Reduced overall survival in TP53-mutated ccus is driven by prior cytotoxic exposure and cytopenia rather than leukemic progression

S Steven Tessier (1Mayo Clinic, Rochester, United States) Y Yazan Jabban (1Mayo Clinic, Rochester, United States) H Hassan Alkhateeb (1Mayo Clinic, Rochester, United States) W William Hogan (1Mayo Clinic, Division of Hematology, Department of Medicine, Rochester, United States) M Mrinal Patnaik (5Mayo Clinic, Rochester, United States) L Laura Ongie (2Mayo Clinic, Division of Hematology, Rochester, United States) A Antoine Saliba (1Mayo Clinic, Rochester, United States) A Abhishek Mangaonkar (1Mayo Clinic, Rochester, United States) N Naseema Gangat (4Mayo Clinic, Scottsdale, United States) J James Foran (6Mayo Clinic Comprehensive Cancer Center, Jacksonville, United States) T Talha Badar (Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, Florida, United States) H Hemant Murthy (2Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, United States) C Cecilia Arana Yi (2Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, United States) N Nathan Punwani (4Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, United States) Y Yael Kusne (5Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, United States) K Kebede Begna (1Mayo Clinic, Rochester, United States) A Ayalew Tefferi (4Mayo Clinic, Scottsdale, United States) D Devendra Hiwase (24The Royal Adelaide Hospital, Department of Haematology, Adelaide, Australia) A Aref Al-Kali (1Mayo Clinic, Division of Hematology, Department of Medicine, Rochester, United States) M Mithun Shah (1Mayo Clinic, Division of Hematology, Department of Medicine, Rochester, United States)

Abstract

Abstract Background: TP53-mutated (TP53mut) myeloid neoplasms (MN) are a biologically and clinically distinct subgroup of blood cancers associated with extremely poor outcomes and limited response to conventional therapies. In some patients, MN are preceded by clonal cytopenia of undetermined significance (CCUS). Prior cytotoxic exposure (treatment related, TR) is an independent predictor for survival in CCUS (Li et al, Blood Adv. 2024). As TP53mut CCUS and MN are enriched in TR cases, the interaction between cytotoxic exposure and TP53mut status on the risk of progression and survival remains unclear. Methods: Adult patients with CCUS who were evaluated at the Mayo Clinic or South Australian myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) Registry (Adelaide, Australia) were included. CCUS and MDS were defined according to the 5th edition of the WHO classification for MN (Khoury et al, 2022), except for the exclusion of cases harboring MDS-defining cytogenetics. Next-generation sequencing was performed using a targeted panel covering genes commonly mutated in MN. In cases with >1 TP53mut, VAFs were summed. Survival outcomes were assessed by Kaplan-Meier with log-rank testing. Univariate and multivariate analyses were estimated using Cox proportional hazards regression. Results: Of 320 CCUS cases, 50 (15.6%) harbored TP53mut (TP53mut CCUS), whereas 270 (84.4%) were wild-type (TP53wt CCUS). Median age at diagnosis was 71 years (range 16-99). TP53mut CCUS had a greater proportion of females (60% vs 33.7%, p<0.001) and TR (66% vs 23%, p<0.001) compared to TP53wt. Hematologic parameters including hemoglobin, red cell distribution width, mean corpuscular volume, white blood count, absolute neutrophil count, platelets, and bone marrow blasts were comparable between the two groups. Almost all TP53mut (n=48, 96%) were located in the DNA-binding domain and the median variant allele frequency (VAF) was 9% (range 2-46%). Five (10%) cases harbored 2 TP53mut. The distribution of TP53mut VAF among patients was as follows: ≤2.5% (n=2), 2.5-5% (n=10), 5-10% (n=19), 10-20% (n=11), and ≥20% (n=7). The proportion of cases with cytogenetic abnormalities was smaller in TP53mut compared to TP53wt CCUS(12% vs 25.9%, p=0.035). Both cohorts had a comparable median number of mutations: 2 (range 0-7) in TP53mut and 2 (range 0-5) in TP53wt. The most common co-mutations in TP53mut CCUS were TET2 (n=8, 17.8%), PPMD1 (n=7, 15.6%), DNMT3A (n=6, 13.3%), ASXL1 (n=6, 13.3%), and SRSF2 (n=4, 8.9%). At last follow up, the rate of progression was comparable between TP53mut and TP53wt CCUS (12% vs 22%, p=0.13). Median time to MN progression was not reached in TP53mut and 6.25 months in TP53wt CCUS (p=0.5197). A significantly higher proportion of TP53mut cases acquired complex cytogenetics compared to TP53wt cases (33% vs 2%, p=0.024) at MN progression. Of 20 deaths observed in the TP53mut cohort, non-myeloid hematologic malignancies (n=6, 30%), infections (n=5, 25%), and TP53mut MN (n=4, 20%) were the 3 most common causes. With a median follow-up of 4 years (IQR 1.2-4.8), median OS was longer in de novo (dn) cases (8.7 years for dn TP53wt; not reached for dn TP53mut) and shorter in TR cases (3.3 years for TR TP53wt; 4.8 years for TR TP53mut). Notably, TP53mut showed no independent prognostic impact in the entire cohort, or when stratified by TR vs dn CCUS. On multivariate analysis that included TP53mut status, factors independently associated with inferior OS included prior therapy (HR 2.21, 95% CI 1.41-3.45, p<0.001), anemia (HR 4.1, 95% CI 1.88-8.99, p<0.001), and thrombocytopenia (HR 2.38, 95% CI 1.43-3.95, p<0.001). Similarly, TR CCUS (HR 1.6, 95% CI 1.06-2.4, p=0.03) and anemia (HR 2.15, 95% CI 1.25-3.7, p=0.006) were independently associated with inferior progression free survival. Conclusion: TP53 mut in CCUS did not independently predict inferior survival or increase leukemic transformation. While TP53mut CCUS were less likely to harbor cytogenetic abnormalities at diagnosis, significantly more cases harbored genomic instability at leukemic transformation. The poor outcomes attributed to TP53mut CCUS were driven by prior cytotoxic exposure, cytopenia – particularly anemia, and non-leukemic causes of death. These findings suggest risk stratification in CCUS should prioritize clinical context over TP53mut status alone.

