Comparison of the WHO classification (5th edition) 2022 and the International Consensus Classification (ICC) 2022 for diagnosis of acute myeloid leukemia

• Autorzy: Al-Nakkash Naba , Frenzel Lukas P.

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.58332/scirad2024v3i1a03

• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

In 2022, two classifications were published to define the diagnosis of patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML). The World Health Organisation (WHO) 5th edition and the International Consensus Classification (ICC) provide an updated summary of current knowledge of the diseases and construct a framework for physicians. Two differing classifications result in discrepancies, which change the definition of AML subtypes and present a challenge in clinical settings. This work summarizes the updated classification systems and discusses their significance in clinical settings while considering the latest findings. Relevant changes affect the i) required blast percentage, ii) AML harbouring CEBPA mutations, iii) AML with KMT2A and MECOM rearrangements, iv) AML with myelodysplasia-related characteristics and in association with this entity AML with mutated RUNX1, and lastly v) AML with TP53 mutation. In summary, a unified classification system would be desirable to achieve harmonized diagnosis and treatment of AML).

Słowa kluczowe

EN

AML; WHO; ICC; acute myeloid leukemia; World Health Organisation; International Consensus Classification

PL

AML; WHO; ICC; ostra białaczka szpikowa; Światowa Organizacja Zdrowia; International Consensus Classification

• Wydawca: Radomskie Towarzystwo Naukowe
• Czasopismo: Scientiae Radices
• Rocznik: 2024
• Tom: Vol. 3, Iss. 1
• Strony: 14--29
• Opis fizyczny: Bibliogr. 44 poz., 1 il. kolor.

Twórcy

autor

Al-Nakkash Naba

• Department I of Internal Medicine, University Hospital Cologne, Cologne, 50937; Germany

autor

Frenzel Lukas P.

• Department I of Internal Medicine, University Hospital Cologne, Cologne, 50937; Germany
• Center of Integrated Oncology ABCD, University Hospital of Cologne, Cologne, Germany
• Cologne Excellence Cluster on Cellular Stress Responses in Aging-Associated Diseases (CECAD), University of Cologne, Cologne, 50937; Germany

