Maggioni, Giulia

Abstract Myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) are clinically and biologically diverse disorders, emphasizing the need for personalized treatment approaches. The International Working Group for Prognostication of MDS (IWG_PM) recently introduced a molecular classification, referred to as the MDS taxonomy, that categorizes patients into 16 subgroups based on 21 gene mutations, 6 cytogenetic abnormalities, and loss of heterozygosity (LOH) at TP53 and TET2 loci. This study sought to validate and enhance the clinical relevance of the MDS taxonomy by analyzing a large retrospective cohort ( n = 5136) and transcriptomic data from a prospective cohort ( n = 477). The taxonomy successfully identified subgroups with distinct clinical characteristics and disease progression patterns. However, incorporating gene interactions from taxonomy subgroups did not improve the prognostic performance of the Molecular International Prognostic Scoring System (IPSS‐M). We further assessed whether the taxonomy could guide management in patients receiving disease‐modifying therapies. Except for the “ TP53 ‐complex” subgroup, taxonomy classifications were not predictive of hypomethylating agent response or transplant outcomes. Nonetheless, they correlated with overall survival, suggesting that while both IPSS‐M and the taxonomy capture disease biology, other non‐genetic factors may influence treatment response. RNA sequencing confirmed the biological distinctiveness of the taxonomy groups. Transcriptomic profiling of CD34+ bone marrow cells revealed unique, homogeneous gene expression patterns, particularly within the AML‐like, bi TET2 , SF3B1 , and TP53 ‐complex subgroups. Further integration of multi‐omics data may refine MDS classification, improving clinical decision‐making and guiding the development of targeted therapies.

PURPOSE Chronic myelomonocytic leukemia (CMML) is a rare myeloid neoplasm characterized by clinical heterogeneity and is associated with poor outcomes. To date, limited molecular information has been incorporated into disease classification and risk stratification. We aimed to integrate genomic features into the clinical decision-making process for CMML. PATIENTS AND METHODS We analyzed a retrospective cohort of 3013 patients with CMML (training set) and a prospective population of 516 patients (validation set). Using an innovative framework for multimodal data analysis, we developed molecular-based disease taxonomy and prognostication. RESULTS Unsupervised clustering identified nine entities with distinct genomic features and outcomes ( P < .001), including splicing machinery, transcription factors, signal transduction and tyrosine kinase pathways aberrations, and high-risk molecular signatures. Notably, 15% of patients showed molecular/clinical overlap with other myeloid neoplasms. We integrated molecular and clinical information to build the international CMML Prognostic Scoring System (iCPSS), incorporating mutations in nine genes together with hematologic parameters and cytogenetic abnormalities. The iCPSS identified five groups with distinct probability of overall and leukemia-free survival in both training and validation cohorts ( P < .001), outperforming existing prognostic models. Importantly, 55% of patients were reassigned to higher or lower risk groups by the iCPSS. Decision analysis demonstrated that iCPSS could refine the optimal timing of allogeneic transplantation at the individual level; compared with conventional prognostic tools, iCPSS-based decision modeling changed transplantation strategy in 31% of cases, resulting in a significant gain-in-life expectancy for eligible patient population ( P < .001). A federated learning platform was implemented to enable continuous, privacy-preserving model update across multiple centers. CONCLUSION Molecular information improves CMML classification and prognostication, supports more effective clinical decision making, and potentially refines the design of clinical trials.

