Citations

Abstract Inotuzumab ozogamicin (InO) is an antibody-calicheamicin conjugate with striking efficacy in B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia (B-ALL). However, there is wide interpatient variability in treatment response, and the genetic basis of this variation remains largely unknown. Using a genome-wide CRISPR screen, we discovered that the loss of DNA nucleotidylexotransferase (DNTT) is a primary driver of InO resistance. Mechanistically, the downregulation of DNTT attenuated InO–induced DNA damage response, cell cycle arrest, and mitochondrial apoptotic priming, thereby ultimately leading to leukemia resistance to InO. Ex vivo leukemia InO sensitivity was highly associated with DNTT expression in ALL blasts with substantial intraleukemia heterogeneity as revealed by single-cell RNA sequencing. Among patients with B-ALL enrolled in the Children's Oncology Group trial AALL1621, we observed consistent DNTT downregulation in residual blasts following InO treatment. The selection of DNTT-low blasts by InO therapy was also recapitulated in vivo using patient-derived xenograft models. Collectively, our data indicate that DNTT is a key regulator of calicheamicin response in leukemia and thus a potential biomarker for individualizing InO therapy in B-ALL.

Abstract BMT CTN (Blood and Marrow Transplant Clinical Trials Network) 1506 (“MORPHO”) was a randomized study of gilteritinib compared with placebo as maintenance therapy after hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) for patients with FLT3-ITD–mutated acute myeloid leukemia (AML). A key secondary end point was to determine the impact on survival of before and/or after HCT measurable residual disease (MRD), as determined using a highly sensitive assay for FLT3-ITD mutations. Generally, gilteritinib maintenance therapy was associated with improved relapse-free survival (RFS) for participants with detectable peri-HCT MRD, whereas no benefit was evident for those lacking detectable MRD. We conducted a post hoc analysis of the data and found that the level of MRD detected with this approach correlated remarkably with RFS and relapse risk, and that MRD detectable at any level negatively affected RFS. In the placebo arm, 42.2% of participants with detectable FLT3-ITD MRD relapsed compared with 13.4% of those without detectable MRD. We found that 14.8% of participants had multiple FLT3-ITD clones detected as MRD and had worse survival irrespective of treatment arm. Finally, we examined the kinetics of FLT3-ITD clonal relapse or eradication and found that participants on the placebo arm with detectable MRD relapsed rapidly after HCT, often within a few weeks. MRD-positive participants on the gilteritinib arm relapsed either with FLT3 wild-type clones (assessed by capillary electrophoresis), after cessation of gilteritinib with persistent MRD, or on progression of multiclonal disease. These data demonstrate the potential of FLT3-ITD MRD to guide therapy with gilteritinib for this subtype of AML. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT02997202.

ABSTRACT Patients with newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia (ND‐AML) derive variable survival benefit from venetoclax + hypomethylating agent (Ven‐HMA) therapy. The primary objective in the current study was to develop genetic risk models that are predictive of survival and are applicable at the time of diagnosis and after establishing treatment response. Among 400 ND‐AML patients treated with Ven‐HMA at the Mayo Clinic, 247 (62%) achieved complete remission with (CR) or without (CRi) count recovery. Multivariable analysis–derived hazard ratios (HR), including 1.8 for European LeukemiaNet (ELN) adverse karyotype, 4.7 for KMT2Ar , 1.7 for TP53 MUT , 2.6 for KRAS MUT , and 2.1 for IDH2 WT were applied to develop an HR‐weighted risk model: low, intermediate, and high; respective median survival censored for allogeneic stem cell transplant (ASCT) (3‐year survival) were “not reached” (67%), 19.1 (33%), and 7.1 months (0%). In patients achieving CR/CRi, adverse karyotype, KMT2Ar , KRAS MUT , IDH2 WT predicted inferior survival, allowing for a complementary response‐stratified risk model. The model was externally validated and was shown to be superior to the ELN 2024 risk model (AIC 179 vs. 195 and AUC 0.77 vs. 0.69). Survival was inferior with failure to achieve CR/CRi or not receiving ASCT; 3‐year survival for high‐risk with or without ASCT was 42% versus 0% ( p < 0.01); intermediate 72% versus 43% ( p = 0.06); and low‐risk 88% versus 78% ( p = 0.53). The Mayo genetic risk models offer pre‐treatment and response‐based prognostic tools for ND‐AML treated with Ven‐HMA. The current study underscores the prognostically indispensable role of achieving CR/CRi and ASCT.

