Characteristics and outcomes of CEBPA bZIP in-frame mutations in de novo and treated secondary acute myeloid leukemia
Abstract
Abstract Introduction: Mutations (mut) in CEBPA occur in 7-20% of patients (pts) with de novo acute myeloid leukemia (AML). In-frame mut in the CEBPA basic leucine zipper domain (bZIP-Inf) account for ~50% of theseCEBPA variants and are associated with favorable outcomes with frontline intensive chemotherapy (IC). However, data on the efficacy of frontline low intensity (LIT) regimens [including those incorporating venetoclax (VEN)] and outcomes of treated secondary (ts)-AML with CEBPA bZIP-Inf mut are limited. Methods: We conducted a retrospective study of adult pts with newly diagnosed CEBPA bZIP-Inf mut AML in two cohorts: de-novo (without antecedent myeloid neoplasm) or ts-AML (previously treated antecedent myeloid neoplasm). Outcomes were assessed based on type of induction therapy (IC or LIT). Results: A total of 34 pts treated from 2/2016 - 4/2025 were included: 28 pts with de novo AML and 6 pts with ts-AML. In the de-novo cohort, IC was used in 17 (61%) pts, LIT in 11 (39%) pts. In the de novo AML IC subgroup (n=17), the median age was 40 years (y) (range, 23 – 68). VEN was added to IC in 11 (65%) pts. Baseline adverse risk cytogenetics (CG) were present in 3 (18%) pts (complex in 2 pts, -5 in 1 pt), whereas 12 (71%) pts had a diploid karyotype. The most common baseline co-mut were RAS pathway (7, 41%), GATA2 (6, 35%), WT1 (4, 24%), TP53 (3, 18%), and FLT3-ITD (3, 18%). Responses with IC were complete remission (CR) in 15 (88%) pts, no response in 1 (6%) pt, and early death in 1 (6%) pt. Among responders, all 13 (100%) pts with available testing attained negative measurable residual disease (MRD) status by flow cytometry. 6 (35%) pts underwent allogenic stem cell transplant (ASCT) in 1st CR, with median time to ASCT of 3.6 months (m). After a median follow up of 44.7 m, 16 (94%) pts remain alive. AML relapse after initial CR occurred in 1 (7%) pt. The median relapse-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) were not reached (NR) (3 y RFS 93% and 3 y OS 94%). On landmark analysis, pts who underwent ASCT in 1st CR had similar median OS compared with those who did not (NR vs NR, p>0.99). In the de novo AML LIT subgroup (n=11), the median age was 66 y (range, 44 – 82). The LIT backbone used was low dose Ara-c in 9 (82%) pts and HMA in 2 (18%) pts. VEN was added to LIT in all 11 (100%) pts. Baseline CG were adverse in 3 (27%) pts (complex in 2 pts, del17p in 1 pt) and favorable in 1 (9%) pt (inv 16); 5 (46%) pts had diploid CG. The most common baseline co-mut were DNMT3a, TET2, and GATA2, occurringin 2 (18%) pts each, whereas TP53 and WT1 mut each occurred in 1 (9%) pt. Responses with LIT were CR in 10 (91%) pts and no response in 1 (9%) pt. Among responders, MRD negativity was attained in 9 (90%) pts. 3 (27%) pts underwent ASCT in 1st CR with a median time to ASCT of 4 m. After a median follow up of 24.6 m, 6 (55%) pts remain alive (all in 1st CR). AML relapse after initial CR occurred in 2 (18%) pts, and 2 (18%) pts died in 1st CR. For the full LIT cohort, median RFS and OS were 14.2 m (3 y RFS 46%) and 15.6 m (3 y OS 39%), respectively. On landmark analysis, pts who underwent ASCT in 1st CR had similar median OS compared to those who did not (NR vs 30.6 m, p= 0.89). The ts-AML cohort included 6 pts with median age of 74 y (range 22 – 78). Pre-AML diagnoses included MDS in 3 pts, MDS/MPN overlap in 2 pts, and myelofibrosis in 1 pt. Prior therapies included HMA (n=3), VEN (n=2), and ruxolitinib (n=1). Common baseline co-mut at ts-AML diagnosis included ASXL1 (4, 66%), RUNX1 (2, 33%), and SRSF2 (2,33%). CEBPA bZIP-Inf mut was newly emergent at the time of AML transformation in all 4 (100%) pts with available longitudinal mut data. IC was used in 1 (17%) pt, LIT in 5 (83%) pts, with 2 (33%) pts attaining CRi, 1 (17%) pt with aplastic bone marrow and 3 (50%) pts with no response. 1 pt underwent ASCT. After a median follow up of 37 m from the start of AML treatment, the median OS for the ts-AML cohort was 13.6 m. Conclusion: De novo AML with CEBPA bZIP-Inf mut in our cohort had excellent MRD negative CR rates to both IC and VEN-based LIT induction regimens indicating a favorable risk profile. Despite a relatively low rate of relapse, OS in the LIT cohort was lower due to an increased frequency of non-relapse mortality. Of interest, we note that CEBPA bZIP-Inf mut in ts-AML often emerge at the time of AML transformation and may mitigate the otherwise dismal outcomes of ts-AML (OS <6 m; Senapati et al., AJH 2025).
Article Details
Authors (21)
Sankalp Arora
1The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Division of Cancer Medicine, Houston, United States
Wei-Ying Jen
The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center
Alexandre Bazinet
1The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, United States
Abhishek Maiti
1University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Leukemia, Houston, United States
Ghayas Issa
2Department of Leukemia, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
Tapan Kadia
2Department of Leukemia, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
Gautam Borthakur
5MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, United States
Farhad Ravandi
Department of Leukemia The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center Houston Texas USA
Yesid Alvarado Valero
1The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, United States
Musa Yilmaz
Chi Young Ok
4Division of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Department of Hematopathology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
Hong Fang
Andres Quesada
1The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, United States
Rashmi Kanagal-Shamanna
Fatima Jelloul
7The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Department of Hematopathology, Division of Pathology & Laboratory Medicine, Houston, United States
Keyur Patel
L. Jeffrey Medeiros
27Department of Hematopathology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
Hagop Kantarjian
2Department of Leukemia, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
Naval Daver
1The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
Courtney DiNardo
1The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Leukemia, Houston, United States
Sanam Loghavi