Geissler, Klaus H.

Background. Study of myeloid neoplasms (MN) has been rapidly transformed by genome characterization. Gene mutations have been reported to influence disease phenotype and risk of disease progression, and the evaluation of mutational status can provide valuable insights to improve the decision-making process. In this international study, we evaluated the clinical impact of mutational screening in patients with CMML, which is characterized by significant clinical and genomic heterogeneity, including a substantial proportion of patients with poor outcomes and unmet needs. Currently, only limited molecular information has been incorporated into CMML classification and prognostication. Methods. We retrospectively collected 3182 CMML patients. We used MOSAIC, an AI-based framework for multimodal analysis in rare cancers (PMID: 38875514) to develop innovative, molecular-based tools for classification and prognostication. An independent validation of the results on 516 prospectively collected patients was performed. Results. Bayesian Networs and Hierarchical Dirichlet Processes were used to identify genomic associations and define a CMML molecular classification. We identified 11 clusters with distinct clinical and genomic features, including splicing machinery, signal transduction and tyrosine kinase pathways aberrations, and high-risk molecular signatures (i.e., AML-like and TP53 mutations). Up to 15% of patients showed clear genomic overlap with other MN. Importantly, extensive multi-color flow cytometry on T lymphocytes, NK and myeloid cells (BD FACSymphony A5 Cell Analyzer) revealed specific immunologic and inflammation signatures associated with molecular subgroups. We then integrated molecular and clinical information to build an international CMML Prognostic Scoring System (iCPSS). We assessed the performance of different statistical and AI-based methods; L1-penalized Cox Model resulted as the best performing method. Selected features included hematological parameters (WBC, Hb, PLT and marrow blasts), cytogenetic abnormalities, and mutations in 10 genes (ASXL1, DNMT3A, EZH2, NRAS, RUNX1, SETBP1, STAG2, TET2, TP53, U2AF1). By Bayesian thresholds optimization, we identified 5 risk classes (i.e., very-low, low, intermediate, high and very-high) with median overall survival (OS) ranging from 99 to 9 months (P<.001), and median leukemia-free survival (LFS) ranging from 210 to 18 months (P<.001). iCPSS provided better patient discrimination across all clinical endpoints compared to currently available prognostic tools, with a Concordance Index (CI) for OS of 0.75 versus 0.62-0.64, respectively. Notably, compared to available scoring systems, up to 40% of patients were reassigned to higher or lower risk classes by the iCPSS. External validation on an independent prospective cohort confirmed that the performance of iCPSS is superior to existing prognostic models (CI for OS 0.71 vs 0.54-0.61, respectively) To demonstrate the clinical utility of iCPSS, we focused on 753 patients who underwent allogeneic stem cell transplantation (HSCT). In multivariable analysis, iCPSS stratified the probability of OS post-HSCT (P<.001) and identified groups of patients with different probabilities of disease relapse, ranging from 9% to 62% (P<.001). We employed a clinical- and genomic-based decision support system (PMID: 38723212) to determine the optimal timing of HSCT. Preliminary analyses indicated that higher-risk patients according to iCPSS (i.e., intermediate, high, and very high) benefit from an immediate HSCT strategy. Lower-risk patients (i.e., very low and low) had life expectancy maximized with delayed HSCT. Modeling decision analysis using iCPSS compared to conventional scores, resulted in a change in transplantation policy for a significant proportion of patients (up to 25%). Conclusion. Molecular information significantly improves the classification of CMML patients, providing a basis for refining diagnostic boundaries with other MN and for a more rational inclusion of patients in clinical trials. The iCPSS demonstrated superior performance over currently available scoring systems and improved HSCT decision making process.

Abstract Mutations in chromatin regulator ASXL1 are frequently identified in myeloid malignancies, in particular ∼40% of patients with chronic myelomonocytic leukemia (CMML). ASXL1 mutations are associated with poor prognosis in CMML and significantly co-occur with NRAS mutations. Here, we show that concurrent ASXL1 and NRAS mutations defined a population of CMML patients who had shorter leukemia-free survival than those with ASXL1 mutation only. Corroborating this human data, Asxl1−/− accelerated CMML progression and promoted CMML transformation to acute myeloid leukemia (AML) in NrasG12D/+ mice. NrasG12D/+;Asxl1−/− (NA) leukemia cells displayed hyperactivation of MEK/ERK signaling, increased global levels of H3K27ac, upregulation of Flt3. Moreover, we find that NA-AML cells overexpressed all the major inhibitory immune checkpoint ligands: programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1)/PD-L2, CD155, and CD80/CD86. Among them, overexpression of PD-L1 and CD86 correlated with upregulation of AP-1 transcription factors (TFs) in NA-AML cells. An AP-1 inhibitor or short hairpin RNAs against AP-1 TF Jun decreased PD-L1 and CD86 expression in NA-AML cells. Once NA-AML cells were transplanted into syngeneic recipients, NA-derived T cells were not detectable. Host-derived wild-type T cells overexpressed programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) and T-cell immunoreceptor with immunoglobulin and ITIM domains (TIGIT) receptors, leading to a predominant exhausted T-cell phenotype. Combined inhibition of MEK and BET resulted in downregulation of Flt3 and AP-1 expression, partial restoration of the immune microenvironment, enhancement of CD8 T-cell cytotoxicity, and prolonged survival in NA-AML mice. Our study suggests that combined targeted therapy and immunotherapy may be beneficial for treating secondary AML with concurrent ASXL1 and NRAS mutations.

