RAS mutations negate the favorable impact of NPM1 in older patients with newly diagnosed Acute Myeloid Leukemia treated with ven/HMA

F Fieke Hoff (1National Institutes of Health, National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI), Bethesda, United States) A Alexander Li (Department of Chemistry and Chemical Biology, Harvard University, 12 Oxford Street, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02138, United States) Y Ying Huang R Rina Welkie (1The Ohio State University, James Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, United States) R Ronan Swords (OHSU Knight Cancer Institute Center for Hematologic Malignancies, Portland, Oregon, United States) E Elie Traer (Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, Oregon, United States) E Eytan Stein (3Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, Medicine, New York, United States) T Tara Lin (20University of Kansas Cancer Center, Westwood, United States) M Maria Baer (3University of Maryland Marlene and Stewart Greenebaum Cancer Center, Baltimore, United States) V Vu Duong (5University of Maryland, Baltimore, United States) W William Blum (Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia, United States) M Martha Arellano (8Winship Cancer Institute of Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, United States) W Wendy Stock O Olatoyosi Odenike (University of Chicago Medicine and Comprehensive Cancer Center, Chicago) J Joshua Zeidner (5University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, United States) R Rebecca Olin (1University of California, San Francisco, Hematology, Blood and Marrow Transplantation, and Cellular Therapy Program, San Francisco, United States) C Catherine Smith (University of Alabama at Birmingham, Homewood, Alabama, United States) G Gary Schiller (7David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, United States) E Emily Curran (University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, Cincinnati, Ohio, United States) S Shivani Handa (The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, United States) N Nyla Heerema (7Nationwide Children's Hospital, Columbus, United States) T Timothy Chen M Molly Martycz (The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, United States) M Mona Stefanos (OSU, Columbus, Ohio, United States) S Sonja Marcus (The Leukemia and Lymphoma Society, Rye Brook, New York, United States) L Leonard Rosenberg (The Leukemia and Lymphoma Society, Rye Brook, New York, United States) B Brian Druker (1Oregon Health & Science University, Division of Hematologic Malignancies, Knight Cancer Institute, Portland, United States) R Ross Levine (1Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, United States) A Ashley Yocum (14Blood Cancer United, Washington, United States) U Uma Borate (2Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, United States) A Alice Mims (3Ohio State University, Hematology/Oncology, Columbus, United States) J John Byrd (3University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, United States) Y Yazan Madanat

Abstract

Abstract Background: Activating RAS mutations play an important role in the pathogenesis of acute myeloid leukemia (AML) and occur in approximately 15-20% of patients with newly diagnosed (ND) AML. Although RAS mutations do not independently impact survival, the 4-gene molecular prognostic risk signature (mPRS) that is used to risk-stratify clinical outcomes in patients treated with venetoclax (VEN) and azacitidine and led to the updated ELN 2024, considered RAS mutations intermediate-risk. Furthermore, NPM1 was no longer favorable prognostic when co-occurring with signaling gene (SG) mutations (i.e., FLT3, NRAS, KRAS). However, given the small number of patients with a co-occurring NPM1and RAS mutation (n=8) or FLT3-ITD (n=16), it is unclear whether these patients truly have worse outcome compared with those without SG mutations. We aimed to investigate the prognostic impact of NPM1 alone and in the co-presence of RAS and/or FLT3-ITD mutations, among patients with favorable- or intermediate-risk AML per ELN 2024, in two independent cohorts of older patients (≥60 years) treated with VEN in combination with a hypomethylating agent (HMA). Methods: This retrospective study included data from two different cohorts of patients aged ≥60 years with ND AML who were treated with first-line (1L) VEN+HMA and were enrolled in the Beat AML trial (NCT03013998) or who were included in the US-based Flatiron Health research database. Mutation analysis (next-generation sequencing or polymerase chain reaction) was performed at diagnosis. Overall survival (OS) was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. OS was defined as the date of consent (Beat AML) or from start of 1L (Flatiron) to the date of death, allogeneic cell transplantation, or last follow-up. Results: A total of 187 patients enrolled on the Beat AML trial with favorable- (n=128) or intermediate-risk AML (n=59) per ELN 2024 were included. The median age was 74 years (range, 61-89). Forty (21%) patients were NPM1mut, 41 (21%) were RASmut, and 21 (11%) patients were FLT3-ITDpos. The median OS was 48.6 weeks with a 2-yr OS of 40%. NPM1mutwas associated with a trend toward increased OS compared to NPM1wt (2-yr OS 54% vs 37%, p=0.12). NeitherRASmut (p=0.2), nor FLT3-ITD (p=0.84) impacted outcome. NPM1mutwithout RASmut (n=29) had a non-significant superior 2-yr OS of 58% compared to NPM1mutwith RASmut(n=11), NPM1wtwith RASmut(n=30) and NPM1wtwithout RAS(n=117) patients(30%, 38%, 39%, respectively; p=0.22). NPM1mutwithout SG (n=20) was also associated with non-significant improved 2-yr OS of 59% compared to NPM1mutwith SGmut(n=20), NPM1wtSGmut(n=39), NPM1wtSGwt(n=108) patients(45%, 29% and 40%, respectively; p=0.27). Due to the small number of patients, a similar analysis was performed in a larger real-world cohort of ND AML patients (n=803). The median age was 76 years (range, 60-84), 645 (80%) patients were favorable- and 158 (20%) were intermediate-risk per ELN 2024. One hundred twenty-six patients had NPM1mut, 155 had RASmut (113 NRASmut, 64 KRASmut) and 104 patients were FLT3-ITDpos. The median OS was 40 weeks (range, 0-390). NPM1mutwas associated with significantly longer OS compared to NPM1wt (p=0.0078) and RASmut was associated with a shorter OS compared to RASwt (p=0.0001), irrespective of KRAS (p=0.055) or NRAS (p=0.0001). FLT3-ITD did not impact outcome (p=0.12). Stratified by the presence of RAS mutation, 2-yr OS of NPM1mutRASmut was inferior compared to NPM1mutRASwt(2-yr OS 27% vs 51%, p=0.001). NPM1mut in the co-presence of SGmutwas also associated with inferior 2-yr OS compared to NPM1mut in the absence of SGmut(2-yr OS 35% vs 49%, p=0.036), however, when we compared NPM1mut with or without FLT3-ITD, outcome was not impacted (p=0.29). Conclusions: SG mutations are common in older patients with AML, often with NPM1 co-mutations. We demonstrated that while NPM1mutwere prognostically favorable, the presence of co-occurring SG mutations negates the favorable effect of NPM1mut in ND older adults with AML, particularly RASmutrather than FLT3-ITD. These findings warrant investigation of new therapies, such as the addition of menin inhibitors to VEN/AZA, in the subset of NPM1mutRASmutFLT3-ITDneg patients. Phase 3 trials are currently underway, and benefit to this patient subset should be analyzed.

