MECOM gene overexpression in pediatric patients with acute myeloid leukemia.

BACKGROUND: Acute myeloid leukemia (AML) is characterized by blocked or aberrant differentiation of hematopoietic stem cells. The MECOM gene overexpression in hematopoietic progenitors induces myeloid differentiation block, resulting in increased self-renewal and survival of these transformed progenitors. However, its exact role in AML remains unclear. We aimed to estimate the prevalence of MECOM overexpression among pediatric AML patients, and assess its impact on clinical outcome. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Real-time quantitative polymerase chain reaction and Livak method (2ΔΔCt) were used to determine relative MECOM expression level among 243 pediatric patients with AML. MECOM overexpression was considered if the cumulative relative expression was above 1 (2-ΔΔCt) and was designated as MECOMpos. RESULTS: Of 243 AML patients tested 57(23.5%) demonstrated MECOMpos. Patients with MECOMpos had significantly lower median age. The frequency of MECOMpos was significantly higher among AML patients with 11q23 abnormalities, complex karyotypes and among high- and intermediate-risk groups compared to low-risk group (p = .014). MECOMpos patients had significantly lower overall survival (OS) (38.7 vs. 78.9%, p < .001), event-free survival (EFS) (37.3% vs. 68.4%, p < .001), and had higher cumulative incidence of relapse (49.5% vs. 23.5%, p = .002) at 36 months compared to MECOMneg patients. Multivariate analysis revealed that MECOMpos was an adverse prognostic factor for OS (hazards ratio (HR) = 2.11, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.24-3.60, p = .006) and EFS (HR= 1.71, 95% CI 1.07-2.75, p = .025). The logistic regression model showed that MECOMpos was an independent prognostic factor regardless of minimal residual disease status post first induction therapy in the intermediate-risk group (odds ratio 2.89; 95% CI 1.19-6.57, p = .018). CONCLUSION: The aberrant MECOM gene expression is an adverse prognostic factor, especially in patients without previously known cytogenetic risk factors. Our results suggest the potential benefit from pretreatment screening for MECOM gene overexpression in newly diagnosed AML patients for better risk stratification and treatment adjustment.

Integration of measurable residual disease by WT1 gene expression and flow cytometry identifies pediatric patients with high risk of relapse in acute myeloid leukemia.

Background: Molecular testing plays a pivotal role in monitoring measurable residual disease (MRD) in acute myeloid leukemia (AML), aiding in the refinement of risk stratification and treatment guidance. Wilms tumor gene 1 (WT1) is frequently upregulated in pediatric AML and serves as a potential molecular marker for MRD. This study aimed to evaluate WT1 predictive value as an MRD marker and its impact on disease prognosis. Methods: Quantification of WT1 expression levels was analyzed using the standardized European Leukemia Network real-time quantitative polymerase chain reaction assay (qRT-PCR) among a cohort of 146 pediatric AML patients. Post-induction I and intensification I, MRD response by WT1 was assessed. Patients achieving a ≥2 log reduction in WT1MRD were categorized as good responders, while those failing to reach this threshold were classified as poor responders. Results: At diagnosis, WT1 overexpression was observed in 112 out of 146 (76.7%) patients. Significantly high levels were found in patients with M4- FAB subtype (p=0.018) and core binding fusion transcript (CBF) (RUNX1::RUNX1T1, p=0.018, CBFB::MYH11, p=0.016). Following induction treatment, good responders exhibited a reduced risk of relapse (2-year cumulative incidence of relapse [CIR] 7.9% vs 33.2%, p=0.008). Conversely, poor responders' post-intensification I showed significantly lower overall survival (OS) (51% vs 93.2%, p<0.001), event-free survival (EFS) (33.3% vs 82.6%, p<0.001), and higher CIR (66.6% vs 10.6%, p<0.001) at 24 months compared to good responders. Even after adjusting for potential confounders, it remained an independent adverse prognostic factor for OS (p=0.04) and EFS (p=0.008). High concordance rates between WT1-based MRD response and molecular MRD were observed in CBF patients. Furthermore, failure to achieve either a 3-log reduction by RT-PCR or a 2-log reduction by WT1 indicated a high risk of relapse. Combining MFC-based and WT1-based MRD results among the intermediate-risk group identified patients with unfavorable prognosis (positive predictive value [PPV] 100%, negative predictive value [NPV] 85%, and accuracy 87.5%). Conclusion: WT1MRD response post-intensification I serves as an independent prognostic factor for survival in pediatric AML. Integration of WT1 and MFC-based MRD results enhances the reliability of MRD-based prognostic stratification, particularly in patients lacking specific leukemic markers, thereby influencing treatment strategies.