Keywords myelodysplastic syndrome - acute leukemia - International prognostic scoring system
- cytogenetics
Introduction
Myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) is a clonal hematological disorder with ineffective
hematopoiesis in one or more bone marrow (BM) lineages.[1 ] Clinically MDS presents with fatigue, dyspnea, infections, easy bruising due to
dysplasia in cell lines, and peripheral cytopenias. BM failure occurs due to ineffective
hematopoiesis as a result of excessive apoptosis, maturation arrest, and proliferation
resembling the mechanism that play in acute myeloid leukemia (AML).[2 ] Multiple factors are implicated in pathophysiology of MDS such as immunologic, cytogenetic,
epigenetic, genetic factors, and therapy associated factors.[3 ]
MDS progress to secondary AML (sAML) in 20 to 30% of cases, whereas the remaining
succumb to progressive BM failure.[4 ] The prognosis of patients transforming to AML is generally grave, as they are resistant
to currently available treatment options and the long-term survival rate among treated
patients is low.[5 ]
Owing to the inherent nature of genetic heterogeneity, multiple cytogenetic abnormalities
are detected; however, role of each of these in disease progression is not well established.[6 ] Risk assessment and therapeutic planning is presently based on the revised International
Prognostic Scoring System (IPSS-R).[7 ] Cytogenetics (CG), one of the parameters in IPSS-R, is performed mostly by conventional
CG. Based on the scoring system, the risk of transformation to AML is assessed and
managed accordingly. With advent of sequencing, genetic information obtained can greatly
impact the prognosis of the disease.[8 ]
Deep sequencing studies has facilitated in better understanding of molecular pathogenesis
of MDS and its progression. Majority of the mutations do not seem to play any causative
role other than genetic instability.[6 ]
[9 ] Disease progression of MDS is characterized by increasing blast count which is due
to acquired additional mutations and genetic alterations in the new emerging clones.[9 ] This explains the varied mutational profiles across the different stages of disease.
The model to understand MDS and its progression into AML is a multistep concept of
leukemogenesis[10 ]
[11 ] which is characterized by accumulation of different molecular and genomic alterations
belonging to class-I and -II genes and epigenetic modifications[12 ]
[13 ] that result in the expansion of the MDS/AML clone, this is well understood and accepted.
Spectrum of some mutated genes enriched in sAML is FLT3 , NRAS , WT1 , IDH1 , and IDH2 (type-I genes) which are also the most frequently mutated genes in primary AML.[14 ] The commonly mutated genes in high-risk MDS group are GATA2 , RUNX1 , TET2 , TP53 , and ASXL1 (type-II genes).[15 ] Leukemic transformation is faster in patients with type-I gene mutations than those
without type-I mutations. Epigenetic and RNA splicing genes are commonly mutated in
MDS and acquisition of type-I mutations, providing proliferation advantage and explaining
the multistep concept of leukemogenesis.[16 ]
Around 80 to 90% of MDS cases have somatic mutations identified which determine the
clinical phenotype and overall survival. Sequencing studies help to identify mutations
which are predictors of poor overall survival.[10 ] These mutations are not commonly assessed during patient management as definitive
guidelines are not well established. Currently the Indian data on MDS cases and its
progression to AL is limited. The study was performed to evaluate clinicohematologic,
morphological spectrum, and cytogenetic findings of newly diagnosed MDS along with
outcome and also evaluate the cases which progressed to AL with emphasis on their
cytogenetic findings.