Introduction: Post-transplant cyclophosphamide (PTCy) has emerged as the new standard of care for graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) prophylaxis following reduced-intensity conditioning (RIC) allogeneic stem cell transplant (alloSCT). The BMT CTN 1703 phase III trial demonstrated superior GVHD/relapse or progression-free survival (GRFS) in patients receiving PTCy, without affecting relapse risk. The primary objective of this study was to compare the risk of relapse in high-risk myeloid neoplasms post RIC/Nonmyeloablative (NMA) transplant using PTCy vs Tacrolimus/Methotrexate (TAC/MTX) as GVHD prophylaxis (PPX). Methods: We retrospectively reviewed patients with high-risk myeloid neoplasms following RIC/NMA alloSCT who received PTCy or TAC/MTX for GVHD PPX between Jan 2018 and June 2023. Criteria for high-risk myeloid neoplasms included acute myeloid leukemia (AML) with ≥1 of the following (complex or monosomal karyotype, TP53, WT1, FLT3 ITD+/NPM1-, active disease, MRD+, secondary AML), Myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) with ≥1 of the following (complex karyotype, monosomal karyotype, TP53, RAS pathway mutation, marrow blast of 10% or more) or chronic myelomonocytic leukemia (CMML). Kaplan-Meier and log-rank tests were used to estimate overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS). Non-relapse mortality (NRM) and relapse incidence (RI) were calculated using competing risk analysis. Factors with P&lt;0.10 in univariate analysis were included in multivariate analysis Results: Out of 552 alloSCTs, 108 (19.5%) patients met the inclusion criteria. Seventy-two (66.6%) received TAC/MTX, and 36 (33.3%) received PTCy. The median follow-up time was 26 months (range 3-68). The median age at transplant was 65 years (range 62-69) with age comparable between the two groups (p=0.6). Haploidentical transplant accounted for 33.3% of PTCy, while the remainder had matched related or matched unrelated transplant (MRD/MUD). Compared to TAC/MTX group, the PTCy group had more frequent NRAS mutation (19.4% vs 8.3%, p=0.094), but fewer patients with hematopoietic cell transplantation-specific comorbidity index (HCT-CI) ≥ 3(41.7% vs 61.1%, p=0.056). AML MRD+ was more prevalent in the PTCy group (22.2% vs 8.3%, p=0.098). The two groups were otherwise well-balanced in terms of disease distribution, disease risk index, TP53 mutation, and complex monosomal karyotype (CK and MK). The 1-yr OS, DFS, and GRFS for PTCy vs TAC/MTX were 78.7% vs 72.8% (p=0.9), 53.6% vs 67.9% (p=0.2), 38% vs 40%, (p=0.4), respectively. The 1-yr cumulative incidence of relapse (CIR) was higher in PTCy compared to TAC/MTX (37.6% vs 11.1%, p=0.01). Both haploidentical and MRD/MUD in the PTCy group had similar 1-yr RI (34.7 vs 38.3% p=0.7). Limiting the analysis to MRD/MUD, the PTCy group had a higher risk of relapse compared to TAC/MTX (34.7% vs 10.2%, P=0.007). Sub-analysis showed a higher 1-yr-CIR in the PTCy cohort for secondary AML (40% vs 0.0%, p=0.01), TP53 mutation (44.4% vs 18.1%, p=0.02), CK/MK (71.4% vs 22.2%, P=0.008), and chromosome 17 abnormality (60% vs 10%, P=0.001), compared to TAC/MTX. Despite of the increased CIR in the PTCy group, only patients with chromosome 17 abnormality receiving PTCy had an inferior DFS compared to TAC/MTX (median 5 vs. 14 months, p=0.008). In multivariate analysis for 1-yr CIR that included TP53, chromatin modifiers mutations, complex karyotype, high/very high DRI, and PTCy, both PTCy (HR 4.56, 95% CI 1.1-18.07, p=0.031) and high/very high DRI (HR 12.745, 95% CI 1.5-103.4, p=0.017) were independently predictive of post-transplant relapse. However, these factors were not significantly associated with 1-year OS. Conclusion:In patients with high-risk MN following RIC/NMA alloSCT, those receiving PTCy as GVHD PPX had a higher risk of relapse compared to TAC/MTX, irrespective of the donor source. Notably, an inferior DFS was observed only in patients with chromosome 17 abnormality who received PTCy. Despite of the increased relapse risk in the PTCy group, OS, DFS, and GRFS were comparable to TAC/MTX, likely due to higher risk of GVHD and NRM in the latter group.

