All content on this site is intended for healthcare professionals only. By acknowledging this message and accessing the information on this website you are confirming that you are a Healthcare Professional. If you are a patient or carer, please visit Know AML.
Introducing
Now you can personalise
your AML Hub experience!
Bookmark content to read later
Select your specific areas of interest
View content recommended for you
Find out moreThe AML Hub website uses a third-party service provided by Google that dynamically translates web content. Translations are machine generated, so may not be an exact or complete translation, and the AML Hub cannot guarantee the accuracy of translated content. The AML Hub and its employees will not be liable for any direct, indirect, or consequential damages (even if foreseeable) resulting from use of the Google Translate feature. For further support with Google Translate, visit Google Translate Help.
The AML Hub is an independent medical education platform, sponsored by Daiichi Sankyo, Jazz Pharmaceuticals, Johnson & Johnson, Kura Oncology, Roche, Syndax and Thermo Fisher, and has been supported through a grant from Bristol Myers Squibb. The funders are allowed no direct influence on our content. The levels of sponsorship listed are reflective of the amount of funding given. View funders.
Bookmark this article
During the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) Annual Meeting, Alexander Maurer from the AML Hub hosted a group discussion with Michael Ozga and Caner Saygin, both from The Ohio State University, Columbus, US and Abhay Singh from Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center, Buffalo, US. This podcast discusses how the type of prior treatment can affect the risk of therapy-related myeloid neoplasms.
How does the type of prior treatment affect the risk of therapy-related myeloid neoplasms?
The group start by discussing the problems clinicians face when deciding treatment plans for patients with secondary myeloid neoplasms and describe how exposure to prior DNA damaging agents, cytotoxic therapies, and genotoxic therapies, can lead to a complex karyotype in these patients.
The group then discuss the role of clonal hematopoiesis in the evolution of secondary myeloid neoplasms. Dr Saygin describes how this could be a possibility especially for TP53 mutated, therapy-related AML, he also provides another hypothesis that genotoxic agents could cause de novo mutations. The group also discuss other driving mutations for clonal hematopoiesis including MPN1, SRSF2, and ASXL1, before moving on to discuss how specific genotoxic therapies can generate specific mutations. Dr Saygin and Dr Ozga describe their study in which they analyzed the molecular footprint of patients who had received various genotoxic and cytotoxic agents in order to answer this. Dr Singh also discusses his data on how the development of novel agents, such as immunotherapies may actually reduce the risk of secondary myeloid neoplasms compared to previous treatment options.
The discussion ends on the note that these types of studies will eventuality allow clinicians to predict disease risk better and provide more suitable therapies based on the patient's particular molecular profile.
Your opinion matters
Subscribe to get the best content related to AML delivered to your inbox