4.8 Article

Mutation Clearance after Transplantation for Myelodysplastic Syndrome

Journal

NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE
Volume 379, Issue 11, Pages 1028-1041

Publisher

MASSACHUSETTS MEDICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1804714

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Leukemia and Lymphoma Society
  2. Edward P. Evans Foundation
  3. National Cancer Institute (NCI) [R33CA217700]
  4. Specialized Program of Research Excellence in AML of the NCI [P50CA171963]
  5. Washington University Institute of Clinical and Translational Sciences from the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences of the National Institutes of Health [UL1TR002345, TL1TR002344]
  6. American Society of Hematology Scholar Award
  7. Gabrielle's Angel Foundation
  8. Lottie Caroline Hardy Trust
  9. Genomics of AML Program Project of the NCI [P01 CA101937]
  10. Specialized Program of Research Excellence in AML [P50CA171963]
  11. NCI Cancer Center grant [P30CA091842]
  12. NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE [K08CA166229, P30CA091842, R35CA197561, K08CA222630, P50CA171963, P01CA101937, R35CA210084, R33CA217700] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER
  13. NATIONAL CENTER FOR ADVANCING TRANSLATIONAL SCIENCES [TL1TR002344, UL1TR002345] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER

Ask authors/readers for more resources

BACKGROUND Allogeneic hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation is the only curative treatment for patients with myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS). The molecular predictors of disease progression after transplantation are unclear. METHODS We sequenced bone marrow and skin samples from 90 adults with MDS who underwent allogeneic hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation after a myeloablative or reduced-intensity conditioning regimen. We detected mutations before transplantation using enhanced exome sequencing, and we evaluated mutation clearance by using error-corrected sequencing to genotype mutations in bone marrow samples obtained 30 days after transplantation. In this exploratory study, we evaluated the association of a mutation detected after transplantation with disease progression and survival. RESULTS Sequencing identified at least one validated somatic mutation before transplantation in 86 of 90 patients (96%); 32 of these patients (37%) had at least one mutation with a maximum variant allele frequency of at least 0.5% (equivalent to 1 heterozygous mutant cell in 100 cells) 30 days after transplantation. Patients with disease progression had mutations with a higher maximum variant allele frequency at 30 days than those who did not (median maximum variant allele frequency, 0.9% vs. 0%; P<0.001). The presence of at least one mutation with a variant allele frequency of at least 0.5% at day 30 was associated with a higher risk of progression (53.1% vs. 13.0%; conditioning regimen-adjusted hazard ratio, 3.86; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.96 to 7.62; P<0.001) and a lower 1-year rate of progression-free survival than the absence of such a mutation (31.3% vs. 59.3%; conditioning regimen-adjusted hazard ratio for progression or death, 2.22; 95% CI, 1.32 to 3.73; P=0.005). The rate of progression-free survival was lower among patients who had received a reduced-intensity conditioning regimen and had at least one persistent mutation with a variant allele frequency of at least 0.5% at day 30 than among patients with other combinations of conditioning regimen and mutation status (P.0.001). Multivariate analysis confirmed that patients who had a mutation with a variant allele frequency of at least 0.5% detected at day 30 had a higher risk of progression (hazard ratio, 4.48; 95% CI, 2.21 to 9.08; P<0.001) and a lower 1-year rate of progression-free survival than those who did not (hazard ratio for progression or death, 2.39; 95% CI, 1.40 to 4.09; P=0.002). CONCLUSIONS The risk of disease progression was higher among patients with MDS in whom persistent disease-associated mutations were detected in the bone marrow 30 days after transplantation than among those in whom these mutations were not detected.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available