Citations

Background: Biallelic TP53 alterations result from either sequence variations or deletions involving TP53 and are not necessarily synonymous with “multi-hit TP53”. According to the 2022 international consensus classification (ICC) for myeloid neoplasms (MN), multi-hit TP53 signifies i) the presence of two or more distinct TP53 mutations, each with variant allele frequency (VAF) ≥10%, ii) a single TP53 mutation with VAF ≥50%, or iii) a single TP53 mutation with VAF ≥10% accompanied by a cytogenetically-apparent del(17p13.1), copy-neutral loss of heterozygosity (LOH) at the 17p TP53 locus, or, in the absence of LOH information, complex karyotype ( Arber et al. Blood 2022;140: 1200). The current study is focused on MN with multi-hit TP53 and examines the additional prognostic impact of morphologic subtype designation, bone marrow (BM) or peripheral blood (PB) blast percentage, TP53 VAF, and MN with diagnostic qualifiers (i.e., therapy-related, or secondary progressing from myelodysplastic/myeloproliferative/overlap syndromes/neoplasms). Methods : The current study was conducted under an institutional review board approved minimum risk protocol that allowed retrospective collection and analysis of data from Mayo Clinic patient records. Multi-hit TP53 was defined as per ICC criteria as outlined above ( Arber et al. Blood 2022;140: 1200). Morphologic subtype designations of MN were according to ICC criteria and assigned at the time of TP53 detection. NGS and cytogenetic information was available in all study patients. Survival analyses were calculated from time of TP53 mutation detection. Conventional statistical methods were applied using JMP Pro 16.0.0 software (SAS Institute, Cary, NC, USA). Results : Initial screening flagged 143 patients with biallelic TP53 abnormalities derived from formal laboratory reports of NGS data and cytogenetic studies; of these, 130 met ICC criteria for multi-hit TP53: pure erythroid leukemia (PEL; N=24), acute myeloid leukemia (AML)-not PEL (N=54), myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS; N=36), MDS/AML (N=11), and other MN (N=5). Of these 130 informative cases, 128 (98%) harbored complex/monosomal karyotype (CK/MK). Further analysis excluded patients with “other” MN (N=5) and those without CK/MK (N=2), the latter to mitigate the confounding effect of CK/MK on survival and the former because of small sample size and disease heterogeneity. Clinical and laboratory characteristics of the 124 study patients are outlined in table 1. Survival analysis stratified by ICC-defined MN subtypes revealed the prognostic relevance of morphological distinction between PEL vs “AML-not PEL” (p<0.01; HR 2.4) and PEL vs “ TP53-muated MDS/AML” (p=0.02; HR 2.3) while survival was similar between “AML-not PEL” and “ TP53-mutated MDS/AML” (p=0.9; Figure 1a). Survival in “ TP53-mutated MDS” was significantly longer, compared to PEL (p<0.01; HR 0.2), “ TP53-mutated AML-not PEL” (p=0.01; HR 0.5), and “ TP53-mutated MDS/AML” (p=0.07; HR 0.5), the latter with borderline significance (Figure 1a). Multivariable analysis confirmed the independent prognostic relevance of ICC subtype designation (p<0.01) and also revealed additional negative prognostic contribution from advanced age (p=0.02), male gender (p=0.02), MN, secondary (p<0.01), MN, therapy-related (p=0.03), and DNMT3A mutation (p=0.02). Significance was retained in all instances, with the exception of MN, therapy-related (p=0.15), when analysis was repeated after excluding PEL cases (Figure 1b). Conclusions : The current study confirms the prognostic validity of the ICC morphologic subtype designation and TP53 VAF classification threshold, in the context of multi-hit TP53. The study also highlights the prognostic distinction between PEL and “ TP53-mutated AML-not PEL” and the prognostic alignment between the latter and “ TP53-muated MDS/AML”, both of which displayed inferior survival, compared to “ TP53-mutated MDS”. The study also suggests additional prognostic contribution from secondary and therapy-related qualification while the observation regarding DNMT3A mutation requires validation with higher number of informative cases.