Abstract Background: The recently published BLAST clinical and BLAST molecular (BLAST-Mol) risk models for chronic myelomonocytic leukemia (CMML) incorporate clinical and molecular variables, respectively, for prediction of overall survival (OS), while BLAST-BT (blast transformation) risk model was predictive of BT free survival (BTFS) [Blood 2025;doi:]. In the current study, the Mayo Clinic (USA) CMML cohort used in the aformentioned study was expanded from 457 to 600 patients and merged with an external cohort of 501 patients from the Humanitas Research Hospital (HRH; Italy) in order to validate the BLAST, BLAST-Mol and BLAST-BT risk models. Methods: CMML diagnosis and sub-categorization were according to the International Consensus Classification, which included CMML-1 (BM/PB blasts &lt;10%/&lt;5%) vs. CMML-2 (BM/PB blasts ≥10%/≥5%) and CMML-MP (leukocytes ≥13 x 10⁹/L) vs. CMML-MD (leukocytes &lt;13 x 10⁹/L) [Blood 2022;140:1200]. The BLAST score is based on clinical risk factors including PB blasts ≥2%, leukocytes ≥13 x 109/L, and severe or moderate anemia resulting in BLAST low, intermediate, and high risk groups. BLAST-Mol also accounts for mutations and karyotype and identifies PHF6 and TET2 as “favorable” and DNMT3A, U2AF1, BCOR, SETBP1, ASXL1, NRAS, PTPN11, RUNX1, TP53, as “unfavorable” mutations with adverse karyotype also considered unfavorable. BLAST-BT variables include absence of PHF6MUT, BM blasts ≥10%, presence of DNMT3AMUT, PB blasts ≥2%, leukocyte count ≥13 x 109 /L, and ASXL1MUT. OS analyses were censored for allogeneic stem cell transplant (ASCT). Conventional statistical methods were employed, using JMP Pro 18.0.0 software SAS Institute, Cary, NC, USA. Results: A total of 1,101 patients (median age 73 years; 67% males) with newly-diagnosed CMML were considered: Mayo cohort 600 and HRH cohort 501. Compared to the HRH cohort, the Mayo cohort was more likely to include CMML-MP (44% vs. 28%; p&lt;0.01), CMML-1 (87% vs. 81%; p&lt;0.01), ASXL1MUT (48% vs. 35%; p&lt;0.01), SRSF2MUT (43% vs. 33%; p&lt;0.01), NRASMUT (15% vs 9%; p&lt;0.01), PHF6MUT (7% vs. 4%; p&lt;0.01), and less likely to harbor TET2MUT (50% vs. 58%; p&lt;0.01), and SF3B1MUT (4% vs. 10%; p&lt;0.01) [Table 1]. At a median follow-up of 55 months (range 0-202), 686 (62%) deaths, 218 (20%) BTs, and 142 (13%) ASCTs were documented. CPSS-mol risk categories at diagnosis included low (N=190; median OS 67 months), intermediate-1(N=271; median 38 months), intermediate-2 (N=407; median 26 months), and high (N=231; median 16 months; p&lt;0.01) [AUC at 5 years 0.75]. BLAST clinical risk distribution was low (N=356; median OS 65 months), intermediate (N=393; median 30 months), and high (N= 352; median 16 months; p&lt;0.01) [Figure 1; AUC at 5 years 0.79]. The corresponding AUCs calculated for the Mayo and HRH cohorts, separately, were 0.81 and 0.76, respectively. BLAST-Mol risk assignments included low (N=357; median OS 66 months), intermediate (N=512; median 27 months) and high (N=232; median 15 months; p&lt;0.01) [Figure 2; AUC at 5 years 0.79]. The corresponding AUCs for the Mayo and HRH cohorts were 0.81 and 0.77, respectively. The 3-year cumulative incidence of BT (accounting for death from another cause) stratified by BLAST-BT risk model included 8% for very low risk (N=54), 11% for low risk (N=332), 20% for intermediate-risk (N=281), 27% for high risk (N=250), and 34% for very high risk (N=176) [p&lt;0.01; Figure 3]. Multivariable analysis of the combined Mayo-Humanitas cohort (N=1,101) identified age &gt;65 years (HR 1.7, 95% CI 1.3-2.1), CMML-2 subtype (HR 2.0; 95% CI 1.6-2.5), and a number of other mutations or co-mutations with BLAST-Mol-independent and CPSS-mol-independent prognostic contribution (to be elaborated further at the time of meeting presentation). Conclusions: The current study validates the predictive performance of the BLAST, BLAST-Mol and BLAST-BT risk models in a large two-center international cohort of patients with CMML. The possibility of further enhancement of the BLAST-Mol model is suggested by the demonstration of independent prognostic relevance from additional mutations and co-mutations.

