in the upfront treatment of CMML and AML secondary to CMML results in higher response rates compared to HMA alone, this combination does not improve survival based on this multi-center PSM analysis. The current sample size of CMML-BT may limit detection of OS differences between treatment groups. The role of VEN to reduce blasts and serve as a bridge to alloSCT, particularly after HMA failure, requires further investigation in larger studies in both the CMML and CMML-BT populations.

AbstractThe current study was approached with the assumption that response to induction chemotherapy, in acute myeloid leukemia (AML), overshadows pre‐treatment risk variables in predicting survival and therefore be used as an anchor for a simplified risk model. We considered 759 intensively‐treated patients with AML, not promyelocytic: median age 60 years; primary 66%, secondary 25%, and therapy‐related 9%; European LeukemiaNet cytogenetic risk category favorable 8%, intermediate 61%, and adverse 31%. Complete remission with (CR) or without (CRi) count recovery was achieved in 608 (80%) patients. After a median follow‐up of 22 months, 503 deaths, 272 relapses, and 257 allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplants (AHSCTs) were recorded. Multivariable analysis identified failure to achieve CR/CRi (HR 3.8, 95% CI 3.1–4.8), adverse karyotype (2.2, 1.8–2.8), and age >55 years (2.1, 1.6–2.7) as main risk factors for survival. HR‐weighted scoring resulted in four‐tiered risk stratification: low (0 points; N = 183), intermediate‐1 (1 point; N = 331), intermediate‐2 (2 points; N = 117), and high (≥3 points; N = 128), with respective median survival (5‐year rate) not reached (68%), 34 (37%), 13 (20%), and 5 (5%) months (p < .001). FLT3‐ITD mutation was associated with inferior survival in intermediate‐1 (p = .004) and TP53 in intermediate‐2 (p = .06) and high (p = .02) risk disease; the latter was fully accounted for by the close association between TP53 mutation and complex/monosomal karyotype while the observations regarding FLT3‐ITD were not affected by treatment with midostaurin. AHSCT had a favorable impact on survival, most apparent in intermediate‐1 (p < .001), intermediate‐2 (p = .03), and high (p = .01) risk disease. The proposed 3‐factor survival model offers a novel prototype that is amenable to further enhancement by molecular information and was validated in an external cohort of 1032 intensively‐treated AML patients.