Materials and Methods
Observational study was done in a retrospective manner and was conducted in patients
diagnosed with MDS at a regional cancer center in western India, from January 2015
to December 2019. Sample size included all the cases diagnosed at our institute over
a period of 5 years. Cases which were not evaluated for CG and secondary causes of
MDS were excluded. Cases were diagnosed if they met the established criteria, diagnosis
of de novo MDS was considered following correlation with morphologic, cytogenetic,
and clinical criteria. Cytopenia was diagnosed as per the recommended and established
thresholds in IPSS-R (hemoglobin concentration <10 g/dL, platelet count <100 × 109/L,
and absolute neutrophil count <1.8 × 109 /L); BM examination which is considered hallmark in diagnosis of MDS was evaluated
for morphologic dysplasia in all the three cell lineages and the established cut-off
was 10% in each lineage to call unilineage or multilineage dysplasia. Dysplastic changes
observed in nucleus of erythroid lineage (nuclear budding, internuclear bridging,
karyorrhexis, multinuclearity, and megaloblastoid changes) and in cytoplasm (ringed
sideroblasts with an aid of Perl's stain and cytoplasmic vacoulations). Dysgranulopoiesis
is characterized by small or overtly large cell size, nuclear hypo- or hypersegmentation,
decreased granularity, and auer rods. Dysplastic changes in megakaryocytes include
micromegakaryocytes, nuclear hypolobation, and multinucleation. Immunohistochemistry
was performed to correlate with BM biopsy findings in necessary cases. Biochemical
tests such as vitamin B-12, folate, and iron profile were performed in all cases to
rule out nutritional causes of dysplasia. Any occupational exposure to heavy metals
or pesticides and anticancer drugs was excluded. Cases without workup for secondary
causes of dysplasia and prior history of treatment for any other malignancy were excluded.
Conventional cytogenetics: BM aspirate sample was sent in heparinized tube for CG.
Karyotyping was performed using short-term culture technique and metaphase chromosomes
were banded by Giemsa- trypsin- guanine cytosine (GTG) technique and documented as
per International System for Human Cytogenetic Nomenclature (ISCN) 2016 guidelines.[17 ] At least 20 normal metaphases were necessary to consider a patient cytogenetically
normal.
Fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH): interphase and metaphase FISH was performed
and tests were performed as per clinician request. Slides were prepared by phase-contrast
microcopy and probes were added to target area of interest. Slides were subjected
to denaturation and hybridization process, counterstained with 4',6-diamidino-2-phenylindole
(DAPI), and visualized under fluorescence microscope.
FISH was performed with commercially available probes (Vysis), the following probes
were used: LSI 5q31 (EGR1) and 7q31 (D7S486). Probe of interest was simultaneously
applied (cohybridized) with a different color-labeled probe (internal control). The
combinations used were 5q31 (spectrum orange) and D5S721:D5S23 (spectrum green), 7q31
(spectrum orange), and CEP 7 (spectrum green). Cells were considered harboring a gene
deletion when carrying two signals due to the internal control and only one signal
due to the target sequence and monosomic when carrying one signal each for the internal
control and target sequence probes. A total of 200 cells were analyzed and cut-off
was 2% for del 7q and 4% for del 5q.
Diagnosis was based on the World Health Organization (WHO) 2016 criteria and cases
prior to this were reevaluated and classified as per the present criteria. With the
necessary data, the patients were risk stratified as per IPSS-R system.[7 ] During the follow-up period, the cases which progressed to AL were identified using
the WHO determined blast cut-off of 20%.
Statistical Analysis
Statistical analysis was performed with Statistical Package for Social Science (SPSS)
software version 20 (IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Armonk, New York, United States;
IBM Corp.). Continuous variables were reported as median with standard deviation (SD)
and categorical variables as percentages. The association between categorical variables
was evaluated for significance, period of progression to AL was calculated in the
each risk group and Student's t -test was applied to study the significance of age and its progression also among
different risk categories of MDS. The test was considered significant if the p -value is <0.05.
Results
Over a period of 5 years, 63 cases of primary MDS were reported (45 men and 18 women)
and out of 45 cases on follow-up, 15 cases (33.3%) progressed to AL during the median
follow-up period of 6 months (range: 1–53 months). Median age at diagnosis of primary
MDS is 52 years (range: 11–79 years) and median age of cases which progressed to AL
is 51 years. Among the cases that progressed to AL, 53 years (range: 11–74 years)
was the median age in men (11 cases) and 56 years (range: 51–71 years) in women (4
cases). Most patients complained of fatigue (58 cases [92.0%]), breathlessness on
exertion (33 cases [52.4%]), bleeding or easy bruising was presenting complaint (7
seven cases [11.1%]), six cases (9.5%) were incidentally detected due to cytopenia/s
which was unresponsive to therapy, and two asymptomatic cases (3.1%) were also referred
due to presence of atypical cells/blasts in peripheral blood.