Background While central nervous system (CNS) disease is found in minority of patients (pts) at diagnosis of Ph+ ALL, later relapses can occur in pts despite adequate CNS prophylaxis. CNS disease can be managed with varying combinations of systemic, radiation, and intrathecal (IT) therapy and can be associated with significant toxicity, especially in older pts. While there are more durable systemic responses with 2nd or 3rd generation tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) based combinations, CNS penetration can vary by TKI. In this large multi-center study, we analyze the incidence of CNS disease in Ph+ ALL in the context of induction therapies and survival post relapse. Methods We conducted a multicenter observational study in collaboration with 10 U.S. academic centers under the COMMAND consortium and reviewed the incidence of CNS relapse in 505 Ph+ ALL pts. We evaluated baseline characteristics, treatment given prior to CNS relapse, and outcome post relapse. Results Baseline characteristics, initial treatment and outcome prior to CNS relapse Eighteen (3.56%) pts were identified to have CNS disease at relapse. Median age of the pts in years (yrs) was 51 (range [R], 22-75), median white blood cell (WBC) was 33.3 x 10(9)/L (R, 2.1-200) and 6 (33%) pts had additional cytogenetic abnormalities at diagnosis. Sixty-one percent (n= 11) of pts received intensive chemotherapy (IC) during induction; 2 (11%), 14 (78%) and 2(11%) of pts received 1st, 2nd or 3rd generation TKI-based combination during induction, respectively. All of pts achieved complete remission (CR), 45.5% achieved complete molecular remission (CMR) at 3 months from the time of diagnosis. Five (28%) pts received allogeneic stem cell transplantation (allo-HCT) as a consolidation therapy. Treatment received at CNS relapse and response The median time to CNS relapse after induction was 10.8 months (mo) (R, 2-79). All pts except 1 had isolated CNS relapse after CR1, 4/18 (22%) pts had T315I mutation at relapse. Twelve (67%) and 6 (33%) pts received intrathecal chemotherapy (IT) with TKI and systemic chemotherapy + TKI in addition to IT, respectively. Eleven (61%) pts received dasatinib, 5 (28%) pts received ponatinib and one (6%) pts each received bosutinib and imatinib at relapse. Ninety-three percent of pts achieved CR (n=3, not evaluable). Six (33%) pts underwent allo-HCT after CNS relapse, one of these transplanted pts had second allo-HCT. Survival after CNS relapse The median relapse free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) after CNS relapse was 9.8 (95% CI: 3.80-15.76) and 13.87 (95% CI: 4.08-23.65) mo, respectively. In subset analysis, we compared survival outcome among pts who had relapse without CNS involvement (n= 160/505 [32%]). The median RFS (9.9 vs 9.8, p= 0.88) and OS (31.53 vs 28.80, p= 0.57) after relapse was not significantly different among pts who had relapse with or without CNS involvement, respectively. We also compared OS among pts without relapse to those with relapse. The median OS was not reached (NR; 73% alive at 5 years), 28.80 and 31.53 months (p= &lt;0.001) among pts with no relapse, relapse with CNS and without CNS involvement, respectively. Conclusion Our retrospective analysis from a large database showed that CNS relapses were uncommon (3.56%) in adult pts with Ph+ ALL. A majority of pts (89%) received a 2nd or a 3rd generation TKI during induction. Approximately one quarter of pts with CNS relapse had emergence of T315I mutation. While almost all pts achieved CR, the RFS was relatively short. We did not see significant differences in survival among pts who had relapse with or without CNS involvement.

