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, Johnson & Johnson, Kura Oncology and Syndax, 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
The 2017 European LeukemiaNet (ELN) recommendations separate patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) into three risk groups (favorable, intermediate, and adverse) based on significant chromosomal aberrations and gene mutations. However, some studies have suggested that prognosis may vary within the favorable group depending on mutations that are not included in the ELN risk criteria, such as DNA methylation mutations in regulatory regions (DNA-MR) of genes such as DNMT3A, IDH1, IDH2, and TET2. James Yu and colleagues have evaluated the impact of DNA-MR mutations on the outcomes of patients within the 2017 ELN favorable-risk group from a single-center study.1
Results of this study were presented as an oral abstract at the 2021 Transplantation & Cellular Therapy (TCT) Meetings of the American Society for Transplantation and Cellular Therapy (ASTCT) and the Center for International Blood & Marrow Transplant Research (CIBMTR) by James Yu and are summarized below.
All adult patients with AML who underwent intensive induction at the AdventHealth Orlando Hospital, Orlando, US, in 2017–2020 were reviewed. Those with acute promyelocytic leukemia or therapy-related AML were excluded from the analysis, while those with de novo AML or myelodysplastic syndrome-related AML were included. Next generation sequencing was carried out on the 124 remaining patients, using a target panel of 53 AML-related genes, including the DNA-MR genes of TET2, DNMT3A, IDH1, IDH2, and SETBP1. Patients were defined as positive for DNA-MR gene mutations if at least one of these genes were mutated.
Patients were classified into four groups:
Patient characteristics can be seen in Table 1.
Table 1. Patient characteristics*
BM, bone marrow; Hb, hemoglobin; HSCT, hematopoietic stem cell transplantation; PB, peripheral blood; PLT, platelet; WBC, white blood cell. |
|
Characteristic |
N = 124 |
---|---|
Median age, years |
61.5 |
Female, % |
39.5 |
Median WBC count, 103/µL |
9.7 |
Median PLT count, 103/µL |
53.0 |
Median Hb level, g/dL |
8.0 |
Median BM blast, % |
51.0 |
Median PB blast, % |
42.0 |
Karyotype abnormality |
|
HSCT, % |
45.2 |
Overall survival and relapse-free survival were analyzed between the four groups using a two-tailed log-rank test, with a 5% significance level.
The median follow-up of all patients was 57.3 weeks.
Figure 1. Percentage of patients with each type of DNA-MR gene mutation in the favorable-risk group*
*Data from Yu et al.1
The median overall survival was significantly decreased in patients in the ELN favorable-risk group with DNA-MR gene mutations compared to those without, or those in the ELN intermediate group; but was similar to that of patients in the ELN adverse group (Table 2).
Table 2. Median overall survival*
Bold type indicates statistical significance. |
||
Group |
Median OS, days |
p-value |
---|---|---|
1 (ELN favorable with DNA-MR) |
299 |
|
2 (ELN favorable without DNA-MR) |
NR |
0.0002 |
3 (ELN intermediate) |
987 |
0.0159 |
4 (ELN adverse) |
422 |
0.9641 |
Relapse-free survival was significantly decreased in patients in the ELN favorable-risk group with DNA-MR gene mutations compared to those without (Table 3).
Table 3. Median relapse-free survival*
Bold type indicates statistical significance. |
||
Group |
Median RFS, days |
p-value |
---|---|---|
1 (ELN favorable with DNA-MR) |
511 |
|
2 (ELN favorable without DNA-MR) |
NR |
0.0141 |
3 (ELN intermediate) |
494 |
0.9436 |
4 (ELN adverse) |
305 |
0.5826 |
DNA-MR gene mutations are common in patients with AML who are deemed to have favorable-risk status by the 2017 ELN criteria. They were associated with a less favorable prognosis in terms of both overall and progression-free survival compared with patients without these mutations. Moreover, these outcomes were similar to those of patients who are deemed as intermediate- or adverse-risk by the 2017 ELN criteria.
As DNA-MR gene mutations often co-occurred with NPM1 mutations, the authors suggest that perhaps this group of patients should have a different management regimen, for example, by being offered a hematopoietic stem cell transplantation in order to improve prognosis.
Limitations to the study include the relatively small sample size and that the prognostic effect of each individual type of DNA-MR gene mutation was not taken into account. Furthermore, the effects of AML treatments that effect DNA methylation, such as azacitidine or other demethylation agents, were also not analyzed as part of this study. Therefore, further studies in a larger population are required to confirm these results.
Your opinion matters
Subscribe to get the best content related to AML delivered to your inbox