Chronic Myelomonocytic Leukemia: 2022 Update on Diagnosis, Risk Stratification and Management

ABSTRACT Our understanding of chronic myelomonocytic leukemia (CMML) has evolved tremendously over the past decade. Large-scale sequencing studies have led to increased insight into the genomic landscape of CMML and clinical implications of these changes. This in turn has resulted in refined and improved risk stratification models, which to date remain versatile and subject to remodeling, as new and evolving studies continue to refine our understanding of this disease. In this article, we present an up-to-date review of CMML from a hematopathology perspective, while providing a clinically practical summary that sheds light on the constant evolution of our understanding of this disease.

Download Full-text

Chronic myelomonocytic leukemia: 2016 update on diagnosis, risk stratification, and management

American Journal of Hematology ◽

10.1002/ajh.24396 ◽

2016 ◽

Vol 91 (6) ◽

pp. 631-642 ◽

Cited By ~ 45

Author(s):

Mrinal M. Patnaik ◽

Ayalew Tefferi

Keyword(s):

Risk Stratification ◽

Chronic Myelomonocytic Leukemia ◽

Myelomonocytic Leukemia

Download Full-text

ASXL1 and SETBP1 Mutations and Their Prognostic Contribution In Chronic Myelomonocytic Leukemia: An International Study Of 431 Patients

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v122.21.1510.1510 ◽

2013 ◽

Vol 122 (21) ◽

pp. 1510-1510

Author(s):

Mrinal M Patnaik ◽

Raphael Itzykson ◽

Terra L Lasho ◽

Olivier Kosmider ◽

Christy Finke ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Platelet Count ◽

Risk Stratification ◽

Prognostic Model ◽

Univariate Analysis ◽

Multivariable Analysis ◽

International Study ◽

Chronic Myelomonocytic Leukemia ◽

Prognostic Impact ◽

Missense Mutations ◽

Myelomonocytic Leukemia

Abstract Background Chronic myelomonocytic leukemia (CMML) is a clonal stem cell disorder with overlapping features between myelodysplastic syndromes and myeloproliferative neoplasms. Numerous models exist for CMML prognostication, with more recent studies suggesting (JCO 201; 31:2428) or refuting (Leukemia 2013; 27:1504) the prognostic contribution of ASXL1 mutations. Furthermore, SETBP1 mutations were recently shown to be associated with shortened overall survival (OS) in CMML (Leukemia 2013; 10:1038). In the current international study, we examine these issues in a larger cohort of 431 patients. Methods 431 patients with WHO-defined CMML were included in the study. 235 (55%) were seen at the Mayo Clinic from 1997 through 2012. The remainders were from the French CMML registry (JCO 201; 31:2428). All patients underwent bone marrow (BM) examination and cytogenetic evaluation at diagnosis. DNA analysis for spliceosome component mutations (SRSF2, SF3B1 and U2AF1), ASXL1 and SETBP1 mutations were carried out on BM specimens obtained at diagnosis. In order to address the aforementioned discrepancy regarding the prognostic impact of ASXL1 mutations, relevant analyses in the Mayo cohort were first performed with and without inclusion of missense ASXL1 mutations. ASXL1 mutations from the French cohort did not include missense mutations. We evaluated the prognostic relevance of ASXL1 and SETBPI mutations, as well as several other clinical and laboratory parameters including those previously identified by the MDAPS (Blood 2002;99:840) the Spanish cytogenetic risk stratification (Haematologica 2011;96:375), and the Mayo prognostic model (Leukemia 2013;27;1504). Results Among the 431 study patients, 286 (66%) were males and median age was 73 years (range, 17-93 years). There were 368 (85%) patients with CMML-1 and the remainder had CMML-2. At a median follow-up of 23 months, 260 (60%) deaths and 70 (16%) leukemic transformations were documented. Median survivals were 38 months for CMML-1 and 24 months for CMML-2 (p=0.11). Mutational frequencies were 44% (173/390) for SRSF2, 6% (23/379) for SF3B1, 7% (27/387) for U2AF1, 38% (164/411) for ASXL1 (excluding missense mutations), and 5% (21/431) for SETBP1. Risk stratification was, based on i) Mayo prognostic model: 172 (40%) high, 151 (35%) intermediate and 94 (25 %) low risk, ii) MDAPS: 15 (3%) high, 73 (17%) intermediate-2, 125 (29%) intermediate-1 and 218 (50%) low risk and iii) Spanish cytogenetic stratification system: 316 (73%) low, 43 (10%) intermediate and 50 (12%) high risk. In the Mayo cohort, univariate analysis revealed that the exclusion of missense mutations changed the prognostic impact of ASXL1 mutations from non-significant (p=0.08) to significant (p=0.001). Accordingly, all subsequent analyses excluded missense ASXL1 mutations. In univariate analysis, lower hemoglobin (p<0.0001), lower platelet count (p=0.0027), higher absolute monocyte count (AMC) (p<0.0001), higher absolute lymphocyte count (ALC) (p=0.0002), circulating immature myeloid cells (IMC) (P<0.0001), cytogenetic risk stratification (p<0.0001) and ASXL1 mutations (p<0.0001) were significant for OS. In multivariable analysis, lower hemoglobin (p=0.0001; RR 2, 99% CI 1.6-2.6), lower platelet count (p=0.002; RR 1.5, 99% CI 1.2-1.9), higher AMC (p=0.0002; RR 2.2, 99% CI 1.6-3.1) and ASXL1mutations (p=0.0009; RR 1.9, 99% CI 1.5-2.4) retained their independent negative prognostic impact. Similarly, in univariate analysis, leukemia-free survival (LFS) was negatively affected by age (p=0.0015), lower hemoglobin (p=0.0002), lower platelet count (p=0.0002), higher AMC (p<0.0001), higher ALC (p=0.0001), circulating IMC (p<0.0001), BM blasts (p<0.0001), and cytogenetic risk stratification (p=.0002). ASXL1 (p=0.17) and SETBP1(p=0.87) mutations were not found to be significant. In multivariable analysis, lower platelet count (p=0.0005), higher AMC (P=0.0042), circulating IMC (P=0.008) and cytogenetic risk stratification (p=0.009) retained their independent negative prognostic impact. Conclusions In the current international study of a large cohort of patients with CMML, we confirm and clarify the independent prognostic relevance of ASXL1 mutations. The relatively high frequency of ASXL1 mutations in CMML warrants its inclusion in contemporary prognostic models. Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