Background: There is an increased risk of second primary malignancies including second hematological malignancies (SHM) in multiple myeloma (MM) patients undergoing autologous stem cell transplant (auto-SCT) followed by lenalidomide maintenance. We analyzed the characteristics and outcomes of patients who developed SHM after an auto- SCT for MM. Methods: A retrospective study of all MM patients who underwent auto- SCT at Mayo Clinic, Rochester between January 1, 1990, and 31 August 2023 and later developed SHM. Demographic, clinical and pathologic data were collected retrospectively. Overall survival (OS) was calculated from the date of auto-SCT to the date of last follow up. Statistical analyses were performed using GraphPad prism 9.0. Chi-square test was used to calculate the difference between categorical variables. Kaplan Meier method and log rank test were used to estimate OS. Results: Among 3513 patients who underwent at least 1 auto-SCT, 104 (2.9%) developed a SHM at a median follow up of 59 (range, 0.2-265) months. Patients who developed SHM, more frequently received pretransplant alkylating agents (37.5 vs 24.2 %, odds ratio [OR], 1.87; P=0.003) and topoisomerase II inhibitors (anthracyclines/etoposide) (17.3% vs 10.4%, OR [1.79]; P=0.03) compared to a control group of MM patients without SHM. Further, exposure to lenalidomide (77.8% vs 57.6%, OR[2.59]; P &lt;0.0001) and radiation therapy (32.6% vs 23.1%, [1.54]; P=0.04) were more often seen in the SHM cohort compared to control group. Among the 381 patients who underwent &gt; 1 auto- SCT, 3.1% developed SHM. Therapy related myeloid neoplasms (t-MN) accounted for 90.3% of cases [n=94; t-myelodysplastic syndrome (t-MDS=64), t-acute myeloid leukemia (t-AML=12), t-MDS transformed to AML(n=16), chronic myeloid leukemia (n=1), MDS/myeloproliferative neoplasm overlap syndrome (n=1)]. Eight patients (7.6%) developed therapy related B- cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia (t-ALL); Philadelphia (Ph) negative ALL (n=7) and Ph- like ALL (n=1). One patient each developed mixed phenotype acute leukemia and acute leukemia, not otherwise specified. Sixty patients (57.6%) were males and the median age at diagnosis of SHM was 70 (range, 43-84) years. The median time from auto-SCT to diagnosis of SHM was 58.5 (range, 7-236) months. In a multivariate analysis, receiving an alkylating agent (hazard ratio [95% confidence interval]: 2.51 [1.54 to 4.01]; P = 0.0002) and/or topoisomerase II inhibitor as induction for MM (3.12 [1.59 to 5.88]; P = 0.0006), exposure to lenalidomide (7.08 [3.92 to 13.50]; P = &lt;0.0001) and radiation therapy (1.60 [1.02 to 2.44]; P = 0.03) were independent predictors of developing SHM. At diagnosis, 57% (n=37) of t-MDS and 71% (n=20) with t-AML had high risk disease per R-IPSS and 2022 European Leukemia Net respectively. Clonal abnormality in chromosome 5 and/or 7 was present in 45% (n=42) of patients. Complex and monosomal karyotype was seen in 32% (n=30) with t-MN. The most frequently mutated genes based on next generation sequencing data included TP53 (n=33), DNMT3A (n=9), RUNX1 (n=5), TET2 (n=4) and CEBPA (n=4). In the t-MDS/AML cohort, 3 patients (3.1%) underwent second auto-SCT and 9 (9.5%) received allogenic SCT (allo-SCT) for SHM. After a median follow-up of 27.2 months, the median OS from t-MDS/AML diagnosis was 8.04 months (95%CI, 6.1-11.0 months) and there was no difference in median OS for allo-SCT recipients versus nonrecipients (9.1 vs 6.8 months, P =0.19). In the t-ALL (n=8) cohort, all of them received lenalidomide based induction and five received lenalidomide maintenance. Most of the t-ALL patients had adverse risk cytogenetics [IKZF1 deletion (n=2), complex karyotype (n=2), TP53 mutation (n=1) and P2RY8-CRLF2 fusion (n=1)]. Three patients with t-ALL underwent allo-SCT and the median OS for allo-SCT recipients versus non recipients were 8.3 vs 7.9 months respectively, P=0.50. Among patients with SHM, 92.3% (n = 96) have died with SHM (72%) being the most common cause of death. MM patients who developed SHM had an inferior OS when compared to those without SHM (median OS, 75 vs 90 months, P =0.006). Conclusion: SHM following auto-SCT tends to have aggressive disease biology with poor outcomes. Short term follow up underestimates the risk of SHM and the higher incidence noted in our study may be due to longer follow up. As the OS in MM patients continues to improve, SHM remains an important challenge in improving long term outcomes.

