Rogers, Heesun J.

Abstract Objectives Myeloproliferative neoplasm, unclassifiable (MPN-U, revised to MPN, not otherwise specified in the fifth edition of the World Health Organization classification) is a heterogeneous category of primary marrow disorders with clinical, morphologic, and/or molecular features that preclude classification as a more specific MPN subtype due to stage at diagnosis, overlapping features between MPN subtypes, or the presence of coexisting disorders. Compared with other MPN subtypes, the contribution of the mutational landscape in MPN-U in conjunction with other clinical and morphologic biomarkers to prognosis has been less well investigated. Methods We performed a multicenter, retrospective study of MPN-U (94 cases) to better define the clinicopathologic features, genetic landscape, and clinical outcomes, including subgroups of early-stage, advanced-stage, and coexisting disorders. The Dynamic International Prognostic Scoring System (DIPSS) plus scoring system was applied to assess its relevance to MPN-U prognosis. Results Multivariate analysis demonstrated bone marrow blast count and DIPSS plus score as statistically significant in predicting overall survival. Univariate analysis identified additional potential poor prognostic markers, including abnormal karyotype and absence of JAK2 mutation. Secondary mutations were frequent in the subset analyzed by next-generation sequencing (26/37 cases, 70.3%) with a borderline association between high molecular risk mutations and overall survival. Conclusions This study, as one of the largest of MPN-U studies incorporating both clinicopathologic and molecular data, moves toward identification of biomarkers that better predict prognosis in this heterogeneous category.

AbstractEnumeration of blasts and promonocytes is essential for World Health Organization (WHO) classification of myelomonocytic neoplasms. The accuracy of distinguishing blasts, promonocytes and monocytes, including normal vs abnormal monocytes, remains controversial. The objective of this analysis is to assess concordances between experienced hematopathologists in classifying cells as blasts, promonocytes, and monocytes according to WHO criteria. Each of 11 hematopathologists assessed glass slides from 20 patients [12 with chronic myelomonocytic leukemia (CMML) and 8 with acute myeloid leukemia (AML)] including blood and BM aspirate smears, and limited nonspecific esterase (NSE) stains. All cases were blindly reviewed. Fleiss’ extension of Cohen's kappa for multiple raters was used on these variables, separately for peripheral blood (PB) and bone marrow (BM). Spearman's rank correlation was used to assess correlations between each pair of hematopathologists for each measurement. For the classification based on the sum of blasts and promonocytes in the BM, Fleiss’ kappa was estimated as 0.744. For PB, categorizing patients according to the sum of blasts and promonocytes, Fleiss’ kappa was estimated as 0.949. Distinction of abnormal monocytes from normal monocytes in PB did not achieve a good concordance and showed strong evidence of differences between hematopathologists (P < .0001). The hematopathologists achieved a good concordance rate of 74% in CMML vs AML classification and a high k rate, confirming that criteria for defining the blasts equivalents (blasts plus promonocytes) could be applied consistently. Identification of monocyte subtypes (abnormal vs normal) was not concordant. Our results support the practice of combining blasts/promonocytes into a single category.

It is controversial whether acute myeloid leukemia (AML) patients with 20–29% bone marrow (BM) blasts, formerly referred to as refractory anemia with excess blasts in transformation (RAEBT), should be considered AML or myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) for the purposes of treatment and prognostication. We retrospectively studied 571 de novo AML in patients aged >50 years, including 142 RAEBT and 429 with ≥30% blasts (AML30), as well as 151 patients with 10–19% BM blasts (RAEB2). RAEBT patients were older and had lower white blood count, but higher hemoglobin, platelet count, and karyotype risk scores compared to AML30, while these features were similar to RAEB2. FLT3 and NPM1 mutations and monocytic morphology occurred more commonly in AML30 than in RAEBT. RAEBT patients were treated less often with induction therapy than AML30, whereas allogeneic stem cell transplant frequency was similar. The median and 4‐year OS of RAEBT patients were longer than those of AML30 patients (20.5 vs 12.0 months and 28.6% vs 20.4%, respectively, P = 0.003); this difference in OS was manifested in patients in the intermediate UKMRC karyotype risk group, whereas OS of RAEBT patients and AML30 patients in the adverse karyotype risk group were not significantly different. Multivariable analysis showed that RAEBT (P < 0.0001), hemoglobin (P = 0.005), UKMRC karyotype risk group (P = 0.002), normal BM karyotype (P = 0.004), treatment with induction therapy (P < 0.0001), and stem cell transplant (P < 0.0001) were associated with longer OS. Our findings favor considering de novo RAEBT as a favorable prognostic subgroup of AML. Am. J. Hematol. 89:E193–E199, 2014. © 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.