Impact of NRAS and/or KRAS mutations on post-transplant outcomes in Acute Myeloid Leukemia: A study on behalf of EBMT-ALWP

Abstract Background: NRAS, and/or KRAS mutations are identified in 10–15% of patients diagnosed with acute myeloid leukemia (AML). While their prognostic value in non-transplant settings remains inconsistent and treatment-dependent, their impact in the context of allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (allo-HCT) is underexplored. Given the growing use of targeted and maintenance therapies post allo-HCT, understanding whether NRAS/KRAS mutations influence post-transplant outcomes is crucial for risk stratification and future interventional trial design. Methods: This is a retrospective, registry-based analysis conducted after the approval of the Acute Leukemia Working Party of the European Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation. Adult AML patients who underwent allo-HCT between 2016 and 2021 with known NRAS and/or KRAS mutation status at diagnosis were included, regardless of the disease status at transplant. The primary objective was to evaluate the impact of NRAS/KRAS mutations on post-transplant outcomes including overall survival (OS), leukemia-free survival (LFS), cumulative incidence of relapse (CIR), and non-relapse mortality (NRM). Results: A total of 770 patients with NRAS and/or KRAS mutant AML were identified, with a median transplant year of 2020 and a median age at allo-HCT of 53 years (range: 18–79); 53% were male. Median time from diagnosis to allo-HCT was 5 months (interquartile range: 4–8) for patients in first complete remission (CR1). Most had de novo AML (77%) and intermediate-risk ELN2022 cytogenetics (64%, with normal karyotype in 43%); 25% had adverse-risk cytogenetics. NPM1 and FLT3-ITD mutations were present in 42% and 30% of patients, respectively; 58% were negative for both. Myeloablative conditioning was used in 56% of cases. Donor types included matched sibling (19%), haploidentical (25%), and matched unrelated (33%). At transplant, 537 patients were in CR1, 93 in second or third CR (CR2+), and 140 had active disease. Compared to CR1 and active disease patients, those in CR2+ were more often female (59% vs. 46% vs. 43%, p=0.03), had de novo AML (91% vs. 80% vs. 57%), and showed higher rates of favorable cytogenetic risk (mainly inversion 16; 26% vs. 10% vs. 5%, p<0.001) and NPM1 mutations (67% vs. 37% vs. 38%, p<0.001). After a median follow-up of 2 years (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.9–2.1), 2-year OS and LFS for the entire cohort were 65% (95% CI: 61-69) and 54% (95% CI: 50-58), respectively; 2-year CIR was 31% (95% CI: 27-35), and NRM 15% (95% CI: 12-18). In CR1 patients, 2-year OS, LFS and CIR were 72%, 61% and 26%, respectively; for CR2+ patients, 2-year OS was 62%, LFS 57%, and CIR 26%; for active disease, 2-year OS was 41%, LFS 28%, and CIR 51%. According to ELN2022 cytogenetic risk, 2-year LFS among CR1 patients was 77%, 61%, and 55% (p=0.04) for favorable, intermediate, and adverse risk, respectively. Among CR2+ patients, 2-year LFS was 55% for favorable and 63% for intermediate risk, while six of the eight patients with adverse risk died before 2 years and two were alive at 1 year without further follow-up. In patients transplanted with active disease, the 2-year LFS was 100%, 31% and 17% for those with favorable (n=6), intermediate and adverse risk, respectively. Multivariable analysis for CR1 patients showed that LFS was significantly worse in secondary AML (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.57; 95% CI: 1.11–2.22; p=0.01), while mismatched related donors, including haploidentical, were associated with improved LFS (HR: 0.54; 95% CI: 0.34–0.86; p=0.009). Cytomegalovirus positivity in patients was also associated with better LFS (HR: 0.71; 95% CI: 0.5-0.96; p=0.03). Increasing age negatively impacted OS (HR: 1.2 per 10-year increment; 95% CI: 1.0–1.4; p=0.02). Conclusion: This large multicenter study included a substantial number of AML patients harboring NRAS and/or KRAS mutations who underwent allo-HCT. Outcomes in this molecular subgroup were encouraging, with over 60% remaining leukemia-free at 2 years. Notably, patients in CR2+ had predominantly favorable features such as NPM1 mutations and inversion 16, and achieved survival outcomes not different to those in CR1. In addition, haploidentical transplant appeared to confer a better LFS in this cohort, suggesting a potential role for graft-versus-leukemia effects in this setting. These findings add to the growing body of evidence supporting the development of a transplant-specific risk stratification that can predict long-term outcomes.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Blood
Published
2025-11-03
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1182/blood-2025-6395
Primary Topic
Acute Myeloid Leukemia Research
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Impact of NRAS and/or KRAS mutations on post-transplant outcomes in Acute Myeloid Leukemia: A study on behalf of EBMT-ALWP

Jakob Robert Passweg, Matthias Stelljes, Francis Ayuk, Éolia Brissot et al.
Blood
Acute Myeloid Leukemia Research
article

Impact of NRAS and/or KRAS mutations on post-transplant outcomes in Acute Myeloid Leukemia: A study on behalf of EBMT-ALWP

Jakob Robert Passweg, Matthias Stelljes, Francis Ayuk, Éolia Brissot, He Huang, Jordi Esteve, Lorenz Thurner, Ali Bazarbachi, Fabio Ciceri, Ibrahim Yakoub‐Agha, Iman Abou Dalle, Thomas A. Schroeder, Jacques‐Emmanuel Galimard, Andreas Burchert, Robert Zeiser, Bipin N. Savani, Édouard Forcade, Mohamad Mohty, Matthias Eder, Urpu Salmenniemi, Depei Wu, Stephan Mielke
article en