Background: Therapy-related myeloid neoplasms (t-MN) occur after exposure to DNA-damaging agentsincluding cytotoxic chemo and radiation therapy and are associated with dismal outcomes. TP53 and PPM1D (protein phosphatase Mn2+/Mg2+-dependent 1D) mutations (MT) disrupt the DNA damage response and repair (DDR) pathway, are often co-mutated (25-35%), and although enriched in t-MN (20%), can also be seen in age-related clonal hematopoiesis (CH) (5-10%). While progressive genomic instability with biallelic inactivation has been described as a mechanism of MN progression with TP53 MT, similar mechanisms remain to be elucidated for PPM1D MT. We conducted this study to assess the clinical phenotype and outcomes of TP53 and PPM1D co-mutated (PPM1DTP53m) versus PPM1D MT and wild type TP53 (PPM1DTP53wt) CH and MN. Methods: After approval from the Mayo Clinic IRB, the CH and MN databases were queried and 119 pts with PPM1D MT (CH= 26, clonal cytopenia of unknown significance [CCUS]= 64, myelodysplastic syndrome [MDS]=16, myeloproliferative neoplasm [MPN]=8, acute myeloid leukemia [AML]= 5) were identified. We analyzed baseline characteristics, karyotypic changes, somatic mutations, and survival outcomes between the PPM1DTP53m (n= 22) and PPM1DTP53wt (n= 97) groups (gp). Results: Baseline characteristics The median age in years (yrs) was 68.5 (range [R], 43-89) and 71 (R,30-92) in the PPM1DTP53m and PPM1DTP53wt gp (p= 0.65). 22% vs 18% (p=0.78), 58% vs 32% (p=0.03), 9% vs 32% (p=0.01), 7% vs 4.5% (p=&gt;0.99) and 3% vs 14% (p=0.07) pts met criteria for CH, CCUS, MDS, MPN and AML in the PPM1DTP53wt and PPM1DTP53m gp, respectively. Similarly, 19% vs 18% (p=&gt;0.99), 47% vs 32% (p=0.23), 7% vs 36% (p=0.001), 2% vs 0% (p=&gt;0.99) and 2% vs 14% (p=0.04) of pts met criteria for t-CH, t-CCUS, t-MDS, t-MPN and t-AML in the PPM1DTP53wt and PPM1DTP53m gp, respectively. All PPM1D variants were truncating, located in exon 6 of the gene, with median variant allele frequency (VAF) (8% [R,1-64] vs 5.5% [R,2-24], p= 0.10) and number of PPM1D MT (1 [R,1-5] vs 1 [R, 1-3], p=&gt;0.99) being similar between the two gp. While proportion of pts with t-MN were similar between the two gps (77% vs 86%, p= 0.40), cytogenetic (CG) abnormalities (67% vs 31%, p= 0.006), including monosomies (28% vs 2%, p= &lt;0.001) and complex CG (53% vs 4%, p= &lt;0.001) were more frequent in PPM1DTP53m gp compared to PPM1DTP53wt gp, respectively. The median TP53 MT VAF was 14% (R, 1-14); 50% had multi-hit TP53 MT. Somatic mutations in PPM1D MT myeloid neoplasm with and without TP53 MT Somatic co-mutations excluding TP53 were seen in 71% of pts; 73.5% in PPM1DTP53wt and 59% in PPM1DTP53m gp (p= 0.20). Apart from CBL (0% vs 9%,p=0.03), MT involving DNMT3A (20% vs 14%, p= 0.56), TET2 (15% vs. 14%, p= &gt;0.99), IDH1 (6% vs 19%, p= 0.07), splicing factors (8% vs 14%, p=0.08), ASXL1 (11% vs 4.5%, p=0.46), and JAK2 (9% vs 0%,p=0.20) were comparable between PPM1DTP53wt and PPM1DTP53m gps, respectively. The proportion of pts with ≥ 2 somatic co-mutations excluding TP53 MT were numerically higher in PPM1DTP53wt gp (43%) compared to PPM1DTP53m gp (23%) (p= 0.09). In the PPM1DTP53wt gp, other somatic driver mutations included RUNX1 (n= 7 [7%]; CH [n=1], CCUS [n=2], MDS [n=3], MPN [n=1]), NRAS (n=1 [1%]; CCUS), BCOR (n=1 [1%]; CCUS), and PTPN11 (n=1 [1%]; CCUS). Leukemic transformation and survival With a median follow up of 6.43 months (mo) (R, 0.23-36.4), median overall survival (mOS) in mo among high-risk MDS/AML (16.4 vs 15.0, p= 0.66) and CHIP/CCUS pts (35.79 vs 26.28, p= 0.93) was similar between PPM1DTP53wt and PPM1DTP53m gps, respectively. CHIP/CCUS pts harboring multiple vs single PPM1D MT had an inferior mOS (23.9 vs 36.7 mo, p= 0.05). Three (2.5%) MDS pts underwent AML transformation; 1 (1%) and 2 (10%) in PPM1DTP53wt and PPM1DTP53m gp, respectively (p= 0.07). Conclusions In our study, 18% of pts had concurrent TP53 and PPM1D MT (82% t-MN), with the PPM1DTP53wt genotype being more frequent in CCUS, while the PPM1DTP53m genotype was more frequent in MN. The PPM1DTP53m genotype had a higher frequency of CG abnormalities, including complex CG. Survival outcome was inferior and comparable in PPM1D MT MN with or without TP53 MT. While 73.5 % of the PPM1DTP53wt gp had somatic driver MT and 31% had karyotypic abnormalities, 22% had no additional MT or CG changes (all CH/CCUS), underscoring the need to understand how PPM1D MT contribute to hematopoietic dysfunction and MN.

