Characteristics and outcomes in Acute Myeloid Leukemia with Mecom rearrangement treated with hypomethylating agent plus venetoclax

Abstract Background: Acute myeloid leukemia with MECOM rearrangement (MECOMr AML) represents 1-2% of AML and is associated with poor long-term survival outcomes. Though chemotherapeutic resistance in this population has been previously reported, clinical outcomes in the era of hypomethylating agent+venetoclax (HMA+ven) are not well-defined. To explore this, we performed a retrospective study analyzing outcomes in patients (pts) with MECOMr AML treated with HMA+ven. Methods: We included clinicopathological and molecular data from 56 pts with MECOMr AML treated with HMA+ven in the newly diagnosed (1L) and relapsed/refractory (RR) setting from 4 academic centers across the United States. MECOMr was detected by karyotype analysis and/or FISH. Composite complete remission (cCR) was defined as CR + CR with incomplete hematologic recovery (CRi) + CR with partial hematologic recovery (CRh). The Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate overall survival (OS). Log-rank test was used to compare OS between groups. Results: 56 pts with MECOMr AML treated with HMA+ven were identified, including 27 (48%) 1L and 29 (52%) RR. Median age was 65 years (range 20-84), with 1L being older than RR [69 (34-79) vs. 61 (20-84); p=0.02]. 7% had prior myeloid malignancy and 36% had therapy-related AML. In the RR cohort, prior therapy included intensive chemotherapy (IC) in 15 (52%), HMA in 9 (31%), and IC and HMA in 5 (17%); 5 (17%) had undergone prior allogeneic stem cell transplant (alloSCT). Overall, 21 (38%) pts had inv(3), 10 (18%) had t(3;3), 20 (36%) had t(3;other), and 5 (9%) had MECOM/EVI1-rearrangment detected by FISH. The translocation partner in the t(3;other) group included: chromosome 21 (6 pts); chromosomes 2, 7, and 11 (2 pts each); and chromosomes 5, 8, 10, 12, 14, 19, 21 and 22 (1 pt each). 15 pts (27%) had isolated MECOMr. Complex karyotype was present in 23 (41%), monosomy 7 in 19 (34%), del(5/5q) in 13 (23%), del(7q) in 6 (11%), and del(17p) in 4 (7%). The most common mutations included SF3B1 in 13 (23%) and TP53 in 12 (21%), followed by PTPN11 in 11 (20%), NRAS in 7 (12%), and DNMT3A and NF1 each in 6 (11%) pts. Cytomolecular characteristics were comparable between 1L and RR except for TP53 mutation, which was enriched in the 1L group (75% vs 25%, p=0.02). In terms of treatment characteristics, HMA+ven contained azacitidine in 38/56 (68%) and decitabine in 18/56 (32%) with a median of 2 cycles received (range 1-12). Overall, cCR rate was 15/56 (27%), comparable in the 1L and RR groups [9/27 (33%) vs 6/29 (20%), p=0.40]. cCR+MLFS rate was 22/56 (39%) in the overall cohort, comparable between 1L and RR [13/27 (48%) vs 9/29 (31%), p=0.27], although numerically higher in 1L. Amongst responders with minimal residual disease (MRD) assessments performed by local flow cytometry, 6/22 (27%) were MRD-negative across groups, including 4 1L and 2 RR. 13/56 (23%) proceeded to alloSCT, with a numerically higher rate in 1L than RR [8/27 (30%) vs. 5/29 (17%), p=0.34]. 29/56 (52%) pts had refractory disease to HMA+ven, including 11/27 (40%) in 1L vs 18/29 (62%) in RR (p=0.27). Median OS (mOS) for 1L and RR were 6.9 (95% CI 5.3-14.0) vs 6.9 months (mos) (95% CI 5.1-11.5), p=0.72, with a median follow up of 46 and 52 mos, respectively. When assessing mOS from 3-month landmark for responders (cCR+MLFS) vs non-responders, mOS was numerically but not statistically longer in the 1L cohort [9.1 (95% CI 4.2-not reached (NR)) vs 3.9 mos (95% CI 2.3-NR), p=0.82] and statistically longer in the RR cohort [55.0 (95% CI 6.86-NR) vs 3.9 mos (95% CI 2.1-15), p=0.008]. Next, landmark analysis for OS following alloSCT vs no alloSCT from the time of first cCR+MLFS was performed. In the 1L group, mOS was significantly longer amongst those proceeding to alloSCT compared to those who did not [17.4 (95% CI 2.7-NR) vs 3.9 (95% CI 11.0-NR) mos, p=0.026]. Similarly, in the RR group, mOS was improved after alloSCT [55.0 (95% CI 6.9-NR) vs 4.1 (95% CI 2.6-10.4) mos, p=0.01]. Notably, there were 6 long-term survivors. 4 had isolated MECOMr, 1 had concomitant t(6;12)(q13;p13), and 1 had complex karyotype; 5 of them underwent alloSCT. Conclusions: In this multicenter cohort, survival outcomes for MECOMr AML were overall poor after HMA+ven. Response rates were numerically higher in those treated in 1L compared to RR, but there was no difference in mOS following HMA+ven between the two groups. mOS was improved amongst those who responded to HMA+ven and underwent alloSCT.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Blood
Published
2025-11-03
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1182/blood-2025-1616
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

Characteristics and outcomes in Acute Myeloid Leukemia with Mecom rearrangement treated with hypomethylating agent plus venetoclax

Stephen W. Chung, Alexander Joseph Ambinder, Somedeb Ball, Elizabeth Corley et al.
Blood
Acute Myeloid Leukemia Research
article

Characteristics and outcomes in Acute Myeloid Leukemia with Mecom rearrangement treated with hypomethylating agent plus venetoclax

