Arber, Daniel A

ABSTRACT The World Health Organization (WHO) 5th Edition and International Consensus Classification (ICC) have continued to delineate more genetically defined acute leukemias. Both recognize genetic aberrations associated with myelodysplastic syndromes/neoplasms (MDS) as defining MDS‐related AML (AML‐MR). Mutations in RUNX1 are included in this category in the ICC, but not WHO. The current classifications are unclear on how acute leukemias with ambiguous lineage (ALAL), including those of mixed lineage (MPAL) and those without a defined lineage (AUL), should be categorized in the presence of such mutations. Our multi‐institutional study aims to determine the significance of RUNX1 mutation in ALAL compared to de novo AML. Newly diagnosed MPAL, AUL, and AML with RUNX1 mutations were collected. ALAL with MDS‐related cytogenetics, BCR::ABL1 , KMT2A rearrangements, or ZNF384 or BCL11b abnormalities were excluded. We analyzed 17 cases of ALAL and 71 cases of AML that met inclusion criteria. ALAL‐ RUNX1 and AML‐ RUNX1 showed overlapping mutational landscapes with frequent comutations in MDS‐associated genes. No ALAL‐ RUNX1 or AML‐ RUNX1 cases showed concomitant TP53 mutation. ALAL‐ RUNX1 had more bone marrow blasts and more karyotypic abnormalities; however, neither impacted survival, nor did RUNX1 variant allele frequency (VAF). Survival analysis revealed similarly poor outcomes between them. AML‐directed therapies and allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant trended toward improved survival in ALAL‐ RUNX1; however, it did not reach significance. Our results suggest ALAL‐ RUNX1 is associated with younger age, higher blasts, and more karyotypic abnormalities, but has similar clinical and genetic features and outcomes to AML‐ RUNX1 . Our findings suggest, like other MR mutations, RUNX1 ‐mutated ALALs should be included within AML‐MR.

ABSTRACTThe current study includes 910 patients with systemic mastocytosis (SM) seen at the Mayo Clinic from 1968 to 2024. The primary objective was to examine the prognostic contribution of the International Consensus Classification (ICC), in the context of the Mayo Alliance Prognostic System (MAPS) for SM. World Health Organization classification (WHO‐HAEM5) subcategories included (i) indolent/smoldering SM (ISM/SSM; N = 518), (ii) SM associated with another hematological neoplasm (SM‐AHN; N = 273), with the latter including both myeloid and lymphoid neoplasms, (iii) aggressive SM (ASM; N = 106), and (iv) WHO‐defined mast cell leukemia (MCL; N = 13), which included mast cells with both “mature” and “immature” morphology. The ICC‐defined subcategories were mostly similar with the exception that SM‐AHN was replaced by SM associated with another myeloid neoplasm (SM‐AMN; N = 235) and WHO‐defined MCL was replaced by ICC‐defined MCL (N = 8), which included only those with immature MC morphology. Overall survival (OS) was similar between WHO‐defined MCL (median 1.8 years) vs. SM‐AHN (median 2.3 years; p = 0.3) but significantly different between ICC‐defined MCL (median 0.08 years) vs. SM‐AMN (median 2.0 years; p < 0.01). Significant difference in OS was also apparent between ICC‐defined SM‐AMN and SM associated with lymphoid neoplasm (SM‐ALN; median 8.1 years; HR 3.4; p < 0.01). Multivariable analysis confirmed the inter‐independent prognostic contributions of both ICC‐defined morphologic subcategories and MAPS risk variables, including age > 60 years, anemia, alkaline phosphatase > ULN, and platelet count < 150 × 109/L (p < 0.03 in all instances); the same was not true for WHO‐HAEM5‐defined SM subcategories. The addition of mutational information into the multivariable model resulted in ousting anemia and inclusion of ASXL1 (p < 0.01), SRSF2 (p = 0.01), and NRAS (p = 0.01) mutations as additional risk factors. Classification of SM by ICC is prognostically more accurate, compared to WHO‐HAEM5, and strengthens the prognostic contribution of morphology to current clinical and molecular risk models.