Background: TP53-mutated (TP53mut) myeloid neoplasms (MN) have particularly poor survival. Discrepancies in defining TP53mut MN have impact on diagnostic work up, therapeutic decisions, and clinical trial enrolment. Methods: MN cases harboring TP53mut (variant allele frequency, VAF ≥2%) were classified based on bone marrow (BM) and peripheral blood (PB) blast % using the 4th revision of the WHO classification (WHO-4R). Biallelic loss was defined as (i) ≥2 mutations each with VAF ≥2%; (ii) single TP53mut VAF ≥2% plus 17p loss detected on karyotype, FISH, or SNP; or (iii) single TP53mut VAF ≥50%, whereas monoallelic loss was defined as single TP53mut VAF &lt;50% without 17p loss. Primary endpoint was overall survival (OS) from diagnosis. Conditional Inference Trees (CIT) analysis was used to determine the true effect of a predictor. Results: We identified 580 cases including WHO-4R defined acute myeloid leukemia (AML, BM/PB blasts ≥20%, n=219, 37.8%), myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) with excess blasts-2 (EB-2, BM 10-19% or PB 5%-19%, n=92, 15.9%), MDS with excess blasts-1 (EB-1, BM 5-9% or PB 2-4%, n=75, 12.9%), and the remaining were MDS with low blasts (-LB, BM &lt;5% and PB ≤1%, n=194, 33.4%). Of the 578 cases evaluable for allelic status, 437 (75.6%) and 141 (24.4%) had biallelic and monoallelic TP53 loss, respectively. Higher frequency of biallelic loss was observed with increasing blasts. 63.2%, 73.3%, 78% and 86.3% of cases with MDS-LB, MDS-EB1, MDS-EB2, and AML had bi-allelic TP53 loss (P&lt;0.0001). In a multivariable analysis, WHO-4R categories, VAF ≥10%, and biallelic loss were independent predictors of poor survival. CIT analysis further stratified the cohort into 4 groups with distinct survival: (1) MDS-LB (n=194, 33.4%); (2) MDS-EB1/EB2 and AML with VAF &lt;10% (n=38, 6.6%); (3) MDS-EB1/EB2 with VAF ≥10% (n=149, 25.7%); and (4) AML with VAF ≥10% (n=199, 34.3%). MDS-LB cases could be further stratified based on allelic status and complex karyotype (CK): OS was poor for cases with biallelic TP53 loss and monoallelic TP53mut with CK compared to monoallelic TP53mut without CK, who had the most favorable survival (12.7 vs. 13 vs. 34.8 months, P&lt;0.0001).MDS-EB1/EB2/AML with VAF&lt;10% could also be stratified by CK: MDS-EB1/EB2/AML with VAF&lt;10% cases without CK had the favorable survival compared to their counterparts with CK and MDS-EB1/EB2 with VAF ≥10% cases (26.2 vs. 5.6 vs. 6.3 months, P=0.003).MDS-EB1/EB2 with VAF ≥10% was a homogenous subgroup: Biological characteristics including the proportion of cases with biallelic TP53 loss, CK (P&gt;0.9), monosomal karyotype (MK, P&gt;0.9), del 5q (P=0.6), del 7q (P=0.4), and del 17p (P=0.2) were comparable between MDS-EB1 and -EB2 with VAF ≥10%. Importantly, median OS of MDS-EB1 and EB2 with VAF ≥10% was comparable (9.6 vs. 7.2 months, P=0.12). OS in this group was comparable regardless of the blast %, allelic status, or presence of CK.AML with VAF ≥10% had extremely poor survival: Median OS was 3.9 months. Survival of AML was equally poor irrespective of the mono- or biallelic (3.6 vs. 3.9, P=0.89) and non-CK vs. CK (1.8 vs. 3.9 months, P=0.09). Combined, our model would acknowledge poor survival of 514 (89.1%) cases. In contrast, retrospective application of the 5th edition of the WHO classification (WHO-5) and International Consensus Classification (ICC) would classify only 211 (36.4%) and 468 (80.7%) cases as biallelic/multi-hit TP53mut MN, respectively. Finally, the Harrell's c-index of the proposed model, WHO-5, and ICC was 0.66, 0.571, and 0.617, respectively. Conclusion: We provide evidence for subsequent refinements in classifying MN harboring TP53mut. Our salient findings include: (i) acknowledgement of CK as ‘biallelic equivalent’ in MDS-LB; as well as EB1/EB2/AML with VAF 2 to &lt;10% cases; and (ii) demonstration of poor survival of MDS-EB1 and -EB2 with VAF ≥10% regardless of the allelic status. In conclusion, our proposed model acknowledged poor survival of a higher proportion of cases as TP53mut MN compared to the current models with a higher c- index.

