Beat-AML 2024 ELN–refined risk stratification for older adults with newly diagnosed AML given lower-intensity therapy
Fieke W. Hoff, William Blum, Ying Huang, Rina Li Welkie, Ronan Swords, Elie Traer, Eytan M. Stein, Tara L. Lin, Kellie J. Archer, Prapti A. Patel, Robert H. Collins, Maria R. Baer, Vu H. Duong, Martha Arellano, Wendy Stock, Olatoyosi Odenike, Robert L. Redner, Tibor Kovacsovics, Michael W. Deininger, Joshua F. Zeidner, Rebecca L. Olin, Catherine C. Smith, James M. Foran, Gary J. Schiller, Emily Curran, Kristin L Koenig, Nyla A. Heerema, Timothy L. Chen, Molly Martycz, Mona Stefanos, Sonja G. Marcus, Leonard Rosenberg, Brian Druker, Ross L. Levine, Amy Burd, Ashley O. Yocum, Uma Borate, Alice S. Mims, John C. Byrd, Yazan F. Madanat
Abstract
ABSTRACT: Although the 2022 European LeukemiaNet (ELN) acute myeloid leukemia (AML) risk classification reliably predicts outcomes in younger patients treated with intensive chemotherapy, it is unclear whether it applies to adults ≥60 years treated with lower-intensity treatment (LIT). We aimed to test the prognostic impact of ELN risk in patients with newly diagnosed (ND) AML aged ≥60 years given LIT and to further refine risk stratification for these patients. A total of 595 patients were included: 11% had favorable-, 11% intermediate-, and 78% had adverse-risk AML. ELN risk was prognostic for overall survival (OS) (P < .001) but did not stratify favorable- from intermediate-risk (P = .71). Within adverse-risk AML, the impact of additional molecular abnormalities was further evaluated. Multivariable analysis was performed on a training set (n = 316) and identified IDH2 mutation as an independent favorable prognostic factor, and KRAS, MLL2, and TP53 mutations as unfavorable (P < .05). A "mutation score" was calculated for each combination of these mutations, assigning adverse-risk patients to 2 risk groups: -1 to 0 points ("Beat-AML intermediate") vs 1+ points ("Beat-AML adverse"). In the final refined risk classification, ELN favorable- and intermediate-risk were combined into a newly defined "Beat-AML favorable-risk" group, in addition to mutation scoring within the ELN adverse-risk group. This approach redefines risk for older patients with ND AML and proposes refined Beat-AML risk groups with improved discrimination for OS (2-year OS, 48% vs 33% vs 11%, respectively; P < .001), providing patients and providers additional information for treatment decision-making.