Back to Search Start Over

Incidence and Prognostic Impact of Cytogenetics in Combination with Molecular Aberrations in Patients with Systemic Mastocytosis

Authors :
Nicholas C.P. Cross
Alice Fabarius
Henning D. Popp
Manja Meggendorfer
Mohamad Jawhar
Brigitte Schlegelberger
Karl Sotlar
Andreas Reiter
Juliana Schwaab
Nicole Naumann
Gudrun Göhring
Peter Valent
Claudia Haferlach
Wolf-Karsten Hofmann
Hans-Peter Horny
Nada Khaled
Georgia Metzgeroth
Source :
Blood. 128:947-947
Publication Year :
2016
Publisher :
American Society of Hematology, 2016.

Abstract

Systemic mastocytosis (SM) usually arises as a consequence of an acquired mutation in the receptor tyrosine kinase KIT, usually KIT D816V (>80-90% of patients). The presence of additional molecular aberrations, e.g. in SRSF2, ASXL, or RUNX1 (S/A/Rpos), has a strong adverse impact on disease phenotype and prognosis in patients with advanced SM (advSM) (Jawhar et al., Leukemia 30, 2016). However, little is known about the frequency and prognostic impact of cytogenetic aberrations and potential interactions between cytogenetic and molecular aberrations in the context of prognostication. We therefore analyzed clinical, morphological, cytogenetic and molecular characteristics of 109 patients (KIT D816V, n=102, 94%; KIT D816H, n=2, 2%; no KIT mutation, n=5, 5%) with indolent SM (ISM, n=27) and advSM (n=82) with or without an associated hematologic neoplasm (AHN) [SM-AHN, n=60; aggressive SM, n=3; mast cell leukemia (MCL), n=9; MCL-AHN, n=10)]. Next-Generation Deep Amplicon Sequencing (NGS) was performed to investigate 18 candidate genes as previously described (Schwaab et al., Blood 122, 2013). All ISM patients had a normal karyotype. In advSM, an aberrant karyotype was identified in 16/82 (18%) patients. By analogy with other myeloid neoplasms, e.g. MDS or AML, patients were classified according to their karyotype into two groups. The good-risk group (n=73) included patients with a normal karyotype (n=66) plus those with a favorable karyotype (n=7; del(5q), n=4; trisomy 8, n=1; del(1q), n=1; del(12p), n=1), while the poor-risk group (n=9) included patients with a complex karyotype (defined as ≥3 abnormalities; n=8) or monosomy 7 (n=1). Seven of 9 (78%) patients with a poor-risk karyotype and 2/7 (29%) patients with a favorable karyotype progressed to secondary AML (n=7) or MCL (n=2) within a median observation time of 13 months (range, 0-26). Overall, the median overall survival (OS) of patients with a poor-risk karyotype was significantly shorter than in patients with a good-risk karyotype (4 vs. 41 months; hazard ratio, HR, 9.6, 95% CI 3.9-23.2; P Figure Kaplan-Meier estimates of overall survival (OS) in patients with advanced systemic mastocytosis depending on the karyotype and the mutation status in the SRSF2/ASXL1/RUNX1 gene panel (S/A/R). Pairwise significantly different OS probabilities were observed for the comparison good-risk karyotype + S/A/Rneg (n=27) vs. good-risk karyotype + S/A/Rpos (n=31) vs. poor-risk karyotype (n=9). Figure. Kaplan-Meier estimates of overall survival (OS) in patients with advanced systemic mastocytosis depending on the karyotype and the mutation status in the SRSF2/ASXL1/RUNX1 gene panel (S/A/R). Pairwise significantly different OS probabilities were observed for the comparison good-risk karyotype + S/A/Rneg (n=27) vs. good-risk karyotype + S/A/Rpos (n=31) vs. poor-risk karyotype (n=9). Disclosures Valent: Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding; Ariad: Honoraria, Research Funding; Amgen: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Deciphera Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding. Haferlach:MLL Munich Leukemia Laboratory: Employment, Equity Ownership. Meggendorfer:MLL Munich Leukemia Laboratory: Employment.

Details

ISSN :
15280020 and 00064971
Volume :
128
Database :
OpenAIRE
Journal :
Blood
Accession number :
edsair.doi...........8ebf1256bba0053d172514ce814c9106
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.1182/blood.v128.22.947.947