Introduction: Chronic myelomonocytic leukemia (CMML), an aggressive myeloid malignancy, can be categorized into two subtypes, proliferative CMML (pCMML) and dysplastic (dCMML), based on a white blood cell (WBC) count of ≥ 13 x 109/L for the former (Arber et al. Blood 2016). While this WBC cut off is somewhat arbitrary, patients with pCMML have unique phenotypic features and a shorter survival. We carried out this study to assess the genomic, transcriptomic and epigenetic landscapes of these two CMML subtypes. Methods: Peripheral blood (PB) and bone marrow (BM) mononuclear cells (MNC) were obtained from WHO-defined CMML patients. Next generation sequencing (NGS) using a 36-gene panel was performed on 350 patients with Illumina HiSeq4000 platform with median read depth of 400X. RNA sequencing (RNA-seq) was performed on 25 patients by bulk whole transcriptome sequencing using Illumina TruSeq. DNA immunoprecipitation sequencing (DIP-seq) was performed on 18 patients using 5-methylcystocine (5mC), 5-hydroxymethylcytosine (5hmC) and bridging monoclonal antibodies with subsequent paired-end sequencing using HiSeq4000. Chromatin immunoprecipitation sequencing (ChIP-seq) was performed on 30 patients with Illumina HiSeq2500 to a depth of 25 million for histone 3 lysine 4 monomethylation (H3K4me1) and histone 3 lysine 4 trimethylation (H3K4me3) and 50 million reads for histone 3 lysine 27 trimethylation (H3K27me3) and Input per sample. Results: Five hundred and seventy-three patients with WHO defined CMML were included; median age 71 years (range 18-95 years), 67% males. 282 patients had pCMML (49%), while 291 (51%) had dCMML. As pre-defined, patients with pCMML were more likely to have higher absolute monocyte counts (p<0.0001), circulating immature myeloid cells (p<0.0001), PB blasts (p<0.0001), and higher lactate dehydrogenase levels (p=0.03). At last follow up 234 (41%) deaths and 70 (20%) leukemic transformations were documented. The median OS for pCMML vs dCMML in this cohort was 19 months vs 30 months (p<0.0001, Figure 1A) and validated in an independent Austrian cohort (p=0.02). Genomic profiling: NGS performed on 350 patients (BM MNC) revealed a higher frequency of NRAS (35 vs 17%, p=0.004), cumulative RAS pathway (NRAS, KRAS, CBL and PTPN11) (73 vs 47%, p=0.001), ASXL1 (p=0.003) and JAK2V617F (p=0.04) mutations in pCMML relative to dCMML (Figure 1B); while dCMML had a higher frequency of SF3B1 mutations (p=0.02). There were no differences in distribution of TET2 and SRSF2Transcriptomic analysis: RNA-seq was performed on PB MNC from RAS pathway mutant pCMML patients (n=12) and RAS pathway wildtype dCMML patients (n=13). Unsupervised clustering analysis resulted in appropriate segregation revealing distinct expression profiles between disease subtypes (Figure 1C). Compared to dCMML, 3729 genes were significantly differentially upregulated and 2658 genes were differentially downregulated in pCMML. Among genes most highly upregulated were mitotic checkpoint kinases including AURBK, PLK1, PLK2, PLK4 andEpigenetic profiling: ChIP-seq of PB and BM MNC from pCMML (n=18) and dCMML (n=12) patients and healthy, age-matched controls (n=10) revealed a global increase in H3K4me1, without significant differences in H3K4me3 or H3K27me3 occupancies (regardless of stratification by ASXL1 mutational status; 40% ASXL1mt in pCMML, 30% dCMML) in pCMML vs dCMML (Figure 1D). H3K4me1 occupancy was also increased in a sequence-specific manner at the transcription start sites of the aforementioned mitotic kinases (PLK1 and WEE1). DIP-seq was performed on PB MNC to assess global differences in 5-mC and 5-hmC levels, between pCMML (n=9) and dCMML (n=9), with no differences seen between the two subtypes (regardless of TET2 mutational status, 40% TET2mt in each subtype) (Figure 1E). Conclusions: Despite the somewhat arbitrary WBC distinction between pCMML and dCMML, clear phenotypic, genetic, transcriptomic, epigenetic and survival differences exist between the two subtypes, providing strong biological rationale for this distinction. pCMML patients have a higher frequency of oncogenic RAS pathway mutations, a unique transcriptomic profile enriched in mitotic check point kinases and a unique chromatin configuration with global and sequence specific enrichment in H3K4me1, with no significant global differences in 5mC, 5hmC, or H3K4me3 and H3K27me3 occupancy. Figure 1 Disclosures Geissler: AOP: Honoraria; Pfizer: Honoraria; AstraZeneca: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; Roche: Honoraria; Abbvie: Honoraria; Ratiopharm: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria. Al-Kali:Astex Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Research Funding. Patnaik:Stem Line Pharmaceuticals.: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.