Of the 63 patients, 38 cases (71.9%) had hemoglobin concentration of <8 g/dL, 20 cases
(31.7%) had between 8 and 10 g/dL, and 4 cases (6.3%) had >10 g/dL. Mean hemoglobin
concentration (MHC) was 7.4 g/dL (SD ± 0 1.74). Absolute neutrophil count (ANC) less
than 800/µL was seen in 21 cases (31.7%) and remaining case had count more than 800/µL.
Overall, 31 cases (49.2%) had platelet count <50,000/cmL, 17 case (26.9%) had between
50,000 and 100,000/cmL, 15 cases (23.8%) counts were above 100,000/cmL ([Supplementary Material S1 ], available in the online version), and 12 cases (19.0%) had isolated anemia and
29 cases (46.0%) were pancytopenic. Macrocytic morphology was the commonest finding
followed by dimorphic picture and in three cases, microcytic red blood cell (RBC)
was noted. Eight cases had blasts in peripheral blood. Vitamin B-12 and serum folate
levels evaluated were within normal limits and iron profile in few cases revealed
an overload picture.
The distribution of WHO defined MDS entities along with median age in each of the
entity is enumerated in ([Table 1 ]). Maximum number of cases belonged to MDS-excess blast (EB) EB2 category accounted
to 32 cases (50.7%). Cytogenetic study results are available in 54 cases and it includes
all cases which progressed to AL. Twenty-one cases (38.9%) had abnormal karyotype
and the CG findings in decreasing order of their prevalence in the study is normal
karyotyping (33 cases), del (7q; 8 cases), del (5q; 5 cases), monosomy 7 (3 cases;
[Fig. 1 ]) trisomy 8 (3 cases), complex karyotyping +der (7) del(7) i(17; 1 case), and hyperdiploidy
(1 case; [Table 2 ]). Risk groups stratified by IPSS-R and median age in each of the risk groups is
tabulated ([Table 3 ]). Forty-five cases were on follow-up and 15 cases (33.3%) progressed to AL which
included one case of acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL; [Table 4 ]). Estimated EFS was 5 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0–12 months), 17 cases
were on lenalidomide and 5 cases (29.4%) progressed to AML over 6 months, and 7 out
of 13 cases (53.4%) on hypomethylating agents (HMA) transformed to AML over 6 months.
Six cases were on blood transfusion and four cases were on erythropoietin, one case
each progressed to AML over 11 and 12 months, respectively. Patient aged 35 years
with 15% blast and marrow fibrosis was treated as AML, 11 months of follow-up period
was uneventful. Hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) was performed in an
18-year-old patient belonging high-risk category with normal karyotyping, patient
progressed to AML in 48 months and is on follow-up from past 12 months. Patient aged
11 years who progressed to ALL after 4 months of diagnosis of MDS with del 7q and
is on follow-up from past 53 months and is stable. All cases which progressed to AL
belonged to MDS-EB category only and majority of them fell into high and very-high-risk
IPSS-R groups ([Table 2 ]). Median time taken to progress to AL in high and very high risk groups was 11 and
6 months, respectively, while longer time duration of 16 months was taken by intermediate
risk group. Progression to AL in high (p = 0.01) and very high risk group (p = 0.002) was statistically significant, while intermediate risk group was insignificant
(p = 0.3). Monosomy 7 belonging to poor cytogenetic risk group, showed 100% transformation
to AL. One case with complex karyotyping was lost for follow-up.