Stephen W. Chung, Alexander Joseph Ambinder, Somedeb Ball, Elizabeth Corley, Justin C. Wheat, Yanming Zhang, Aaron D. Goldberg, Meghan C. Thompson, Eytan M. Stein, Emily Ferguson Mason, Ashwini Yenamandra, Christopher A. Famulare, Bang H. Hoang, Leora S. Boussi, Andriy Derkach, Sheng F. Cai, Kateryna Fedorov, Meira Yisraeli Salman
article en

Abstract

Abstract Background: Acute myeloid leukemia with MECOM rearrangement (MECOMr AML) represents 1-2% of AML and is associated with poor long-term survival outcomes. Though chemotherapeutic resistance in this population has been previously reported, clinical outcomes in the era of hypomethylating agent+venetoclax (HMA+ven) are not well-defined. To explore this, we performed a retrospective study analyzing outcomes in patients (pts) with MECOMr AML treated with HMA+ven. Methods: We included clinicopathological and molecular data from 56 pts with MECOMr AML treated with HMA+ven in the newly diagnosed (1L) and relapsed/refractory (RR) setting from 4 academic centers across the United States. MECOMr was detected by karyotype analysis and/or FISH. Composite complete remission (cCR) was defined as CR + CR with incomplete hematologic recovery (CRi) + CR with partial hematologic recovery (CRh). The Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate overall survival (OS). Log-rank test was used to compare OS between groups. Results: 56 pts with MECOMr AML treated with HMA+ven were identified, including 27 (48%) 1L and 29 (52%) RR. Median age was 65 years (range 20-84), with 1L being older than RR [69 (34-79) vs. 61 (20-84); p=0.02]. 7% had prior myeloid malignancy and 36% had therapy-related AML. In the RR cohort, prior therapy included intensive chemotherapy (IC) in 15 (52%), HMA in 9 (31%), and IC and HMA in 5 (17%); 5 (17%) had undergone prior allogeneic stem cell transplant (alloSCT). Overall, 21 (38%) pts had inv(3), 10 (18%) had t(3;3), 20 (36%) had t(3;other), and 5 (9%) had MECOM/EVI1-rearrangment detected by FISH. The translocation partner in the t(3;other) group included: chromosome 21 (6 pts); chromosomes 2, 7, and 11 (2 pts each); and chromosomes 5, 8, 10, 12, 14, 19, 21 and 22 (1 pt each). 15 pts (27%) had isolated MECOMr. Complex karyotype was present in 23 (41%), monosomy 7 in 19 (34%), del(5/5q) in 13 (23%), del(7q) in 6 (11%), and del(17p) in 4 (7%). The most common mutations included SF3B1 in 13 (23%) and TP53 in 12 (21%), followed by PTPN11 in 11 (20%), NRAS in 7 (12%), and DNMT3A and NF1 each in 6 (11%) pts. Cytomolecular characteristics were comparable between 1L and RR except for TP53 mutation, which was enriched in the 1L group (75% vs 25%, p=0.02). In terms of treatment characteristics, HMA+ven contained azacitidine in 38/56 (68%) and decitabine in 18/56 (32%) with a median of 2 cycles received (range 1-12). Overall, cCR rate was 15/56 (27%), comparable in the 1L and RR groups [9/27 (33%) vs 6/29 (20%), p=0.40]. cCR+MLFS rate was 22/56 (39%) in the overall cohort, comparable between 1L and RR [13/27 (48%) vs 9/29 (31%), p=0.27], although numerically higher in 1L. Amongst responders with minimal residual disease (MRD) assessments performed by local flow cytometry, 6/22 (27%) were MRD-negative across groups, including 4 1L and 2 RR. 13/56 (23%) proceeded to alloSCT, with a numerically higher rate in 1L than RR [8/27 (30%) vs. 5/29 (17%), p=0.34]. 29/56 (52%) pts had refractory disease to HMA+ven, including 11/27 (40%) in 1L vs 18/29 (62%) in RR (p=0.27). Median OS (mOS) for 1L and RR were 6.9 (95% CI 5.3-14.0) vs 6.9 months (mos) (95% CI 5.1-11.5), p=0.72, with a median follow up of 46 and 52 mos, respectively. When assessing mOS from 3-month landmark for responders (cCR+MLFS) vs non-responders, mOS was numerically but not statistically longer in the 1L cohort [9.1 (95% CI 4.2-not reached (NR)) vs 3.9 mos (95% CI 2.3-NR), p=0.82] and statistically longer in the RR cohort [55.0 (95% CI 6.86-NR) vs 3.9 mos (95% CI 2.1-15), p=0.008]. Next, landmark analysis for OS following alloSCT vs no alloSCT from the time of first cCR+MLFS was performed. In the 1L group, mOS was significantly longer amongst those proceeding to alloSCT compared to those who did not [17.4 (95% CI 2.7-NR) vs 3.9 (95% CI 11.0-NR) mos, p=0.026]. Similarly, in the RR group, mOS was improved after alloSCT [55.0 (95% CI 6.9-NR) vs 4.1 (95% CI 2.6-10.4) mos, p=0.01]. Notably, there were 6 long-term survivors. 4 had isolated MECOMr, 1 had concomitant t(6;12)(q13;p13), and 1 had complex karyotype; 5 of them underwent alloSCT. Conclusions: In this multicenter cohort, survival outcomes for MECOMr AML were overall poor after HMA+ven. Response rates were numerically higher in those treated in 1L compared to RR, but there was no difference in mOS following HMA+ven between the two groups. mOS was improved amongst those who responded to HMA+ven and underwent alloSCT.

BloodVol. 146(Supplement 1)
Kettering University (US), Southwestern Medical Center (US), University of Baltimore (US), The University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center (US), Vanderbilt University Medical Center (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 42%
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.