Clinical Factors but Not Somatic Mutations Predict for Survival in Patients with Myelofibrosis Undergoing Allogeneic Hematopoietic Cell Transplant: Analysis of the North American Myelofibrosis Transplant Outcome (NAMTO) Study
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Introduction: Myelofibrosis (MF) is a clonal hematologic malignancy characterized by constitutive JAK-STAT activation and aberrant cytokine signaling. Allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (allo-HCT) remains the only potentially curative therapy in MF. The contribution of disease-, patient- and donor-related factors to allo-HCT outcomes remains to be fully elucidated, as well as the presence of somatic mutations in genes such as ASXL1, EZH2, SRSF2, U2AF1 and IDH1/2 which are associated with worse prognosis in MF patients (pts). In this large multi- center retrospective analysis, we aimed to study the impact of clinical and molecular mutations on transplant outcomes. Methods: This analysis including 498 pts from 11 centers in North America and Canada. Univariate proportional-hazard Cox regression analysis stratified by center was used to assess the association of patient, transplant, and disease characteristics on overall survival (OS). Baseline patient demographic data and disease characteristics were selected as covariates in the multivariate analysis. Results: Pts transplanted between 2002-2021 were included in this analysis. Baseline and transplant characteristics are summarized in table 1. The 1- and 2-year OS was 77% (95% CI; 73-81) and 70% (95% CI; 66-74) and non-relapse mortality (NRM) 19% (95% CI: 17-21) and 23% (95% CI: 19-27), respectively. The cumulative incidence (CMI) of relapse at 1- and 2-years was 12% (95% CI; 10-14) and 16% (95% CI; 12-20). The CMI of acute graft versus host disease (aGVHD) grade II-IV was 31% (95% CI; 27-35) at 3 months and 42% (95% CI; 38-46) at 1-year post-transplant and grade was III-IV 13% (95% CI; 11-15) and 18% (95% CI; 14-22), respectively. The CMI of neutrophil engraftment at 1 and 3 months was 90% (95% CI: 87-93) and 97% (95% CI: 95-95) and for platelets 55% (95% CI: 50-59) and 80% (95% CI: 76-83). Univariate analysis included pts (age and gender), transplant (donor type and conditioning regimen intensity) and disease characteristics (DIPSS, mutations, cytogenetics (CG), blood counts, and spleen size). Hemoglobin > 10 g/dL (HR .5, 95% CI .34 -.73 p=3 x 10 -4) and platelets >50× 10 9/L (HR .59, 95% CI .42-.81, p=.0013) prior to transplant were associated with improved OS. High risk DIPSS was associated with decreased OS (p=0.0002). Mutations in ASXL1, EZH2, IDH1/2, U2AF1 and SRSF2 were not associated with decreased OS in this analysis (Figure 1). However, mutations in ZRSR2 were associated with inferior OS (HR 2.07, 95% CI 1.08-3.95, p=.0252). Lastly, JAK2 which had the most frequent mutations was not associated with OS (HR .0.93, 95% CI .65-1.31). There was no association between the CG risk groups and OS. Splenomegaly, measured radiographically, had no impact on OS but was strongly associated with engraftment (better engraftment defined as HR>1). For platelets, spleen size of 15.6-18.9 cm HR of 0.69 (95% CI .47-1, p=.0489) and size >18.9-22.5 cm HR of 0.48 ( 95% CI .33-.7, p=1x10^-4). For neutrophils, spleen size >19.9-22.5 cm had a HR of 0.68, (95% CI .48-.96, p=.0268) and size>22.5 cm had a HR of 0.65 (95% CI .46-.91, p=.0114). Mismatched unrelated (MMURD) and haplo identical donors had no impact on survival but were associated with delayed platelet engraftment; MMURD (HR .67, 95% CI .47-.96, p=.0298) and haploidentical donors (HR .56, 95% CI .39-.8, p=.0017). In a multivariate analysis adjusted for age, gender, highest DIPSS, donor type and conditioning regimen, platelets > 50× 10 9/L (HR .61, 95% CI .44-.87, p=.0053) hemoglobin >10 g/dL (HR .6, 95% CI .4-.9, p=.0244) and lower DIPSS at the time of transplant were associated with improved OS. Conclusions: In this large multicenter analysis only clinical variables; hemoglobin and platelets, were found to be associated with OS after allo-HCT in MF patients. Somatic mutations associated with poor prognosis were not associated with OS suggesting that transplant can overcome their negative impact. Splenomegaly was associated with delayed engraftment but not OS. Interestingly, using alternative donors (MMURD and haplo identical) didn't have a negative effect on OS, possibly reflecting the use of post-transplant cyclophosphamide for GVHD prophylaxis in recent years. These results highlight the importance of biologic factors in the prognostication of outcomes in MF pts undergoing allo-HCT independent of somatic mutations. Supported by the American Society of Hematology (ASH) and MPN Research Foundation
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».