Bibliografia

• [1] Huber, S.; et al. AML classification in the year 2023: How to avoid a Babylonian confusion of languages. Leukemia 2023, 37, 1413-1420. DOI: 10.1038/s41375-023-01909-w.
• [2] The website of the National Cancer Institute.
• [3] Khoury, J.D.; et al. The 5th edition of the World Health Organization Classification of Haematolymphoid Tumours: Myeloid and Histiocytic/Dendritic Neoplasms. Leukemia 2022, 36, 1703-1719. DOI: 10.1038/s41375-022-01613-1.
• [4] Arber, D.A.; et al. The 2016 revision to the World Health Organization classification of myeloid neoplasms and acute leukemia. Blood 2016, 127, 2391-2405. DOI: 10.1182/blood-2016-03-643544.
• [5] Arber, D.A.; et al. International Consensus Classification of Myeloid Neoplasms and Acute Leukemias: integrating morphologic, clinical, and genomic data. Blood 2022, 140, 1200-1228. DOI: 10.1182/blood.2022015850.
• [6] Li, W.; The 5th Edition of the World Health Organization Classification of Hematolymphoid Tumors, in Leukemia. Exon Publications 2022, 1-21. DOI: 10.36255/exon-publications-leukemia-who-5th-edition-hematolymphoid-tumors.
• [7] Weinberg, O.K.; et al. The International Consensus Classification of acute myeloid leukemia. Virchows. Archiv. 2023, 482, 27-37. DOI: 10.1007/s00428-022-03430-4.
• [8] Estey, E.; Hasserjian, R.P.; Döhner, H.; Distinguishing AML from MDS: a fixed blast percentage may no longer be optimal. Blood 2022, 139, 323-332. DOI: 10.1182/blood.2021011304.
• [9] Bacher, U.; et al. Prognosis in patients with MDS or AML and bone marrow blasts between 10% and 30% is not associated with blast counts but depends on cytogenetic and molecular genetic characteristics. Leukemia 2011, 25, 1361-1364. DOI: 10.1038/leu.2011.80.
• [10] Sherwood, L.; Is It Time for a Unified Approach to MDS? Blood Cancers Today 2023.
• [11] Bersanelli, M.; et al. Classification and Personalized Prognostic Assessment on the Basis of Clinical and Genomic Features in Myelodysplastic Syndromes. J. Clin. Oncol. 2021, 39, 1223-1233. DOI: 10.1200/JCO.20.01659.
• [12] DiNardo, C.D.; Garcia‐Manero, G.; Kantarjian, H.M.; Time to blur the blast boundaries. Cancer 2022, 128, 1568-1570. DOI: 10.1002/cncr.34119.
• [13] Miyashita, N.; et al. Prognostic impact of FLT3-ITD, NPM1 mutation and CEBPA bZIP domain mutation in cytogenetically normal acute myeloid leukemia: a Hokkaido Leukemia Net study. Int. J. Hematol. 2023, 118, 36-46. DOI: 10.1007/s12185-023-03567-1.
• [14] Taube, F.; et al. CEBPA mutations in 4708 patients with acute myeloid leukemia: differential impact of bZIP and TAD mutations on outcome. Blood 2022, 139, 87-103. DOI: 10.1182/blood.2020009680.
• [15] Faisal, M.S.; Sung, P.J.; Location, location, location: A mini-review of CEBPA variants in patients with acute myeloid leukemia. Leuk. Res. Rep. 2023, 20, 100386. DOI: 10.1016/j.lrr.2023.100386.
• [16] Zhao, D.; et al. AML with CEBPA mutations: A comparison of ICC and WHO-HAEM5 criteria in patients with 20% or more blasts. Leuk. Res. 2023, 134, 107376. DOI: 10.1016/j.leukres.2023.107376.
• [17] Hernández Sánchez, A.; et al. Rearrangements Involving 11q23/ KMT2A : Mutational Landscape and Prognostic Implications - Results of the Harmony Alliance AML Database. Blood 2022, 140, 551-554. DOI: 10.1182/blood-2022-167480.
• [18] Menghrajani, K.; et al. Risk classification at diagnosis predicts post-HCT outcomes in intermediate-, adverse-risk, and KMT2A -rearranged AML. Blood Adv. 2022, 6, 828-847. DOI: 10.1182/bloodadvances.2021004881.
• [19] Yuen, K.; et al. Mutational landscape and clinical outcome of pediatric acute myeloid leukemia with KMT2A rearrangements. Cancer Med. 2023, 12, 1418-1430. DOI: 10.1002/cam4.5026.
• [20] Gao, J.; et al. Comparison of myeloid neoplasms with nonclassic 3q26.2/ MECOM versus classic inv(3)/ t (3;3) rearrangements reveals diverse clinicopathologic features, genetic profiles, and molecular mechanisms of MECOM activation. Genes Chromosomes Canc. 2022, 61, 71-80. DOI: 10.1002/gcc.23004.
• [21] Alpermann, T.; Haferlach, C.; Fasan, A.; Schindela, S.; Kern, W.; Haferlach, T.; Prognosis of Mecom(EVI1)- rearranged MDS and AML Patients Strongly Depends on Accompanying Molecular Mutations but Not on Blast Counts. Blood 2015, 126, 1372-1372. DOI: 10.1182/blood.V126.23.1372.1372.
• [22] Park, H.S.; et al. The new diagnostic criteria for myelodysplasia-related acute myeloid leukemia is useful for predicting clinical outcome: comparison of the 4th and 5th World Health Organization classifications. Ann. Hematol. 2022, 101, 2645-2654. DOI: 10.1007/s00277-022-05002-7.
• [23] Yokoyama, K.; et al. Cell-lineage level-targeted sequencing to identify acute myeloid leukemia with myelodysplasia-related changes. Blood Adv. 2018, 2, 2513-2521. DOI: 10.1182/bloodadvances.2017010744.
