Factors influencing outcomes in therapy-related myeloid neoplasms following allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Introduction: Therapy-related myeloid neoplasms (t-MN), including therapy-related myelodysplastic syndrome (t-MDS) and acute myeloid leukemia (t-AML), arise after exposure to cytotoxic or immunosuppressive treatments. Although the 2022 International Consensus Classification (ICC) no longer recognizes t-MN as distinct, the term persists due to historically poor prognosis. Many cases, however, have favorable or intermediate-risk genetics. This study examines clinical and molecular predictors of outcomes after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (allo-HSCT) in t-MN. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed 141 t-MN patients who underwent allo-HSCT from Jan 2010 to May 2024. Collected variables included demographics, prior therapies, disease features, transplant parameters, and outcomes. The primary endpoint was 2-year overall survival (OS); secondary endpoints were 2-year non-relapse mortality (NRM) and cumulative incidence of relapse (CIR). Kaplan-Meier and competing risk analyses were performed. Results: Among 141 patients (median age 60; 47% male), 62.4% had t-AML, 33.3% t-MDS, and 4.3% other diagnoses. Median time from primary disease to t-MN was 6 years. In t-AML, prior cancers included solid tumors (48.9%) and hematologic neoplasms (35.2%), with 17% having had autologous HSCT. In t-MDS, 74.5% had prior hematologic malignancy and 51.1% had prior autologous HSCT. Overall, 85% had a history of cytotoxic therapy. Pre-HSCT therapies included induction chemotherapy (61%), hypomethylating agents (HMA) alone (22%), HMA plus venetoclax (7.1%), or none (7.8%). Common cytogenetics were chromosome 7 abnormalities (27%), complex karyotype (20.6%), monosomal karyotype (24.1%), and TP53 mutations (7.1%). ELN 2022 risk classification: 12.1% favorable, 39.6% intermediate, 37.4% adverse. With 2-year median follow-up, OS was 52.8%, NRM 29.2%, and CIR 21.1%. Grade II–IV acute GVHD occurred in 26.2%; chronic GVHD in 30.2% (with moderate or severe cases in 20.2%). OS was higher in t-AML vs. t-MDS (57.3% vs. 40.6%, p=0.045). Outcomes did not significantly differ by primary disease type: OS was 50.2% for solid tumors, 53.6% for hematologic neoplasms, 58.8% for benign diseases (p=0.42); NRM: 28.3%, 29.9%, 29.4% respectively (p=0.58); CIR: 25.9%, 19.6%, 11.8% (p=0.31). Among prior hematologic malignancies, prior autologous HSCT did not impact OS, NRM, or CIR. In t-AML, the 2022 European LeukemiaNet (ELN) risk stratification showed 2-year OS: 63.6% (favorable), 62.8% (intermediate), 54.8% (adverse) (p=0.42). NRM did not significantly differ (36.4%, 28.0%, 9.4%; p=0.15), but CIR was higher in adverse (42.1%) vs. intermediate (11.4%) and favorable (0%) (p=0.002). Using the Disease Risk Index (DRI) classification (Armand et al., Blood 2014), 2-year OS was 66.7% (low-risk), 59.5% (intermediate-risk), and 36.5% (high-risk) (p=0.007). NRM: 33.3% (low-risk), 29.6% (intermediate-risk), 27.2% (high-risk) (p=0.99); CIR: 6.0% (low-risk), 12.7% (intermediate-risk), 42.8% (high-risk) (p<0.001). Adverse cytogenetics were associated with inferior outcomes: complex karyotype (OS 35.3% vs. 58.4%, p=0.02; CIR 48.2% vs. 16.1%, p<0.001), chromosome 7 abnormalities (OS 31.1% vs. 61.1%, p<0.001; CIR 43.1% vs. 15.2%, p<0.001), del(5q) (OS 29.2% vs. 55.9%, p=0.005; CIR 56.2% vs. 18.2%, p<0.001). At the time of analysis, no patient with both TP53 mutation and complex karyotype survived beyond 2 years. Conditioning intensity and chronic GVHD severity did not affect OS. Multivariable analysis identified Karnofsky performance status (KPS) <90, chromosome 7 abnormalities, and del(5q) as adverse OS predictors. Chromosome 7 abnormalities, del(5q), and bone marrow graft source were associated with higher relapse. Conclusion: Allo-HSCT offers curative potential for t-MN. Outcomes were better in t-AML vs. t-MDS. ELN 2022 effectively predicted relapse, but DRI better predicted both OS and CIR. Adverse cytogenetics (complex karyotype, del(5q), chromosome 7 abnormalities, TP53 mutations) predicted poor survival. These findings underscore the importance of molecular risk stratification and highlight the need for innovative therapies for high-risk groups.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".