Article Details

Journal Blood
Volume / Issue Vol. 146, Issue Supplement 1
Published November 03, 2025
Pages 995-995
ISSN 0006-4971
Publisher Elsevier BV

Journal Info

Blood

Elsevier BV

ISSN: 0006-4971 Health Sciences

Authors (33)

F

Fieke Hoff

1National Institutes of Health, National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI), Bethesda, United States

A

Alexander Li

Department of Chemistry and Chemical Biology, Harvard University, 12 Oxford Street, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02138, United States

Y

Ying Huang

R

Rina Welkie

1The Ohio State University, James Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, United States

R

Ronan Swords

OHSU Knight Cancer Institute Center for Hematologic Malignancies, Portland, Oregon, United States

E

Elie Traer

Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, Oregon, United States

E

Eytan Stein

3Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, Medicine, New York, United States

T

Tara Lin

20University of Kansas Cancer Center, Westwood, United States

M

Maria Baer

3University of Maryland Marlene and Stewart Greenebaum Cancer Center, Baltimore, United States

V

Vu Duong

5University of Maryland, Baltimore, United States

W

William Blum

Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia, United States

M

Martha Arellano

8Winship Cancer Institute of Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, United States

W

Wendy Stock

O

Olatoyosi Odenike

University of Chicago Medicine and Comprehensive Cancer Center, Chicago

J

Joshua Zeidner

5University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, United States

R

Rebecca Olin

1University of California, San Francisco, Hematology, Blood and Marrow Transplantation, and Cellular Therapy Program, San Francisco, United States

C

Catherine Smith

University of Alabama at Birmingham, Homewood, Alabama, United States

G

Gary Schiller

7David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, United States

E

Emily Curran

University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, Cincinnati, Ohio, United States

S

Shivani Handa

The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, United States

N

Nyla Heerema

7Nationwide Children's Hospital, Columbus, United States

T

Timothy Chen

M

Molly Martycz

The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, United States

M

Mona Stefanos

OSU, Columbus, Ohio, United States

S

Sonja Marcus

The Leukemia and Lymphoma Society, Rye Brook, New York, United States

L

Leonard Rosenberg

The Leukemia and Lymphoma Society, Rye Brook, New York, United States

B

Brian Druker

1Oregon Health & Science University, Division of Hematologic Malignancies, Knight Cancer Institute, Portland, United States

R

Ross Levine

1Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, United States

A

Ashley Yocum

14Blood Cancer United, Washington, United States

U

Uma Borate

2Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, United States

A

Alice Mims

3Ohio State University, Hematology/Oncology, Columbus, United States

J

John Byrd

3University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, United States

Y

Yazan Madanat