Table 1
WHO defined MDS entities with number of cases, median age, cases progressed to AL,
and cytogenetic findings in each of the category
WHO defined MDS entities
Primary MDS (63cases)
n (%)
Median age (y)
AL (15 cases)
Cytogenetic profile (54 cases)
MDS-SLD
2 (3.2)
60
0
Normal karyotyping {2}
MDS-MLD
6 (9.5)
52.5
0
Del (7q) {3}, trisomy 8{1}, normal karyotyping {1}
MDS-RS
SLD
1 (1.6)
77
0
Trisomy 8{1}
MLD
2 (3.2)
59
0
Normal karyotyping {2}
MDS with isolated del(5q)
1 (1.6)
67
0
Del (5q) {1}
MDS-EB
EB1
16 (25.4)
55
5
Normal karyotyping{8},del (5q){1},del (7q) {2}, hyperdiploidy {1}
EB2
32 (50.8)
45.5
9 + 1 (ALL)
Normal karyotyping {18}, del (5q) {3}, del (7q) {3}, monosomy 7 {3}, trisomy 8{1},
+der (7) del(7) i(17) {1}
MDS-U
3 (4.7)
52
0
Normal karyotyping {2}
Abbreviations: AL, acute leukemia; ALL, acute lymphoblastic leukemia; EB-excess blast;
MDS, myelodysplastic syndrome; MLD-multi lineage dysplasia; WHO, World Health Organization;
RS- ringed sideroblast; SLD-single lineage dysplasia; U-unclassifiable.
Note: Number of cytogenetic aberration in each subtype is mentioned in within flower
brackets.
Fig. 1 (A ) Complete karyogram shows 45,XY,-7 indicating complete loss of chromosome 7. (B ) Metaphase FISH shows orange signal localized to short arm of chromosome 7 (7q31)
region and control probe targeting the centromere CEP7 shows green signal. Only one
green and orange signal (101G) seen indicates Monosomy 7. (C ) Partial karyotype shows interstitial deletion in long arm of chromosome 5. In del(5q),
breakpoint occur in q14 and q33. (D ) FISH probe localized to short arm of chromosome 5 (5q31) generates orange signal
and control probe localized to long arm (5p15.2) and generates green signal. Metaphase
FISH shows one orange signal and two green signal (102G) indicating deletion 5q.
Table 2
Cytogenetic profile of MDS patients and cases progressed to acute leukemia along with
median time to progress to AL in each of the cytogenetics
Cytogenetics
MDS (54 cases)
MDS cases progressing to AL (15 cases)
n (%)
Median time for progression (mo)
5q deletion
5
2/5 (40)
5
Monosomy 7
3
3/3 (100)
7
7q deletion
8
1/8 (12.5)
3
Trisomy 8
3
1/8 (12.5)
1
Normal karyotyping
33
8/33 (24.4)
8.5
Complex karyotyping
1
–
–
Hyperdiploidy
1
–
–
Abbreviations: AL, acute leukemia; MDS, myelodysplastic syndrome.
Table 3
Risk stratification of cases based on IPSS-R along with age and median period of progression
to AL
IPSS-R
MDS (54 cases)
n (%)
Median age of MDS (y)
AL (15 cases)
n (%)
Median age of AL (y)
Median time for progression (mo)
Very low
1 (1.5)
26
–
–
–
Low
4 (6.3)
59
–
–
–
Intermediate
12 (19.0)
64.5
2 (16.7)
65
16
High
21 (33.3)
52.0
5 (23.8)
56
11
Very high
16 (25.3)
40.5
8 (53.3)
53
6
Abbreviations: AL, acute leukemia; IPSS-R, revised International Prognostic Scoring
System; MDS, myelodysplastic syndrome.