Abstract Background Blast transformation (BT) occurs in approximately 15-30% of patients with chronic myelomonocytic leukemia (CMML) and remains a leading cause of death. Allogeneic stem cell transplantation (ASCT) is currently the only treatment modality with the potential to cure the disease or prolong survival. Optimal timing of ASCT is critical for maximizing benefit while minimizing risks. To that end, contemporary risk models have focused on the prognostic relevance of individual, as opposed to concurrent mutations. In the current study, we looked into the possibility of prognostic prominence from concurrent mutations in predicting BT in CMML. Methods CMML diagnostic criteria were according to the International Consensus Classification (Arber et al. Blood 2022; 140:1200). A machine-learning hierarchical clustering algorithm was developed and tailored for patient stratification using survival outcomes and co-expression of genomic alterations. To reduce complexity and improve interpretability, we generalized each cluster using existing rule induction algorithms, including the in Trees framework and JRip. The final output was a set of mutation-based cluster definitions, each representing a distinct patient subgroup with similar survival trajectories. Competing risk analysis and cumulative incidence functions were used in downstream evaluation to validate the clinical distinctiveness of the clusters. For all survival analysis, patients were censored at the time of ASCT. Time-to-BT was calculated from the date of diagnosis to the date of BT or ASCT or last contact. BT-free-survival was calculated from the date of diagnosis to the date of BT, ASCT, death, or last contact. Results The core study cohort included 605 patients from the Mayo Clinic, USA, and the external validation cohort 501 patients from Humanitas Cancer Center, Milan, Italy. Using the patient cohort from the Mayo Clinic, machine-learning algorithms identified five molecular clusters with 3-year blast transformation (BT) rates ranging from 0% to 100% (AUC at 3 years 0.78): the order of molecular signature assignment (probability of BT/death from another cause) was i) PHF6MUT/ASXL1WT (0%/17% at 3 years; N=32), ii) NPM1MUT OR BCORMUT/ASXL1MUT OR SETBP1MUT/NRASMUT (48%/30% at 1 year; N=24), iii) RUNX1MUT/ASXL1MUT OR SRSF2MUT/NRASMUT OR EZH2MUT/ASXL1MUT OR SETBP1MUT OR BCORMUT (31%/55% at 3 years; N=132), iv) ASXL1MUT/TET2MUT OR DNMT3AMUT OR JAK2MUT (24%/28% at 3 years; N=123), and v) all other permutations (10%/40% at 3 years; N=294) [Figure 1]. Additional analysis confirmed significant differences in survival between RUNX1MUT/ASXL1MUT vs. RUNX1MUT/ASXL1WT (p&lt;0.01) OR RUNX1WT/ASXL1WT (p&lt;0.01) OR RUNX1WT/ASXL1MUT (p=0.038) [Figure 2]. Similar patterns of differences in survival were also documented for NRAS/SETBP1, ASXL1/EZH2, and NRAS/SRSF2 mutation combinations (Figure 2). A subsequent Cox regression analysis confirmed independent prognostic contributions from “PHF6MUT/ASXL1WT” (HR 5.43e-10; p&lt;0.01), NPM1MUT (HR 26.7; p&lt;0.01), “SETBP1MUT/NRASMUT” (HR 12.7; p&lt;0.01), BCORMUT(HR 5.8; p&lt;0.01), “RUNX1MUT/ASXL1MUT” (HR 2.3, p&lt;0.01), JAK2MUT (HR 2.1; p&lt;0.01), and “ASXL1MUT/TET2MUT” (HR 1.7; p=0.02). The prognostic relevance of “SETBP1MUT/NRASMUT”, “RUNX1MUT/ASXL1MUT”, NPM1MUT, and BCORMUT was validated in the external cohort from Italy (N=501). In the Mayo Clinic cohort, presence of any of the latter mutations was associated with 1-, 3-, and 5-year BT (death from other cause) rates of 27% (21%), 44% (49%), and 44% (51%), respectively (Figure 3). The corresponding values in the absence of high risk mutations were 7% (15%), 15% (37%), and 18% (52%) [Gray's p value &lt;0.01 for both BT and death from another cause; Figure 3]. Similarly, the 1-, 3-, and 5-year BT (death from another cause) rates in the Italian cohort were 21% (19%), 37% (47%), and 42% (54%) in the presence and 8% (14%), 20% (35%), and 24% (45%) in the absence of high-risk mutations (Gray's p value &lt;0.01 for BT and 0.18 for death from another cause; Figure 4). Conclusions In the current study, machine-learning algorithms enabled the discovery of concurrent mutations in CMML that were shown to be prognostically more significant than their individual constituents. Such prognostic interaction might have contributed to some of the discrepancies noted in current literature regarding the prognostic relevance of certain mutations in CMML and should be accounted for in the development of future risk models.