Abstract

Abstract Background: NRAS, and/or KRAS mutations are identified in 10–15% of patients diagnosed with acute myeloid leukemia (AML). While their prognostic value in non-transplant settings remains inconsistent and treatment-dependent, their impact in the context of allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (allo-HCT) is underexplored. Given the growing use of targeted and maintenance therapies post allo-HCT, understanding whether NRAS/KRAS mutations influence post-transplant outcomes is crucial for risk stratification and future interventional trial design. Methods: This is a retrospective, registry-based analysis conducted after the approval of the Acute Leukemia Working Party of the European Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation. Adult AML patients who underwent allo-HCT between 2016 and 2021 with known NRAS and/or KRAS mutation status at diagnosis were included, regardless of the disease status at transplant. The primary objective was to evaluate the impact of NRAS/KRAS mutations on post-transplant outcomes including overall survival (OS), leukemia-free survival (LFS), cumulative incidence of relapse (CIR), and non-relapse mortality (NRM). Results: A total of 770 patients with NRAS and/or KRAS mutant AML were identified, with a median transplant year of 2020 and a median age at allo-HCT of 53 years (range: 18–79); 53% were male. Median time from diagnosis to allo-HCT was 5 months (interquartile range: 4–8) for patients in first complete remission (CR1). Most had de novo AML (77%) and intermediate-risk ELN2022 cytogenetics (64%, with normal karyotype in 43%); 25% had adverse-risk cytogenetics. NPM1 and FLT3-ITD mutations were present in 42% and 30% of patients, respectively; 58% were negative for both. Myeloablative conditioning was used in 56% of cases. Donor types included matched sibling (19%), haploidentical (25%), and matched unrelated (33%). At transplant, 537 patients were in CR1, 93 in second or third CR (CR2+), and 140 had active disease. Compared to CR1 and active disease patients, those in CR2+ were more often female (59% vs. 46% vs. 43%, p=0.03), had de novo AML (91% vs. 80% vs. 57%), and showed higher rates of favorable cytogenetic risk (mainly inversion 16; 26% vs. 10% vs. 5%, p<0.001) and NPM1 mutations (67% vs. 37% vs. 38%, p<0.001). After a median follow-up of 2 years (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.9–2.1), 2-year OS and LFS for the entire cohort were 65% (95% CI: 61-69) and 54% (95% CI: 50-58), respectively; 2-year CIR was 31% (95% CI: 27-35), and NRM 15% (95% CI: 12-18). In CR1 patients, 2-year OS, LFS and CIR were 72%, 61% and 26%, respectively; for CR2+ patients, 2-year OS was 62%, LFS 57%, and CIR 26%; for active disease, 2-year OS was 41%, LFS 28%, and CIR 51%. According to ELN2022 cytogenetic risk, 2-year LFS among CR1 patients was 77%, 61%, and 55% (p=0.04) for favorable, intermediate, and adverse risk, respectively. Among CR2+ patients, 2-year LFS was 55% for favorable and 63% for intermediate risk, while six of the eight patients with adverse risk died before 2 years and two were alive at 1 year without further follow-up. In patients transplanted with active disease, the 2-year LFS was 100%, 31% and 17% for those with favorable (n=6), intermediate and adverse risk, respectively. Multivariable analysis for CR1 patients showed that LFS was significantly worse in secondary AML (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.57; 95% CI: 1.11–2.22; p=0.01), while mismatched related donors, including haploidentical, were associated with improved LFS (HR: 0.54; 95% CI: 0.34–0.86; p=0.009). Cytomegalovirus positivity in patients was also associated with better LFS (HR: 0.71; 95% CI: 0.5-0.96; p=0.03). Increasing age negatively impacted OS (HR: 1.2 per 10-year increment; 95% CI: 1.0–1.4; p=0.02). Conclusion: This large multicenter study included a substantial number of AML patients harboring NRAS and/or KRAS mutations who underwent allo-HCT. Outcomes in this molecular subgroup were encouraging, with over 60% remaining leukemia-free at 2 years. Notably, patients in CR2+ had predominantly favorable features such as NPM1 mutations and inversion 16, and achieved survival outcomes not different to those in CR1. In addition, haploidentical transplant appeared to confer a better LFS in this cohort, suggesting a potential role for graft-versus-leukemia effects in this setting. These findings add to the growing body of evidence supporting the development of a transplant-specific risk stratification that can predict long-term outcomes.

BloodVol. 146(Supplement 1)
Karolinska University Hospital (SE), Vita-Salute San Raffaele University (IT), Inserm (FR), Universität Hamburg (DE), University of Freiburg (DE), Philipps University of Marburg (DE), Vanderbilt University (US), Université de Lille (FR), University Hospital of Basel (CH), Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Lille (FR), Medizinische Hochschule Hannover (DE), Soochow University (CN), Sorbonne Université (FR), Assistance Publique – Hôpitaux de Paris (FR), Augenstern (DE), American University of Beirut Medical Center (LB), University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf (DE), Essen University Hospital (DE), Hôpital Cardiologique du Haut-Lévêque (FR), University of Education Freiburg (DE), Second Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University (CN), Centre de Recherche Saint-Antoine (FR), Biomedical Research Institute (US), Cancer Society of Finland (FI), First Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University (CN), Second Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang University (CN), Consorci Institut D'Investigacions Biomediques August Pi I Sunyer (ES), Saarland University (DE), American University of Beirut (LB)
Openalex Percentile: Top 47%
Acute Myeloid Leukemia Research
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.