• [24] Lindsley, R.C.; et al. Acute myeloid leukemia ontogeny is defined by distinct somatic mutations. Blood 2015, 125, 1367-1376. DOI: 10.1182/blood-2014-11-610543.
• [25] Fuhrmann, I.; et al. AML, NOS and AML-MRC as defined by multilineage dysplasia share a common mutation pattern which is distinct from AML-MRC as defined by MDS-related cytogenetics. Leukemia 2022, 36, 1939-1942. DOI: 10.1038/s41375-022-01631-z.
• [26] Rungjirajittranon, T.; et al. Clinical Outcomes of Acute Myeloid Leukemia Patients Harboring the RUNX1 Mutation: Is It Still an Unfavorable Prognosis? A Cohort Study and Meta-Analysis. Cancers (Basel) 2022, 14, 5239. DOI: 10.3390/cancers14215239.
• [27] Wang, X.; et al. The latest edition of WHO and ELN guidance and a new risk model for Chinese acute myeloid leukemia patients. Front. Med. (Lausanne) 2023, 10, DOI: 10.3389/fmed.2023.1165445.
• [28] Quesada, A.E.; et al. Clinico-pathologic characteristics and outcomes of the World Health Organization (WHO) provisional entity de novo acute myeloid leukemia with mutated RUNX1. Mod. Pathol. 2020, 33, 1678-1689. DOI: 10.1038/s41379-020-0531-2.
• [29] Gaidzik, V.I.; et al. RUNX1 mutations in acute myeloid leukemia are associated with distinct clinico-pathologic and genetic features. Leukemia 2016, 30, 2160-2168. DOI: 10.1038/leu.2016.126.
• [30] Sood, R.; Kamikubo, Y.; Liu, P.; Role of RUNX1 in hematological malignancies. Blood 2017, 129, 2070-2082. DOI: 10.1182/blood-2016-10-687830.
• [31] McCarter, J.G.W.; et al. Interaction between myelodysplasia-related gene mutations and ontogeny in acute myeloid leukemia Blood Adv. 2023, 7, 5000-5013. DOI: 10.1182/bloodadvances.2023009675.
• [32] Daver, N.G.; et al. TP53 -Mutated Myelodysplastic Syndrome and Acute Myeloid Leukemia: Biology, Current Therapy, and Future Directions. Cancer Discov. 2022, 12, 2516-2529. DOI: 10.1158/2159-8290.CD-22-0332.
• [33] Testa, U.; Castelli, G.; Pelosi, E.; TP53-mutated myelodysplasia and acute myeloid leukemia. Mediterr. J. Hematol. Infect. Dis. 2023, 15, e2023038. DOI: 10.4084/MJHID.2023.038.
• [34] Weinberg, O.K.; et al. TP53 mutation defines a unique subgroup within complex karyotype de novo and therapy-related MDS/AML. Blood Adv. 2022, 6, 2847-2853. DOI: 10.1182/bloodadvances.2021006239.
• [35] Montalban-Bravo, G.; et al. Genomic context and TP53 allele frequency define clinical outcomes in TP53-mutated myelodysplastic syndromes. Blood Adv. 2020, 4, 482-495. DOI: 10.1182/bloodadvances.2019001101.
• [36] Kim, K.; et al. Outcomes of TP53 ‐mutant acute myeloid leukemia with decitabine and venetoclax. Cancer 2021, 127, 3772-3781. DOI: 10.1002/cncr.33689.
• [37] Short, N.J.; et al. Prognostic and therapeutic impacts of mutant TP53 variant allelic frequency in newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia. Blood Adv. 2020, 4, 5681-5689. DOI: 10.1182/bloodadvances.2020003120.
• [38] Hiwase, D.; et al. TP53 mutation in therapy-related myeloid neoplasm defines a distinct molecular subtype. Blood 2023, 141, 1087-1091. DOI: 10.1182/blood.2022018236.
• [39] Shah, M.V.; et al. P53 Mutation Status Defines a Distinct Clinicopathological Entity of Therapy-Related Myeloid Neoplasm, Characterized By Genomic Instability and Extremely Poor Outcome. Blood 2022, 140, 9798-9799. DOI: 10.1182/blood-2022-165859.
• [40] Grob, T.; et al. Molecular characterization of mutant TP53 acute myeloid leukemia and high-risk myelodysplastic syndrome. Blood 2022, 139, 2347-2354. DOI: 10.1182/blood.2021014472.
• [41] Fenwarth, L.; et al. Prognostic Impact of Monoallelic Versus Biallelic TP53 Alterations in Intensively-Treated Adults AML Patients: A Retrospective Study from the ALFA Group. Blood 2022, 140, 737-738. DOI: 10.1182/blood-2022-163044.
• [42] Lachowiez, C.A.: et al. Comparison and validation of the 2022 European LeukemiaNet guidelines in acute myeloid leukemia. Blood Adv. 2023, 7, 1899-1909. DOI: 10.1182/bloodadvances.2022009010.
• [43] Fang, H.; Medeiros, L.J.; Wang, W.; Acute myeloid leukemia with mutated TP53 : Is this newly proposed entity oversimplifying a complex group of neoplasms? Am. J. Hematol. 2023, 98, E354-E355. DOI: 10.1002/ajh.27085.
• [44] Jung, J.; et al. Perspectives on acute myeloid leukemia diagnosis: a comparative analysis of the latest World Health Organization and the International Consensus Classifications. Leukemia 2023, 37, 2125-2128. DOI: 10.1038/s41375-023-01996-9.

Uwagi

Opracowanie rekordu ze środków MNiSW, umowa nr SONP/SP/546092/2022 w ramach programu "Społeczna odpowiedzialność nauki" - moduł: Popularyzacja nauki i promocja sportu (2024).