PURPOSE Recurrently mutated genes and chromosomal abnormalities have been identified in myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS). We aim to integrate these genomic features into disease classification and prognostication. METHODS We retrospectively enrolled 2,043 patients. Using Bayesian networks and Dirichlet processes, we combined mutations in 47 genes with cytogenetic abnormalities to identify genetic associations and subgroups. Random-effects Cox proportional hazards multistate modeling was used for developing prognostic models. An independent validation on 318 cases was performed. RESULTS We identify eight MDS groups (clusters) according to specific genomic features. In five groups, dominant genomic features include splicing gene mutations ( SF3B1, SRSF2, and U2AF1) that occur early in disease history, determine specific phenotypes, and drive disease evolution. These groups display different prognosis (groups with SF3B1 mutations being associated with better survival). Specific co-mutation patterns account for clinical heterogeneity within SF3B1- and SRSF2-related MDS. MDS with complex karyotype and/or TP53 gene abnormalities and MDS with acute leukemia–like mutations show poorest prognosis. MDS with 5q deletion are clustered into two distinct groups according to the number of mutated genes and/or presence of TP53 mutations. By integrating 63 clinical and genomic variables, we define a novel prognostic model that generates personally tailored predictions of survival. The predicted and observed outcomes correlate well in internal cross-validation and in an independent external cohort. This model substantially improves predictive accuracy of currently available prognostic tools. We have created a Web portal that allows outcome predictions to be generated for user-defined constellations of genomic and clinical features. CONCLUSION Genomic landscape in MDS reveals distinct subgroups associated with specific clinical features and discrete patterns of evolution, providing a proof of concept for next-generation disease classification and prognosis.

PURPOSE Myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) are heterogeneous myeloid neoplasms in which a risk-adapted treatment strategy is needed. Recently, a new clinical-molecular prognostic model, the Molecular International Prognostic Scoring System (IPSS-M) was proposed to improve the prediction of clinical outcome of the currently available tool (Revised International Prognostic Scoring System [IPSS-R]). We aimed to provide an extensive validation of IPSS-M. METHODS A total of 2,876 patients with primary MDS from the GenoMed4All consortium were retrospectively analyzed. RESULTS IPSS-M improved prognostic discrimination across all clinical end points with respect to IPSS-R (concordance was 0.81 v 0.74 for overall survival and 0.89 v 0.76 for leukemia-free survival, respectively). This was true even in those patients without detectable gene mutations. Compared with the IPSS-R based stratification, the IPSS-M risk group changed in 46% of patients (23.6% and 22.4% of subjects were upstaged and downstaged, respectively). In patients treated with hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT), IPSS-M significantly improved the prediction of the risk of disease relapse and the probability of post-transplantation survival versus IPSS-R (concordance was 0.76 v 0.60 for overall survival and 0.89 v 0.70 for probability of relapse, respectively). In high-risk patients treated with hypomethylating agents (HMA), IPSS-M failed to stratify individual probability of response; response duration and probability of survival were inversely related to IPSS-M risk. Finally, we tested the accuracy in predicting IPSS-M when molecular information was missed and we defined a minimum set of 15 relevant genes associated with high performance of the score. CONCLUSION IPSS-M improves MDS prognostication and might result in a more effective selection of candidates to HSCT. Additional factors other than gene mutations can be involved in determining HMA sensitivity. The definition of a minimum set of relevant genes may facilitate the clinical implementation of the score.

No abstract