Citations

AbstractBackgroundVEXAS (vacuoles, E1 enzyme, X‐linked, autoinflammatory, somatic) syndrome is an autoinflammatory disease with frequent cutaneous manifestations.MethodsWe conducted a retrospective study of all patients with genetically confirmed VEXAS syndrome seen at our institution. Available clinical photographs and skin biopsy slides were reviewed.ResultsCutaneous manifestations developed in 22/25 (88%) patients with VEXAS syndrome. From this group, 10/22 (45%) developed skin involvement before or at the time of other clinical features of VEXAS. Twenty distinct dermatologic presentations of VEXAS from 14 patients were reviewed, and histopathologic patterns were classified as follows: neutrophilic urticarial dermatosis (n = 5, 25%), leukocytoclastic/urticarial vasculitis (n = 4, 20%), urticarial tissue reaction (n = 4, 20%), neutrophilic dermatosis (n = 3, 15%), neutrophilic panniculitis (n = 2, 10%), and nonspecific chronic septal panniculitis (n = 2, 10%). Common systemic findings included macrocytic anemia (96%), fever (88%), thrombocytopenia (76%), weight loss (76%), ocular inflammation (64%), pulmonary infiltrates (56%), deep venous thrombosis or pulmonary embolism (52%), and inflammatory arthritis (52%).ConclusionsCutaneous involvement is a common feature of VEXAS syndrome, and histopathologic findings exist on a spectrum of neutrophilic inflammatory dermatoses.

Abstract Background In the United States, rare disease (RD) is defined as a condition that affects fewer than 200,000 individuals. Collectively, RD affects an estimated 30 million Americans. A significant portion of RD has an underlying genetic cause; however, this may go undiagnosed. To better serve these patients, the Mayo Clinic Program for Rare and Undiagnosed Diseases (PRaUD) was created under the auspices of the Center for Individualized Medicine (CIM) aiming to integrate genomics into subspecialty practice including targeted genetic testing, research, and education. Methods Patients were identified by subspecialty healthcare providers from 11 clinical divisions/departments. Targeted multi-gene panels or custom exome/genome-based panels were utilized. To support the goals of PRaUD, a new clinical service model, the Genetic Testing and Counseling (GTAC) unit, was established to improve access and increase efficiency for genetic test facilitation. The GTAC unit includes genetic counselors, genetic counseling assistants, genetic nurses, and a medical geneticist. Patients receive abbreviated point-of-care genetic counseling and testing through a partnership with subspecialty providers. Results Implementation of PRaUD began in 2018 and GTAC unit launched in 2020 to support program expansion. Currently, 29 RD clinical indications are included in 11 specialty divisions/departments with over 142 referring providers. To date, 1,152 patients have been evaluated with an overall solve rate of 14.1% and as high as 66.7% depending on the phenotype. Noteworthy, 42.7% of the solved or likely solved patients underwent changes in medical management and outcome based on genetic test results. Conclusion Implementation of PRaUD and GTAC have enabled subspecialty practices advance expertise in RD where genetic counselors have not historically been embedded in practice. Democratizing access to genetic testing and counseling can broaden the reach of patients with RD and increase the diagnostic yield of such indications leading to better medical management as well as expanding research opportunities.

SummaryLeukaemic stem cell (LSC) gene expression has recently been linked to prognosis in patients with acute myeloid leukaemia (17‐gene LSC score, LSC‐17) and myelodysplastic syndromes. Although chronic myelomonocytic leukaemia (CMML) is regarded as a stem cell disorder, the clinical and biological impact of LSCs on CMML patients remains elusive. Making use of multiple independent validation cohorts, we here describe a concise three‐gene expression signature (LSC‐3, derived from the LSC‐17 score) as an independent and robust prognostic factor for leukaemia‐free and overall survival in CMML. We propose that LSC‐3 could be used to supplement existing risk stratification systems, to improve prognostic performance and guide management decisions.