BACKGROUND: Recently proposed World Health Organization (WHO, 5 th edition) and International Consensus Classification (ICC) recognized myeloid neoplasms (MN) harboring TP53-mutated ( TP53mut) as a separate entity. However, there are critical differences between the two classifications regarding allelic-status, variance allele frequency (VAF) cut-off and blast categories, that may lead to under- or overestimation of the risk. METHODS: We analyzed MN harboring TP53mut (VAF ≥2%, n=536) managed at Mayo Clinic (USA) and South Australia Health Network (Australia). ICC (Arber et al, Blood 2022) and WHO (Bluebook, Beta v2) definitions were used to stratify MN harboring TP53mut. RESULTS: Of 536 cases, 379 (71%) had myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) (<20% blasts) and 157 (29%) had acute myeloid leukemia (AML). Using WHO, 160 (42%) of 379 were classified as MDS-bi TP53 as they harbored 2 TP53mut (n=115; 30%) or 1 TP53mut plus confirmed loss of heterozygosity (LOH) or copy neutral LOH (cnLOH) of TP53 locus (n=45; 12%). Sixty-two (16%) TP53mut MDS with VAF >49% were classified as presumptive MDS-bi TP53. Of the 157 cases with 1 TP53mut VAF ≤49%, 17 confirmed to have an intact wild-type TP53 copy and were classified as monoallelic. While 140 (89%) cases did not have copy number variation (CNV) analysis. We next evaluated the number of TP53mut cases classified differently by WHO and ICC. As WHO does not recognize TP53mut AML as a separate entity, 157 (29%) TP53mut AML were not classifiable. 46% (174/379) of the TP53mut MDS including 48 (30%), 12 (19%) and 79 (65%) of bi TP53, presumptive bi TP53 and monoallelic TP53mut MDS according to WHO were classified differently by ICC ( Figure 1A). Discordance between the two classifications were predominantly driven by: (i) The difference in VAF cut-off. Sixty patients (11%) with TP53mut VAF <10% were excluded from the ICC classification of TP53mut MN as it mandates TP53mut VAF cut-off ≥10%. 11 (18%) and 41 (68%) of these had bi TP53, monoallelic TP53mut MDS by WHO criteria while 8 (13%) had AML. Importantly, within the VAF <10% cohort, median overall survival (OS) of 2 TP53mut or 1 TP53mut with 17p13.1 (hereafter 17p) deletion or complex karyotype (CK, n=30) was significantly poor compared to 1 TP53mut VAF <10% (11.6 vs 32.4 months; P =0.002, Figure 1B), suggesting that ICC may underestimate the poor prognosis of multi-hit or multi-hit equivalent TP53mut MN with VAF <10%. (ii) The difference in bone marrow blast cut-off. The underlying assumption by WHO is that prognosis of bi TP53mut MDS is poor irrespective of blast percentage category (0-9% vs 10-19%). In contrast, ICC considers that TP53mut MDS/AML (blasts 10-19%) is associated with poor prognosis irrespective of TP53 allelic status. Median OS of TP53mut MDS with 10-19% blasts was significantly poor compared to blast 0-9% (6.4 vs 11.6 months, P <0.0001). Second, median OS of bi TP53mut was significantly poor than monoallelic TP53mut in MDS- blast 0-9% (10.1 vs 15.9 months; P =0.0001) but not in blasts 10-19% (6.8 vs 6.2 months; P =0.19). Hence, exclusion of monoallelic TP53mut MDS with blast 10-19% as TP53mut MN from the WHO classification may underestimate the poor prognosis. (iii) The difference in the definition of biallelic and multi-hit TP53 loss. 35 cases with 1 TP53mut VAF ≤49%, had 17p deletion but did not have CNV analysis to confirm the loss of TP53 locus and could not be classified further using WHO. ICC classified 18 (50%) of these cases as multi-hit. Median OS of 1 TP53mut VAF ≤49%, and 17p deletion on karyotype was significantly poor than 1 TP53mut (VAF ≤49%without 17p deletion on karyotype (6.4 vs 14.6 months, P =0.001). (iv) The difference in the definition of multi-hit equivalent. 32% (33/104) WHO defined monoallelic cases without available CNV data, were classified as multi-hit-equivalent by ICC as they harbored CK. However, WHO does not consider CK as presumptive evidence of bi TP53. Median OS of 1 TP53mut VAF ≤49% with CK was significantly poor compared to 1 TP53mut without CK (8.2 vs 26.9 months, P =0.0008). CONCLUSION: Our study provides evidence that poor prognosis of ‘multi-hit’ TP53 with VAF <10% is underestimated by ICC. On the other hand, poor prognosis of monoallelic TP53 MDS with 10-19% blasts as well as 1 TP53mut VAF ≤49% in the presence of CK is underestimated by WHO. These data suggest that both classifications can be further refined.