Article Details

Journal Blood
Volume / Issue Vol. 146, Issue Supplement 1
Published November 03, 2025
Pages 5643-5643
ISSN 0006-4971
Publisher Elsevier BV

Journal Info

Blood

Elsevier BV

ISSN: 0006-4971 Health Sciences

Authors (20)

S

Steven Tessier

1Mayo Clinic, Rochester, United States

Y

Yazan Jabban

1Mayo Clinic, Rochester, United States

H

Hassan Alkhateeb

1Mayo Clinic, Rochester, United States

W

William Hogan

1Mayo Clinic, Division of Hematology, Department of Medicine, Rochester, United States

M

Mrinal Patnaik

5Mayo Clinic, Rochester, United States

L

Laura Ongie

2Mayo Clinic, Division of Hematology, Rochester, United States

A

Antoine Saliba

1Mayo Clinic, Rochester, United States

A

Abhishek Mangaonkar

1Mayo Clinic, Rochester, United States

N

Naseema Gangat

4Mayo Clinic, Scottsdale, United States

J

James Foran

6Mayo Clinic Comprehensive Cancer Center, Jacksonville, United States

T

Talha Badar

Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, Florida, United States

H

Hemant Murthy

2Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, United States

C

Cecilia Arana Yi

2Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, United States

N

Nathan Punwani

4Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, United States

Y

Yael Kusne

5Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, United States

K

Kebede Begna

1Mayo Clinic, Rochester, United States

A

Ayalew Tefferi

4Mayo Clinic, Scottsdale, United States

D

Devendra Hiwase

24The Royal Adelaide Hospital, Department of Haematology, Adelaide, Australia

A

Aref Al-Kali

1Mayo Clinic, Division of Hematology, Department of Medicine, Rochester, United States

M

Mithun Shah

1Mayo Clinic, Division of Hematology, Department of Medicine, Rochester, United States