Abstract Acute graft-versus-host disease (GVHD), a serious complication of allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT), frequently involves the skin. Since clinicopathologic features of GVHD can mimic those of certain drug eruptions, accurate diagnosis can be challenging. We aimed to develop a tissue-based molecular assay to improve differentiation of GVHD from vacuolar interface drug eruption in the post-HCT period. After identifying 62 putative tissue-based biomarkers using unbiased molecular methods, we incorporated 26 into a quantitative RT-PCR assay. We tested skin biopsy specimens showing vacuolar interface changes attributable to either acute GVHD (n=67) or drug reaction (n=17), as classified by meticulous review of clinical features and course. Data were incorporated into clinical-molecular fusion diagnostic models. Significant differences in the expression of several genes, including MX1, MNDA, OAS, LIMA1, GSTM5, and SPP1, were detected between the two diagnostic groups (p<0.05). The optimal fusion model, which incorporated quantitative expression of MX1, MNDA, OAS, and GSTM5, as well as the clinical feature of diarrhea, imparted high diagnostic accuracy (receiver operating characteristic area-under-curve: 0.89). This novel tissue-based diagnostic molecular assay and fusion model demonstrates potential to improve distinction of GVHD from drug eruptions in the post-HCT setting. Multicenter validation studies are required.

AbstractAcute myeloid leukemia (AML) is a challenging cancer in terms of achieving and maintaining long‐duration remissions. Many novel therapies have been added to the standard regimen (combining cytarabine and anthracycline “7 + 3”) to achieve such goals. Nilotinib is an oral multikinase inhibitor that is active against KIT tyrosine kinase, an important stem cell target. In this trial, we combined nilotinib with 7 + 3 induction (daunorubicin 60 mg/m2), high‐dose cytarabine consolidation, and subsequently, if the patient was a candidate, for 2 years' maintenance therapy in patients with AML and KIT (CD117) expression. Patients were allowed to proceed to allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) if deemed necessary. Our primary goal was increased complete remission rate with this combination. Thirty‐four patients (with a median age 58.5 years) were enrolled on a single‐arm phase II bi‐institutional study; 21 (62%) patients achieved remission. The complete remission rate was 78% in evaluable patients. Thirteen of 34 (38%) patients had allogeneic HCT, all thirteen of which are still alive (100%). Common (>20%) grade 3 non‐hematological toxicities included febrile neutropenia, hypophosphatemia, elevated liver enzymes, and hypertension. Only one patient (3%) died in induction due to liver failure, which was thought secondary to daunorubicin. Our current study reveals good outcomes in patients who received HCT and may warrant a larger study to confirm our findings in that specific population.

AbstractDisease OverviewAtypical chronic myeloid leukemia (aCML) and myelodysplastic/myeloproliferative (MDS/MPN) neoplasms, not otherwise specified (NOS), are MDS/MPN overlap neoplasms characterized by leukocytosis, in the absence of monocytosis and eosinophilia, with <20% blasts in the blood and bone marrow.DiagnosisaCML, previously known as aCML, BCR::ABL1 negative, was renamed as aCML by the ICC classification, and as MDS/MPN with neutrophilia by the 5th edition of the WHO classification. This entity is characterized by dysplastic neutrophilia with immature myeloid cells comprising ≥10% of the white blood cell count, with prominent dysgranulopoiesis. MDS/MPN‐NOS consists of MDS/MPN overlap neoplasms not meeting criteria for defined categories such as chronic myelomonocytic leukemia (CMML), MDS/MPN‐ring sideroblasts‐thrombocytosis (MDS/MPN‐RS‐T), and aCML.Mutations and KaryotypeCytogenetic abnormalities are seen in 40–50% of patients in both categories. In aCML, somatic mutations commonly encountered include ASXL1, SETBP1, ETNK1, and EZH2 whereas MDS/MPN‐NOS can be further stratified by mutational profiles into CMML‐like, MDS/MPN‐RS‐T‐like, aCML‐like, TP35‐mutated, and “others”, respectively.Risk StratificationThe Mayo Clinic aCML model stratifies patients based on age >67 years, hemoglobin <10 g/dl, and the presence of TET2 mutations into low‐risk (0–1 points) and high‐risk (>2 points) groups, with median survivals of 18 and 7 months, respectively. MDS/MPN‐NOS patients have traditionally been risk stratified using MDS risk models such as IPSS and IPSS‐R.TreatmentLeukocytosis and anemia are managed like lower risk MPN and MDS. DNMT inhibitors have been used in both entities with suboptimal response rates. Allogeneic stem cell transplant remains the only curative strategy but is associated with high morbidity and mortality.