Abstract Objectives Fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) for plasma cell neoplasms (PCNs) requires plasma cell (PC) identification or purification strategies to optimize results. We compared the efficacy of cytoplasmic immunoglobulin FISH (cIg-FISH) and fluorescence-activated cell sorting FISH (FACS-FISH) in a clinical laboratory setting. Methods The FISH analysis results of 14,855 samples from individuals with a suspected PCN subjected to cytogenetic evaluation between 2019 and 2022 with cIg-FISH (n = 6917) or FACS-FISH (n = 7938) testing were analyzed. Results Fluorescence-activated cell sorting–FISH increased the detection rate of abnormalities in comparison with cIg-FISH, with abnormal results documented in 54% vs 50% of cases, respectively (P < .001). It improved the detection of IGH::CCND1 (P < .001), IGH::MAF (P < .001), IGH::MAFB (P < .001), other IGH rearrangements (P < .001), and gains/amplifications of 1q (P < .001), whereas the detection rates of IGH::FGFR3 fusions (P = .3), loss of 17p (P = .3), and other abnormalities, including hyperdiploidy (P = .5), were similar. Insufficient PC yield for FISH analysis was decreased between cIg-FISH and FACS-FISH (22% and 3% respectively, P < .001). Flow cytometry allowed establishment of ploidy status in 91% of cases. In addition, FACS-FISH decreased analysis times, workload efforts, and operating costs. Conclusions Fluorescence-activated cell sorting–FISH is an efficient PC purification strategy that affords significant improvement in diagnostic yield and decreases workflow requirements in comparison with cIg-FISH.

Context.— Unlike B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia/lymphoma (ALL/LBL), there have been few therapeutic advances in T-cell ALL (T-ALL)/LBL, an aggressive ALL/LBL subtype. Objective.— To perform a focused tissue array study to elucidate tumor markers of therapeutic potential in T-ALL/LBL. Design.— Using immunohistochemistry, we evaluated expression of leukemic antigens of interest, specifically CC-chemokine receptor 4 (CCR4), among others, on available remnant diagnostic material, including tumor tissue slides obtained from formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded preserved tissues. Results.— Our analysis identified, for the first time, expression of CCR4 in T-ALL/LBL in 11 of 27 cases (40.7%) and confirmed common expression of BCL2, CD38, and CD47, as reported previously. We also identified the expression of CD123 in 4 of 26 cases (15.4%), whereas BCL6 and PDL1 were expressed in a small number of T-ALL/LBL cases. The potential novel target CCR4 was significantly more common in the Pre/Pro-T immunophenotypic subtype, 6 of 9 (66.7%, P = .01). No additional differences in clinical and epidemiologic variables were noted among positive or negative CCR4 cases. Conclusions.— These findings support preclinical and clinical testing of therapies targeting CCR4, CD47, BCL2, CD38, and CD123 in T-ALL/LBL, and may help guide the development of targeted clinical trials in T-ALL/LBL, a rare disease in urgent need of novel therapies.

Myxofibrosarcomas (MFS) present as slowly enlarging superficial masses in elderly patients. Even though these tumors fail to exhibit a distinct immunophenotype, diagnosis is straightforward when they present in subcutaneous tissue. Intramuscular MFS, however, are more challenging to diagnose as the differential also includes dedifferentiated liposarcoma with myxoid features. The vast majority of dedifferentiated liposarcomas show MDM2 amplification, whereas limited data exists as to the MDM2 status of MFS. We sought to explore the rate of MDM2 amplification in cases of classic MFS. Our archives were searched for MFS; only subcutaneous well-sampled resections were included. FISH for MDM2 amplification was performed on each tumor. A cohort of myxoid dedifferentiated liposarcoma resections was studied for comparison. Twenty-two MFS arose in patients aged 44 to 85 years. All tumors contained an infiltrative population of atypical cells embedded in a myxoid stroma with curvilinear blood vessels. MDM2 amplification by FISH was identified in 3 (of 22; 14%) tumors. Available follow up on 17 patients (range 1-96 months; median 13 months) revealed 6 patients with local recurrence and 1 with distant metastasis. Of 3 patients with MDM2- amplified MFS, 1 experienced recurrence and died of unrelated causes, while the second was alive without disease 12 months after diagnosis. Even though the rate of MDM2 amplification by FISH in MFS appears to be low, a subset of cases may show this genetic alteration, which pathologists should be aware of to avoid misclassification as myxoid dedifferentiated liposarcomas. Further studies are necessary to determine if amplification status adds prognostic value.