Table 4
Details of the 15 cases progressed to AL pertaining to hematologic parameters, dysplasia
in cell lineage, MDS subtype, cytogenetics with risk group, and treatment received
prior to follow-up is enumerated
Age
Sex
HB (g/dL)
ANC
Platelet
PS (blast)
Blast % (marrow)
Dysplastic cells
MDS subtype
Cytogenetics
Risk group
Treatment
Time to progress
Progressed to
Follow-up
(y)
(/µL)
(/µL)
(mo)
(mo)
42
M
8.6
0.6
0.21
0
11
EGM
EB2
NK
VH
HMA
13
AML
LFU
62
F
8.6
2.6
0.95
0
9
EGM
EB1
NK
H
HMA
19
AML
Death
69
F
7.3
2.3
0.91
0
16
G
EB2
del 5q
VH
HMA
5
AML
4
56
M
10.1
3.5
0.05
0
6
EGM
EB1
NK
I
Lena[a ]
20
AML
5
11
M
4.3
1.1
0.34
8
16
GM
EB2
del 7q
VH
HMA[b ]
3
ALL
53 (on follow up)
36
M
8.6
4.1
0.19
0
5 with auer rods
EM
EB2
NK
H
Lena
6
AML
LFU
51
F
6.9
1.2
1.3
0
7
E
EB1
NK
H
EPO[c ]
11
AML
3
71
F
9.1
0.7
0.51
0
6
EGM
EB1
NK
H
Lena
28
AML
5
65
M
7.7
1.5
0.35
5
15
EGM
EB2
Monosomy7
VH
HMA
1
AML
Death
71
M
8.7
20.4
1.54
11
13
E
EB2
Monosomy7
VH
HMA
3
AML
3
74
M
10
10.1
2.98
0
5
E
EB1
NK
I
BT
12
AML
11
31
M
8.4
0.7
0.31
0
11
EGM
EB2
Monosomy7
VH
Lena
6
AML
13
53
M
7
0.1
0.26
0
12
EGM
EB2
del 5q
VH
Lena
1
AML
3
18
M
6.6
10
0.45
0
5
EG
EB2
NK
H
HSCT
48
AML
12 (on follow-up)
40
M
7.6
0.2
0.91
0
14
G
EB2
trisomy 8
VH
HMA
1
AML
LFU
Abbreviations: AL, acute leukemia; AML, acute myeloid leukemia; ANC-absolute neutrophil
count; BT-blood transfusion; E, erythroid; F, female; G, HB, hemoglobin; HMA, hypomethylating
agents; HSCT, hematopoietic stem cell transplantation; myeloid; H-high; I-intermediate;
LFU-lost for follow up; M, male; M, megakaryocyte; MDS, myelodysplastic syndrome;
NK, normal karyotyping; PS-peripheral smear; VH-very high.
a Lenalidomide.
b Hypomethylating agents.
c Erythropoietin.
Discussion
Median age of diagnosis is 51 years and 40 cases (63.5%) fell in age group less than
60 years which is similar to the Indian study and other Asian studies.[18 ]
[19 ]
[20 ] Presentation age in Indian population is quite early when compared with the West.[21 ]
[22 ] Incidence of disease is quite common in men with 45 cases (71.4%), while 18 cases
(28.6%) in women as established by WHO.[7 ] Age at diagnosis is earlier in female group (median age: 43 years) compared with
male patients (median age: 54.4 years) and findings were supported by an Indian study.[18 ] Most of the cases referred to tertiary cancer center was due to unexplained anemia
presenting as persistent fatigue or weakness for which some were transfusion dependent
after precluding all treatable causes. Eight cases (12.6%) were identified through
routine checkup. Symptoms due to leucopenia was not observed. Pallor was commonly
observed sign. MHC was 7.40 g/dL (SD ± 1.74). Median age of the patients stratified
into very high risk group were younger (40.5 years) with higher risk of progression
to AL. Patients with symptomatic anemia were initially supported by blood transfusion
and erythropoietin; however, cases with limited response irrespective of del 5q were
also treated with lenalidomide. Cases with cytopenias and increased blast count were
managed by HMA and during follow-up of 45 cases, 15 cases (33.3%) progressed to AL.
Fourteen cases progressed to AML and one case transformed to ALL. Progression of MDS
to AML and, in very rare cases, lymphoblastic type could be explained by hypothesis
which states MDS arises from pluripotent hematopoietic stem cell.[23 ] It is observed that the elapsed median time to progress to AL is 6 months (range:
1–39).
