DNA methylation instability as a biomarker to predict resistance or progression to advanced disease Phase following tyrosine kinase inhibitor therapy in chronic myeloid leukemia
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Introduction DNA methylation occurs at defined CpG sites across the genome and plays a critical role in regulating gene expression. In young, healthy individuals, methylation patterns in peripheral blood cells are largely confined to stable methylation sites (SMSs). With aging, increased variability in these patterns has been observed, a phenomenon termed DNA methylation instability (DMI). Elevated DMI levels was found to reflect underlying epigenetic heterogeneity within the hematopoietic compartment and serve as a surrogate marker for clonal haematopoiesis. In our previous work we identified elevated DMI levels in lymphoid and myeloid malignancies (ASH 2023). Chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) arises from the clonal expansion of a hematopoietic progenitor cell harbouring the BCR::ABL1 fusion gene, but disease progression and treatment response are influenced by additional molecular and epigenetic alterations. We hypothesized that DMICML level can be employed as a prognostic biomarker in chronic phase (CP) CML. Specifically, DMICML level at diagnosis and during follow up may be used to predict response to tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) therapy, achievement of treatment free remission and progression to blast phase CML. Patients and method Paired bone marrow samples collected at diagnosis and follow-up were obtained from 78 patients with CML undergoing treatment with TKIs. Samples from 41 healthy donors (HDs) were included as a control group to establish baseline methylation variability. Genome-wide DNA methylation profiling was performed using the Illumina MethylationEPIC BeadChip. To quantify DNA methylation instability specific to CML, we calculated a DMICML, defined as the deviation in methylation levels across a curated set of SMSs. Methylation at each site was measured using β-values representing the ratio of methylated probe intensity to the total signal intensity (methylated plus unmethylated). Results The CML cohort included 24 females (30%), with a median age of 55 years (range: 19–80). At diagnosis, 75 patients (96%) were in chronic phase, and 24 (31%) had high-risk Sokal scores. Most patients (n = 65, 84%) received imatinib as first-line therapy. After a median follow-up of 1,952 days, the 4-year progression-free survival (PFS) rate was 94% (95% CI: 86–98%). PFS differed significantly by response category: 97% among optimal responders, 91% in patients with resistance, and 50% in those with progressive disease (P = 0.002). DMICML was calculated based on 6,334 CpG sites. These sites were selected based on a cut-off with a standard deviation (SD) > 0.18, which provided the best discriminatory power for outcome prediction, producing an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.654 for outcome discrimination. No correlation was found between DMICML and age in the CML pts cohort. DMICML showed a significant decrease from diagnosis (0.248±0.015) to follow-up (0.210±0.016 p=1.075×10⁻13). Notably, both DMICML values were markedly higher compared to HDs (0.008±0.004 p=3.93×10⁻19), highlighting persistent epigenetic instability in CML despite treatment. DMICML at diagnosis distinguished optimal responders from the resistance/progression group: In optimal responders, the median DMICML at diagnosis was 0.248 (IQR 0.238-0.257), compared to 0.255 (IQR 0.250-0.259) in the resistance/progression group (p=0.021). In contrast, no correlation was found between DMICML at follow-up, and clinical outcomes between optimal responders and resistant/progression group (0.209 vs 0.212; p=0.49). DMICML at diagnosis was correlated with BCR::ABL1 transcript level (R = 0.38, p = 0.0015). However, no correlation was observed between DMICML and BCR::ABL1 transcript levels during follow-up. Conclusion Our study employs a genome-scale approach to characterize DNA methylation instability patterns and identify epigenetic drivers of CML. Elevated DMICML at diagnosis may reflect clonal heterogeneity and serve as a surrogate biomarker to predict resistance or disease progression during TKI therapy. Our findings contribute to improved patient risk and treatment stratification. Its correlation with BCR::ABL1 transcript level results warrants further refinement.
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 | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| 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 ».