Download Full-text

Survival and Prognosis in World Health Organization Defined Chronic Myelomonocytic Leukemia- A Mayo Clinic Series of 227 Patients

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v120.21.3790.3790 ◽

2012 ◽

Vol 120 (21) ◽

pp. 3790-3790

Author(s):

Mrinal M. Patnaik ◽

Curtis A Hanson ◽

Janice M Hodnefield ◽

Ryan A Knudson ◽

Rhett P Ketterling ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Risk Factors ◽

Bone Marrow ◽

Platelet Count ◽

Risk Stratification ◽

Risk Model ◽

Chronic Myelomonocytic Leukemia ◽

Leukemic Transformation ◽

Immature Myeloid Cells ◽

Independent Risk Factors ◽

Myelomonocytic Leukemia

Abstract Abstract 3790 Background: Chronic myelomonocytic leukemia (CMML) is a clonal stem cell disorder characterized by: persistent peripheral blood (PB) monocytosis (>1 × 10(9)/L), absence of BCR-ABL1 fusion, absence of rearrangement of the PDGFRA/B genes, <20% bone marrow (BM) & PB blasts, and dysplasia involving one or more myeloid cell lines. It is clinically considered to be an overlapping syndrome with myelodysplastic and myeloproliferative features. The natural history and prognostic features of CMML are not well defined with the MD Anderson prognostic score (MDAPS) and the Spanish risk stratification by cytogenetics being the two major prognostic tools currently being used in clinical practice. Methods: 227 patients with WHO defined CMML were seen at the Mayo Clinic from 1997 through 2007. All patients underwent bone marrow (BM) examination and cytogenetic evaluation at diagnosis. We evaluated the prognostic relevance of several clinical and laboratory parameters including those previously identified by the MDAPS (Blood 2002;99:840) and the Spanish cytogenetic risk stratification (Haematologica 2011;96:375). Results: Among the 227 study patients, 153 (67%) were males and median age was 71 years (range, 17–90 years). There were 192 (85%) patients with CMML-1 & the remainder had CMML-2. At a median follow-up of 15 months, 166 (73%) deaths and 33 (14.5%) leukemic transformations were documented. Median survivals were 22 months for CMML-1 and 14 months for CMML-2. In univariate analysis, significant risk factors for survival included decreased hemoglobin level, decreased platelet count and increased levels of white blood cells (WBC), absolute neutrophils (ANC), absolute monocytes (AMC), absolute lymphocytes (ALC), PB blasts, BM blasts and presence of circulating immature myeloid cells (IMC; inclusive of PB blasts). However, on multivariable analysis that included the aforementioned Spanish cytogenetic risk stratification, only increased AMC (>10 × 10(9)/L, RR 2.5, 95% CI 1.7–3.8), presence of circulating IMC (RR 2.0, 95% CI 1.4–2.7), decreased hemoglobin (<10 g/dL; RR 1.6, 99% CI 1.2–2.2), and decreased platelet count (<100 × 10(9)/L; RR 1.4, 99% CI 1.0–1.9) retained significance. Using these four independent risk factors, we prepared a new prognostic risk model that performed better than both the MDAPS and the Spanish cytogenetic risk models (Figure). The Mayo risk model was also predictive of leukemic transformation: high risk RR 4.9 (95% CI 1.9–12.8) and intermediate risk RR 2.6 (1.1–5.9). Individual parameters of independent significance for leukemic transformation included PB blast count and AMC >10 × 10(9)/L. Conclusions: Absolute monocyte count is the strongest predictor of survival in CMML. Other independent risk factors include circulating immature myeloid cells, anemia and thrombocytopenia. A risk model based on these four risk factors is effective in predicting both overall and leukemia-free survival and outperforms both the MDAPS and risk stratification by cytogenetics. Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

Download Full-text