Introduction: NPM1 mutations, seen in up to 30% of adults with acute myeloid leukemia (AML), often co-occur with FLT3 internal tandem duplication (FLT3-ITD). Measurable residual disease (MRD) testing before allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplant (alloHCT) for persistence of mutated NPM1 and/or FLT3-ITD can identify patients with AML in complete remission (CR) at highest risk of relapse and death. Quantitative RT-PCR assays are currently recommended for NPM1 MRD testing, while FLT3-ITD MRD testing is DNA-based using next generation sequencing (NGS). DNA-based NGS assays for mutated NPM1 MRD testing may have several advantages but require validation. We performed NPM1 MRD detection in blood collected from patients with AML during first CR (CR1) prior to alloHCT on a subset of patients from the Pre-MEASURE study (PMID: 36881031) using a highly-sensitive, commercially available DNA-based NPM1 NGS MRD assay. Methods: Of the 531 patients aged 18 or older from the Pre-MEASURE study who received an alloHCT for NPM1mutated AML during CR1 at a CIBMTR reporting site in the USA between the years of 2013-2019, a subset of 190 were randomly selected to be included in this analysis. A commercially available research testing kit (IVS, Invivoscribe, San Diego, CA), which can detect DNA-based NPM1 MRD, was used to establish a workflow following clinical testing standards and validated to detect NPM1 insertion variants down to a variant allele fraction (VAF) of at least 0.005%. Results were compared to those previously reported using an anchored multiplex PCR-based (AMP) targeted NGS assay (detection limit 0.01%) and FLT3-ITD MRD results, where applicable. Overall survival (OS) and cumulative incidence of relapse were estimated with the day of transplant as time 0 using Kaplan-Meier estimation (log-rank tests), Fine and Gray model, and Cox proportional hazards models. Results: NPM1 NGS MRD testing was successful for 186 (98%) patients, of which 48 (26%) relapsed (median: 4.0 months; range: 0.7-52.5) and 64 (34%) died (median: 9.7 months; range: 0.4-58.9) post-alloHCT. The IVS assay detected NPM1 insertion variants in 71 patients with a median VAF of 0.0026% (range:0.0002-2.1%). Using a VAF threshold of ≥0.01% for MRD positivity, the IVS test showed that 24 patients tested positive for NPM1 MRD pre-alloHCT, which was associated with significantly increased rates of relapse (52% vs 20% at 3yrs; HR=4.3; P&lt;0.001) and decreased OS (34% vs 71% at 3yrs; HR=3.6; P&lt;0.001) compared to testing negative, in close alignment with those previously reported using the AMP assay. After removing the VAF threshold, an additional 47 patients were classified as NPM1 MRD positive, which remained associated with increased rates of relapse (40% vs 15% at 3yrs; HR=3.4; P&lt;0.001) and decreased OS (50% vs 75% at 3yrs; HR=2.9; P&lt;0.001). In multivariable analysis, residual NPM1 MRD burden prior to alloHCT was associated with risk of relapse and death in a dose-dependent manner. Patients were further subdivided based on their reported FLT3-ITD mutational status at baseline. Increased risk of relapse was seen for NPM1 MRD positive patients regardless of baseline FLT3-ITD. 123 (66%) patients were co-mutated for FLT3-ITD at baseline and previously tested for FLT3-ITD MRD using the IVS assay (PMID: 38696205). Defining MRD based on the presence of NPM1 vs NPM1 and/or FLT3-ITD revealed equivalent levels of relapse (45% vs 44%) and OS (45% vs 46%) at 3 years, with NPM1 MRD evaluation identifying 5 additional relapses. These results were confirmed in the full Pre-MEASURE cohort (n=317) using the AMP assay. NPM1 MRD positive patients receiving nonmyeloablative conditioning or reduced-intensity conditioning (RIC) without melphalan (mel) had increased risk of relapse or death compared to patients receiving myeloablative conditioning or RIC with mel, regardless of FLT3-ITD co-mutational status (3yrs: relapse 87% vs 55%, P=0.006; OS 15% vs 42%, P=0.013). Conclusions: In patients with NPM1 mutated AML from the Pre-MEASURE study, we show that detection of residual NPM1 variants in pre-transplant blood during CR1 using a highly sensitive DNA-based assay is associated in a dose-dependent manner with a significantly increased risk of relapse and death after allo-HCT, which can be mitigated in part by conditioning regimen. In patients co-mutated for both FLT3-ITD and NPM1 at diagnosis, NPM1 should be prioritized as a target for NGS-MRD if only one test is available.