Abstract “Nonclassical” myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPNs) and myelodysplastic/myeloproliferative neoplasms (MDS/MPNs) represent a heterogeneous group of malignancies characterized by a wide range of clinical manifestations. Unlike classical MPNs, there is no standardized management approach for these conditions, particularly concerning the indications for and management of allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation. To address this gap, the European Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation (EBMT) Practice Harmonization and Guidelines (PH&G) Committee and the Chronic Malignancies Working Party (CMWP) have collaborated to develop shared guidelines aimed at optimizing the selection and management of patients with these rare forms of neoplasms. A comprehensive review of the literature from the publication of the revised fourth edition of the (2016) World Health Organization classification onward was conducted. A multidisciplinary group of experts in the field convened to produce this document, which was developed through multiple rounds of draft circulation. Key recommendations include the early identification of potential transplant candidates, particularly in cases of chronic neutrophilic leukemia, chronic eosinophilic leukemia (CEL)/CEL, not otherwise specified (CEL-NOS), myeloid/lymphoid neoplasm with eosinophilia and tyrosine kinase gene fusions with FGFR1, JAK2, ABL1, and FLT3 rearrangements, MDS/MPN with neutrophilia/atypical chronic myeloid leukemia, and MDS/MPN, NOS. For patients with MPN, NOS/MPN unclassifiable, standard recommendations for myelofibrosis should be applied. Similarly, in MDS/MPN with thrombocytosis, transplantation is recommended on the basis of established MDS guidelines. Given the current lack of robust evidence, this document will serve as a valuable resource to guide future research activities, providing a framework for addressing critical unanswered questions and advancing the field.

Abstract This retrospective analysis aimed to provide evidence-based risk stratification of TP53-mutated (TP53mut) myeloid neoplasms (MNs). Of 580 MNs harboring TP53mut with variant allele frequency (VAF) ≥2%, 219 (37.8%), 194 (33.4%), 92 (15.9%), and 75 (12.9%) were classified as acute myeloid leukemia (AML), myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) with low blasts (MDS-LB), MDS with excess blasts (MDS-EB)-2, and -EB1 according to the revised fourth edition of the World Health Organization (WHO) classification, respectively. Hierarchical analysis identified the following 4 risk groups with distinct survival: (1) MDS-LB, (2) MDS-EB1/EB2/AML VAF &lt;10%, (3) MDS-EB1/EB2 VAF ≥10%, and (4) AML VAF ≥10%. We next evaluated the impact of allelic status, VAF, and complex karyotype (CK). In our cohort, the significance of biallelic status was limited to MDS with &lt;5% blasts and not for blasts 5% to 9%, as proposed by the International Consensus Classification (ICC), or 5% to 19%, as proposed by the fifth edition of the WHO (WHO-5). MDS-EB1 and -EB2 with VAF ≥10% had comparable survival (9.6 vs 7.2 months; P = .12), regardless of allelic status. Contrary to the ICC proposal, MDS-EB1/EB2 with VAF &lt;10% and CK had poor survival compared with those without CK, comparable to MDS-EB1/EB2 with VAF ≥10% (5.6 vs 26.2 vs 6.3 months; P = .003). Survival of TP53mut AML was poor (median 3.9 months) regardless of allelic/CK status. Thus, using ICC or WHO-5 may underestimate prognosis of MDS with blasts 5% to 19% and 5% to 9%, respectively. Collectively, the hierarchical model acknowledges poor survival of 91.9% TP53mut MDS and AML compared with 36.5% and 80.7% by WHO-5 and ICC, respectively.

ABSTRACTA total of 142 patients with myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPNs) or acute myeloid leukemia (AML) associated with multihit TP53 mutations (mTP53 MUT) were accessed from the Mayo Clinic database and included (i) chronic phase MPN (MPN‐CP; N = 19), (ii) accelerated phase MPN (MPN‐AP; N = 14), (iii) blast phase MPN (MPN‐BP; N = 28), and (iv) AML (N = 81). Concurrent ASXL1 MUT, EZH2 MUT, IDH1,MUT and IDH2 MUT were more common in MPN‐MUTBP‐mTP53 compared to AML‐mTP53 MUT. At median of 11.6 months follow‐up, 124 (87%) deaths and 19 (13%) allogeneic stem cell transplantations (ASCT) were documented. Overall survival (OS), calculated from the time of mTP53 MUT detection, was similar between MPN‐BP‐mTP53 MUT (median 4.6 months) and MPN‐AP‐mTP53 MUT (5.6 months; p = 0.5) but both were inferior to MPN‐CP‐mTP53 MUT (11.6 months, p < 0.01). OS in MPN‐CP‐mTP53 MUT was similar to that of AML‐mTP53 MUT (median 7.4 months, p = 0.07). In multivariable analysis, OS was favorably affected by ASCT (HR 0.4, p = 0.03) and disease stage (i.e., chronic phase disease) or achieving response to pre‐transplant chemotherapy (HR 0.2, p < 0.01) and unfavorably by the presence of concurrent TET2 MUT or DNMT3A MUT (HR 2.7, p < 0.01). Based on these risk factors, a 3‐tiered risk model was constructed: low (no risk factors; N = 18; median OS 23.8 months); intermediate (one risk factor; N = 44; 11.1 months); and high (two or more risk factors; N = 80; 4 months; p < 0.01). The current study highlights the equally detrimental impact of mTP53 MUT on long‐term survival in MPN and AML and identifies predictors of short‐term survival.

