髓系肿瘤携带TP53突变的循证风险分层

IF 7.1 1区 医学 Q1 HEMATOLOGY
Mithun Vinod Shah, Kevin Hung, Anmol Baranwal, Monika M Kutyna, Aref Al-Kali, Carla Toop, Patricia Greipp, Anna Brown, Syed Shah, Shreyas Khanna, Dariusz Ladon, Vedavyas Gannamani, Dong Chen, Kebede Begna, Zoe K Price, Danielle Rud, Mark R Litzow, William J Hogan, Peter Bardy, Talha Badar, Sharad Kumar, David T Yeung, Mrinal M Patnaik, James M Foran, Rong He, Naseema Gangat, Hamish S Scott, Cecilia Y Arana Yi, Hassan Alkhateeb, Abhishek A Mangaonkar, Daniel Thomas, Christopher N Hahn, Attilio Orazi, Daniel A Arber, Chung Hoow Kok, Ayalew Tefferi, Devendra Hiwase
{"title":"髓系肿瘤携带TP53突变的循证风险分层","authors":"Mithun Vinod Shah, Kevin Hung, Anmol Baranwal, Monika M Kutyna, Aref Al-Kali, Carla Toop, Patricia Greipp, Anna Brown, Syed Shah, Shreyas Khanna, Dariusz Ladon, Vedavyas Gannamani, Dong Chen, Kebede Begna, Zoe K Price, Danielle Rud, Mark R Litzow, William J Hogan, Peter Bardy, Talha Badar, Sharad Kumar, David T Yeung, Mrinal M Patnaik, James M Foran, Rong He, Naseema Gangat, Hamish S Scott, Cecilia Y Arana Yi, Hassan Alkhateeb, Abhishek A Mangaonkar, Daniel Thomas, Christopher N Hahn, Attilio Orazi, Daniel A Arber, Chung Hoow Kok, Ayalew Tefferi, Devendra Hiwase","doi":"10.1182/bloodadvances.2024015238","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Abstract: </strong>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 <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 <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 <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.</p>","PeriodicalId":9228,"journal":{"name":"Blood advances","volume":" ","pages":"3370-3380"},"PeriodicalIF":7.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12277823/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evidence-based risk stratification of myeloid neoplasms harboring TP53 mutations.\",\"authors\":\"Mithun Vinod Shah, Kevin Hung, Anmol Baranwal, Monika M Kutyna, Aref Al-Kali, Carla Toop, Patricia Greipp, Anna Brown, Syed Shah, Shreyas Khanna, Dariusz Ladon, Vedavyas Gannamani, Dong Chen, Kebede Begna, Zoe K Price, Danielle Rud, Mark R Litzow, William J Hogan, Peter Bardy, Talha Badar, Sharad Kumar, David T Yeung, Mrinal M Patnaik, James M Foran, Rong He, Naseema Gangat, Hamish S Scott, Cecilia Y Arana Yi, Hassan Alkhateeb, Abhishek A Mangaonkar, Daniel Thomas, Christopher N Hahn, Attilio Orazi, Daniel A Arber, Chung Hoow Kok, Ayalew Tefferi, Devendra Hiwase\",\"doi\":\"10.1182/bloodadvances.2024015238\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Abstract: </strong>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 <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 <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 <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.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9228,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Blood advances\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"3370-3380\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":7.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12277823/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Blood advances\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1182/bloodadvances.2024015238\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"HEMATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Blood advances","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1182/bloodadvances.2024015238","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEMATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

这项回顾性分析旨在对TP53突变(TP53mut)骨髓性肿瘤(MN)进行循证风险分级。根据世界卫生组织(WHO)修订的第四版分类法,在580例携带TP53突变且变异等位基因频率(VAF)≥2%的MN中,219例(37.8%)、194例(33.4%)、92例(15.9%)和75例(12.9%)分别被归类为急性髓系白血病(AML)、低囊变MDS(MDS-LB)、多囊变MDS(MDS-EB)-2和-EB1。层次分析法确定了四个具有不同生存率的风险组:(i) MDS-LB,(ii) MDS-EB1/EB2/AML VAF
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Evidence-based risk stratification of myeloid neoplasms harboring TP53 mutations.

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 <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 <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 <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.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Blood advances
Blood advances Medicine-Hematology
CiteScore
12.70
自引率
2.70%
发文量
840
期刊介绍: Blood Advances, a semimonthly medical journal published by the American Society of Hematology, marks the first addition to the Blood family in 70 years. This peer-reviewed, online-only, open-access journal was launched under the leadership of founding editor-in-chief Robert Negrin, MD, from Stanford University Medical Center in Stanford, CA, with its inaugural issue released on November 29, 2016. Blood Advances serves as an international platform for original articles detailing basic laboratory, translational, and clinical investigations in hematology. The journal comprehensively covers all aspects of hematology, including disorders of leukocytes (both benign and malignant), erythrocytes, platelets, hemostatic mechanisms, vascular biology, immunology, and hematologic oncology. Each article undergoes a rigorous peer-review process, with selection based on the originality of the findings, the high quality of the work presented, and the clarity of the presentation.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信