Introduction E1910 randomized pts with ALL aged 30-70 years who were measurable residual disease negative (MRD-) by multi-color flow cytometry (FC) after intensification to conventional chemotherapy (chemo) with or without blinatumomab (blina). The addition of blina resulted in improved overall survival (OS) (Litzow, NEJM 2024) and led to a new standard of care. Older ALL pts have inferior outcomes when compared to younger pts in part due to increased treatment toxicity. In E1910, exposure to dexamethasone and pegasparagase was reduced for older pts (age &gt;55 years). We present results of subgroup analyses describing outcomes of older pts enrolled in E1910. Methods Details of the E1910 protocol remission induction (step 1), high dose methotrexate with pegaspargase intensification (step 2), blina randomization (step 3), and maintenance (step 4) or allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HCT) were previously presented (Litzow, NEJM 2024). MRD status was determined after step 2 centrally with 6-color FC with MRD- defined as &lt;0.01% in the bone marrow (BM). Following approval of blina in the US for MRD positive (MRD+) disease in 2018, MRD+ pts were assigned to the blina arm and no longer randomized. The primary objective was to compare the OS and relapse free survival (RFS) among older pts aged &gt;55 years (pre-specified stratification factor) who received chemo + blina to that of pts who received chemo alone (step 3 treatment). Estimates of OS and RFS were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Comparison of OS and RFS between treatment arms was conducted using the two-sided stratified log-rank test and Cox model with CD20 status, rituximab use, and whether pts intended to receive HCT or not as stratification factors. Stratified Multivariate Cox models of OS and RFS were used to further evaluate the effect of step 3 treatment, adjusted by gender, white blood cell count (WBC), platelets, hemoglobin, peripheral blood blasts, BM blasts, performance status and combined molecular risk category. Results Among the 488 enrolled pts, 211 were ≥55 years old with median age of 61 (range 55-70). Among older pts, 49.3% were female and 83.4% were white, 17 (8.1%) pts had WBC &gt;30.000/uL at the time of diagnosis. 156 (73.9%) pts had CD10+ early B-ALL and 46 (21.8%) had CD10- B-ALL immunophenotype. The most common genetic subgroups were low hypodiploid (n=58, 27.5%), BCR::ABL1-like (n=34, 16.1%) and KMT2A rearranged (n=26, 12.3%). 8.1% of pts had low, 9.0% intermediate, 63.5% high combined molecular risk disease and in 19.4% of pts risk could not be assigned. Baseline characteristics were not significantly different in chemo + blina and chemo only pts. The median follow-up for this analysis from step 1 registration was 54.6 months. Complete response with (CR) or without (CRi) count recovery after induction was observed in 174 (82.5%) pts (167 CR, 7 CRi). 93 (44%) pts were MRD-. 32 (15.1%) pts received HCT on study and 24 (11.4%) pts received it off study. Among MRD- pts (n=93), 46 were randomized to and 45 received blina: 6 (13.3%) pts had 1, 14 (31.1%) had 2, 2 (4.4%) had 3 and 23 (51.1%) had 4 cycles. 3-year OS were 71% and 67% for the blina and the chemo only arm (univariate model: HR 0.75, 95% CI: 0.37-1.50; multivariate model: HR 0.56, 95% CI: 0.25-1.27). 3-year RFS were 69% and 59% for the blina and the chemo only arm (univariate model: HR 0.75, 95% CI: 0.39-1.45; multivariate model: HR 0.67, 95% CI: 0.32-1.42). Among MRD+ pts (n=25), 14 were randomized to and 11 received blina: 7 (63.6%) pts had 2, and 4 (36.4%) had 4 cycles. 3-year OS were 66% and 44% for the blina vs the chemo only arm (univariate model: HR 0.66, 95% CI: 0.12-3.64). 3-year RFS were 64% and 31% for the blina vs the chemo only arm (univariate model: HR 0.64, 95% CI: 0.15-2.74). Frequency of treatment-related toxicities among older pts during different study phases and treatment assignments will be presented. Conclusion Despite evidence of improved outcomes in the whole study cohort, the addition of blina to consolidation chemo for older pts with ALL was not associated with statistically significant improvement of OS or RFS in this exploratory analysis not powered to detect the difference in subgroups. This is possibly due to sample size but may be due to biologic differences in the older adult population. Further studies are needed to definitively determine tolerance and benefit of blina addition to consolidation for older pts with ALL.