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&lt;.001), and median leukemia-free survival (LFS) ranging from 210 to 18 months (P&lt;.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&lt;.001) and identified groups of patients with different probabilities of disease relapse, ranging from 9% to 62% (P&lt;.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.

Background. The inclusion of gene mutations and chromosomal abnormalities in the 2022 WHO and ICC Classifications of MDS has enhanced diagnostic precision and is expected to improve clinical decision-making process. Although these two systems share similarities, clinically relevant discrepancies still exist and potentially cause inconsistency in their adoption in a clinical setting. In this study on behalf of the International Consortium for MDS (icMDS), we adopted a data-driven approach to provide a harmonization roadmap between the 2022 WHO and ICC classification for MDS. A modified Delphi Process consensus approach is currently ongoing among icMDS experts to finalize a harmonized MDS classification scheme. Methods. We analyzed retrospective international cohorts of patients with a diagnosis of MDS (n=7017) and AML (n=1002) according to WHO 2016 criteria. Hierarchical Dirichlet Processes were applied to define clusters capturing broad dependencies among all gene mutations and cytogenetic abnormalities. To investigate the features of importance and their impact on the clustering process, we employed the SHapley Additive exPlanations approach (SHAP). This allowed to define harmonized labels for each clinical entity. The clinical relevance of the unsupervised clustering was assessed through the analysis of phenotypic features and outcomes among each group. ( Blood 2022;140: 9828-9830) Results. Patients' characteristics are summarized in Table 1. We identified 9 clusters, defined by specific genomic features. The cluster of highest hierarchical importance was characterized by biallelic inactivation of TP53 (biTP53). According to SHAP analysis, bi TP53 was defined as 2 or more TP53 mutations, or 1 mutation with copy number loss or cnLOH. Most patients assigned to bi TP53 cluster had TP53 VAF&gt;10% (77.9%) and complex karyotype (70.1%). Assignment to bi TP53 cluster was irrespective of blast count. Patients with monoallelic TP53 mutation segregated into other clusters. Hierarchically, the second cluster included patients with del(5q). SHAP analysis highlighted 5q deletion alone, or with one other chromosomal abnormality other than -7, and absence of bi TP53, as the most relevant features. Most of these patients had blast counts &lt;5% (88.1%). The third distinct cluster included patients with SF3B1 mutations (in the absence of concurrent del(7q), abn3q26.2, complex karyotype or RUNX1 mutation). Most patients with MDS and SF3B1 mutation had &lt;5% blasts (94.2%). Common co-mutated variants in the SF3B1 cluster included mutant DNMT3A (25.2%) and TET2 (38.3%). Morphologically defined MDS cases (i.e., not meeting criteria for bi TP53, del(5q) or SF3B1) were preferentially assigned to the following additional clusters: SF3B1 and concurrent higher-risk mutations (e.g., RUNX1 and ASXL1); SRSF2 and concomitant TET2 mutations; U2AF1 mutations with del(20q), del(7q) or -7; SRSF2 with TET2 mutations and co-mutational patterns including RUNX1 and ASXL1; and AML-like genomic signatures. Our analyses suggest that morphologically defined MDS is characterized by a large heterogeneity in terms of mutation profiles, not entirely captured by the presence of unilineage versus multilineage dysplasia, percentage of bone marrow blasts, and presence of hypocellularity and fibrosis. To better investigate the continuum between high risk MDS (i.e., patients with ≥10% blasts) and AML, an exploratory comparison was made using a cohort of AML (defined according to WHO 2016) patients analyzed using the same statistical methods. Only a partial overlap in genetic signatures was observed between MDS with ≥10% blasts and AML. However, similarities were observed between the AML-like MDS clusters (characterized by mutant NPM1, bZIP CEBPA, and Core Binding Factor abnormalities) and AML clusters defined by the same genetic signature, thus supporting the classification of these entities as AML, irrespective of blast count. Conclusion. Our study demonstrated the utility of a data-driven approach based on advanced statistical methods to generate a harmonized classification for MDS. Table 2 shows a provisional, hierarchical classification algorithm. Further refinement of entity labels and classification criteria is the subject of the ongoing modified Delphi Process consensus approach among icMDS experts.