MDS diagnosed in relatively early age had higher risk for progression to AL. Most
of the patients with age group less than 60 years were in high or very high risk category
of IPSS-R (p = 0.02). Maximum number of cases belonged to MDS-EB category accounting to 48 cases
(76.1%) and 37 cases (68.5%) belonged to high or very high risk group which is supported
by an Asian study which discusses the regional differences in CG.[24 ] Cytogenetic information plays crucial role along with degree of dysplasia and blast
percentage in risk stratification of de novo MDS by using IPSS-R scoring system and
is able to predict the risk of progression to AL ([Table 3 ]). From a total of 15 cases which progressed to AL, 13 cases belonged to high and
very high risk groups, but interestingly 10 cases (66.67%) belonged to good cytogenetic
group and consisted of normal karyotyping (eight cases) and del 5q (two cases) and
these findings were supported by the Indian study as well.[25 ] Progression to AL in cases stratified into high and very high risk groups despite
having good cytogenetic subgroup can only be explained by somatic mutations identified
by sequencing studies. These mutations also addresses the clinical heterogeneity in
the same IPSS-R risk groups with same cytogenetic abnormality.[26 ]
[27 ]
Proportion of abnormal karyotying in our study accounted for 21 cases (38.9%) and
normal karyotying was 33 cases (61.1%) which was supported by Kawata et al study and
accounted for 36.4 and 63.6%, respectively.[28 ] Apparent normal karyotyping is the commonest cytogenetic finding in cases which
progressed to AL (53.4%) and the reason could be because karyotyping carries inherent
limitation of not identifying chromosomal aberration less than 5 × 106 base pairs of DNA, microdeletions, and cryptic translocations.[17 ] The study by Kawata et al underscores the importance of gene sequencing, approximately
81% of cases with normal karyotype revealed mutations which were helpful in better
therapeutic decision-making.[28 ]
Sequencing studies have helped in better understanding of this dynamic and complex
nature of MDS and mutations are identified in around 50 genes in 80 to 90% of MDS
cases.[16 ] However, the causal relationship of these mutations in AML is not well established.
Studies have proven that biological events, such as mutations of type-I genes or epigenetic
changes, play driver role in progression to leukemia than chromosomal abnormalities.[6 ]
Serial sequencing studies help to identify subclones in MDS to sAML which are detected
months to years prior to progression become abundant in sAML and also study the clonal
evolution during progression to sAML due to selective pressure arising from chemotherapy.
Further studies are required to define how to incorporate serial sequencing study
results into traditional response criteria in better monitoring of tumor burden.[29 ]
Currently, there is no consensus on which mutation should be assigned to particular
risk category, except for SF3B1 mutation which carries a good prognosis and its association
with specific morphology is the only mutation incorporated in WHO classification.
Mutations associated with poor prognosis are known; however, their morphological correlation
is not well found.[30 ] Studies have shown TP53 mutation particularly biallelic mutations and specially
in complex karyotypes are known to be poor prognostic marker and advocates its incorporation
into the scoring system, as it helps in identifying the distinct prognostic subgroups.[31 ]
[32 ] MDS carries inherent limitation due to heterogeneous nature of the disease; however,
laboratory advances have identified genetic mutations and their therapeutic targets
and is being translated into personalized medicine in clinical practice.[33 ] Sequencing studies are increasingly used in diagnostic practice, validation, and
standardization as per the established guidelines increase the reproducibility of
the test results.[34 ]
[35 ] Conducting large multicentric studies with participation of many countries could
help in overcoming the racial heterogeneity and the generated high quality sequencing
results will help in recognizing significant mutations that can be incorporated into
specific risk categories in the prognostic scoring.[36 ]
[37 ]
As modern management strategy, prior identification of somatic mutations along with
IPSS-R helps in better risk stratification and can categorize at risk cases. Mutational
studies should commonly be performed in all cases, if not feasible at least in cases
diagnosed at young age, apparent normal karyotyping, complex karotypes, and in cases
which fail to respond to treatment or show signs of clinical deterioration such as
increased transfusion dependency or manifestation of proliferative disease. Above-mentioned
cytogenetic findings in MDS cases progressed to AL highlight the need for mutational
data and its incorporation into the current risk assessment system, as it could offer
better insights in risk stratification and in devising specific targeted therapies
or transplantation before cases could progress to leukemia.
Serial cytogenetic monitoring was not performed, even in cases which progressed to
AL, to assess that the additional cytogenetic finding was the limitation; however,
these findings would have limited implications in patient management.
Conclusion
The study presents the cytogenetic spectrum of MDS cases in western Indian population
with special emphasis on its progression to AL. CG continues to be a useful parameter
in prognostic scoring. Majority of the cases that progressed to AL were risk stratified
in high and very high risk groups and 66.7% cases had CG belonging to good category,
interestingly apparent normal karyotyping was the commonest cytogenetic finding in
more than 50% of the cases that progressed to AL. Mutations could probably explain
the reason for progression to AL despite good CG.