ABSTRACT Alterations in the tumor suppressor gene TP53 are common in human cancers and are associated with an aggressive nature. Approximately 8%–12% of myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) and acute myeloid leukemia (AML) harbor TP53 mutations ( TP53 mut ) and present immense challenges due to inherent chemoresistance and poor outcomes. As TP53 mut are more common in older individuals and those with secondary/therapy‐related myeloid neoplasms (MN), their incidence is expected to increase with an aging population and rising proportion of cancer survivors. Treatments used for other MN—intensive chemotherapy, hypomethylating agents, and the BCL‐2 inhibitor venetoclax—do not improve the survival of TP53 mut MN patients meaningfully. Additionally, further development of many promising agents has been discontinued, highlighting the challenges. Widespread acknowledgment of these problems led to the recognition of TP53 mut MN as a distinct entity in the 5th edition of the World Health Organization and International Consensus Classifications. However, critical discrepancies between the two classifications may lead to under‐ or overestimation of the prognostic risk. Here, we review recent advances in the biology, diagnosis, and treatment of TP53 mut MN. The development of TP53 mut MN is positioned at the intersection of age, hereditary predisposition, and anti‐cancer therapies. Precursor TP53 mut clones can be detected years prior to the eventual leukemic transformation—raising the possibility of early intervention. We discuss the two classification systems and the bearing of the discrepancies between the two on timely and effective management. We provide novel evidence in the areas of discrepancies. Finally, we review the current therapeutic landscape and the obvious limitations of the currently used therapies.

ABSTRACT The clinical relevance of TP53 mutations ( TP53 MUT ) in myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPN) and their prognostic interaction with MPN subtype designation has not been systematically studied. In the current study, 114 patients with MPN harboring TP53 MUT (VAF ≥ 2%) were evaluated for overall survival (OS), calculated from the time of TP53 MUT detection: chronic phase myelofibrosis (MF‐CP; N = 61); blast‐phase (MPN‐BP; N = 31) or accelerated‐phase (MPN‐AP; N = 16) MPN, and polycythemia vera/essential thrombocythemia (PV/ET; N = 6). Sixty‐five (57%) patients harbored International Consensus Classification (ICC)‐defined multihit TP53 MUT and 56 (49%) monosomal/complex karyotype (MK/CK). Majority of MPN‐BP (90%) and MPN‐AP (81%) while 39% of MF‐CP and none of PV/ET patients harbored multihit TP53 MUT . OS in MPN‐BP and MPN‐AP was equally dismal (median 6 vs. 4.5 months, respectively; p = 1.0), regardless of multihit configuration ( p = 0.44), while OS in TP53 MUT MPN‐BP/AP ( N = 47; median 4 months) was inferior to that of a separate cohort ( N = 49) with TP53 wild‐type MPN‐BP/AP (median 11 months; p < 0.01). OS in MF‐CP was significantly shorter with multihit versus non‐multihit TP53 MUT (median 10 vs. 35 months; HR 2.9; p < 0.01), independent of other MF‐relevant genetic risk factors, including ASXL1/SRSF2/U2AF1 mutations. Multihit TP53 MUT was also associated with inferior survival following allogeneic stem cell transplant (ASCT): median 9 months versus “not reached” in patients with ( N = 9) versus without ( N = 8) multihit TP53 MUT ( p < 0.01). The presence of multihit or non‐multihit TP53 MUT in MPN‐BP/AP or multihit TP53 MUT in MF‐CP is associated with exceptionally poor prognosis and justifies inclusion into the ICC category of “myeloid neoplasms with mutated TP53 .” By contrast, detection of non‐multihit TP53 MUT , by itself, might not endanger short‐term survival in MF‐CP, PV, or ET.