| Literature DB >> 34068470 |
Gabriel Antherieu1, Audrey Bidet2, Sarah Huet3, Sandrine Hayette3, Marina Migeon2, Lisa Boureau2, Pierre Sujobert3, Xavier Thomas1, Hervé Ghesquières1, Arnaud Pigneux4, Mael Heiblig1.
Abstract
Recently, a new subset of acute myeloid leukemia (AML) presenting a direct partial tandem duplication (PTD) of the KMT2A gene was described. The consequences of this alteration in terms of outcome and response to treatment remain unclear. We analyzed retrospectively a cohort of KMT2A-PTD-mutated patients with newly diagnosed AML. With a median follow-up of 3.6 years, the median overall survival was 12.1 months. KMT2A-PTD-mutated patients were highly enriched in mutations affecting epigenetic actors and the RTK/RAS signaling pathway. Integrating KMT2A-PTD in ELN classification abrogates its predictive value on survival suggesting that this mutation may overcome other genomic marker effects. In patients receiving intensive chemotherapy, hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) significantly improved the outcome compared to non-transplanted patients. In the multivariate analysis, only HSCT at any time in complete remission (HR = 2.35; p = 0.034) and FLT3-ITD status (HR = 0.29; p = 0.014) were independent variables associated with overall survival, whereas age was not. In conclusion, our results emphasize that KMT2A-PTD should be considered as a potential adverse prognostic factor. However, as KMT2A-PTD-mutated patients are usually considered an intermediate risk group, upfront HSCT should be considered in first CR due to the high relapse rate observed in this subset of patients.Entities:
Keywords: KMT2A; acute myeloid leukemia; transplantation
Year: 2021 PMID: 34068470 PMCID: PMC8126020 DOI: 10.3390/cancers13092272
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Cancers (Basel) ISSN: 2072-6694 Impact factor: 6.639
Patient characteristics.
| Variable | Total ( | |
|---|---|---|
|
| 66 (19–87) | |
|
| 12/50 (24%) | |
|
| 1.1 | |
|
| 47/72 (65.3%) | |
|
| 20/70 (28.6%) | |
|
| 12/75 (16%) | |
|
| 20/40 (50%) | |
|
| 8/70 (11.4%) | |
|
| 20/79 (25.2%) | |
|
| 24/79 (30.4%) | |
|
| DNMT3A, | 12/24 (50%) |
| ASXL1, | 2/24 (8.3%) | |
| RUNX1, | 6/24 (25%) | |
| TET2, | 5/24 (20.8%) | |
| TP53, | 1/24 (4.2%) | |
| SRSF2, | 5/24 (20.8%) | |
| STAG2, | 5/24 (20.8%) | |
| RAS/PTPN11, | 4/24 (16.7%) | |
Figure 1(a) Overall survival according to treatment intensity; (b) overall survival according to age and treatment intensity; (c) overall survival according to ELN 2013 classification in intensively treated patients. IC = intensive care, LIC = low intensive care, BSC = best supportive care.
Figure 2(a) Oncoplot (n = 24); (b) overall survival according to FLT3-ITD status; (c) overall survival according to molecular subgroups.
Figure 3(a) Overall survival according to HSCT status; (b) overall survival according to age and HSCT in CR1 compared to patients who did not underwent HSCT at any time.
Multivariate analysis
| Variables | OS | LFS | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| HR (IC 95%) | Range | HR (IC 95%) | Range | |||
| Age < 60 vs. ≥60 years old | 1.74 | (0.77–3.91) | 0.180 | 2.15 | (0.99–4.67) | 0.053 |
| HSCT (yes vs. no) | 2.35 | (1.06–5.19) |
| 2.36 | (1.08–5.13) |
|
| 0.29 | (0.11–0.78) |
| 0.27 | (0.11–0.70) |
| |
Bold was used to highlight statistically significant results.