Clinical impact and proposed application of molecular markers, genetic variants, and cytogenetic analysis in mast cell neoplasms: Status 2022

Mast cell neoplasms are an emerging challenge in the fields of internal medicine, allergy, immunology, dermatology, laboratory medicine, and pathology. In this review, we discuss the current standards for the diagnosis and prognostication of mast cell neoplasms with special reference to clinically relevant germline and somatic gene variants. In patients with cutaneous mastocytosis or with indolent systemic mastocytosis (SM), various KIT-activating mutations act as key molecular drivers of the disease. In adults, KIT p.D816V is by far the most prevalent driver, whereas other KIT mutants are detected in nearly 40% of children. In advanced SM, including aggressive SM, SM with an associated hematological neoplasm, and mast cell leukemia, additional somatic mutations in other genes, such as SRSF2, JAK2, RUNX1, ASXL1, or RAS, may be detected. These drivers are more frequently detected in SM with an associated hematological neoplasm, particularly in male patients. Recently, hereditary alpha-tryptasemia has been identified as a genetic trait more prevalent in SM compared with healthy controls. Moreover, hereditary alpha-tryptasemia is more frequent in patients with SM with Hymenoptera venom allergy and severe mediator-related symptoms than in patients with SM without symptoms. On the basis of this knowledge, we propose a diagnostic algorithm in which genetic markers are applied together with clinical and histopathologic criteria to establish the diagnosis and prognosis in SM

Standards of genetic testing in the diagnosis and prognostication of systemic mastocytosis in 2022: Recommendations of the EU-US cooperative group

Mastocytosis comprises rare heterogeneous diseases characterized by an increased accumulation of abnormal mast cells in various organs/tissues. The pathogenesis of mastocytosis is strongly linked to the presence of KIT-activating mutations. In systemic mastocytosis (SM), the most frequent mutation encountered is KIT p.D816V, whose presence constitutes one of the minor diagnostic criteria. Different techniques are used to search and quantify the KIT p.D816V mutant; however, allele-specific quantitative PCR and droplet digital PCR are today the most sensitive. The analysis of the KIT p.D816V allele burden has undeniable interest for diagnostic, prognostic, and therapeutic monitoring. The analysis of non–mast cell hematological compartments in SM is similarly important because KIT p.D816V multilineage involvement is associated with a worse prognosis. In addition, in advanced forms of SM, mutations in genes other than KIT are frequently identified and affect negatively disease outcome and response to therapy. Thus, combined quantitative and sensitive analysis of KIT mutations and next-generation sequencing of other recurrently involved myeloid genes make it possible to better characterize the extent of the affected cellular compartments and additional molecular aberrations, providing a more detailed overview of the complex mutational landscape of SM, in relation with the clinical heterogeneity of the disease. In this article, we report the latest recommendations of the EU-US Cooperative Group presented in September 2020 in Vienna during an international working conference, on the techniques we consider standard to detect and quantify the KIT p.D816V mutant in SM and additional myeloid mutations found in SM subtypes.D.D.M., J.J.L., and M.C.C. were supported by the Division of Intramural Research, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National Institutes of Health. P.V. was supported by the Austrian Science Fund (FWF) (grant nos. F4704-B20 and P32470-B)

Standards of pathology in the diagnosis of systemic mastocytosis: recommendations of the EU-US cooperative group

Pathology plays a central role in the diagnosis of systemic mastocytosis (SM), its delineation from other neoplasms and reactive conditions, and in monitoring of SM under therapy. The morphologic hallmark of SM is the accumulation of spindle-shaped, hypogranulated mast cells (MCs) in bone marrow (BM) and other extracutaneous tissues. Four of the 5 World Health Organization–defined diagnostic criteria (ie, compact MC aggregates [=major criterion]; atypical MC morphology; activating KIT point mutations; aberrant expression of CD25 and/or CD2 and/or CD30 in MCs [=minor criteria]) can be addressed by the pathologist. The final classification of SM variants as either BM mastocytosis, indolent SM, smoldering SM, aggressive SM (ASM), SM with an associated hematologic neoplasm (SM-AHN), or MC leukemia (MCL) has important prognostic significance and requires the integration of certain morphological, clinical, radiological, and biochemical data, referred to as B- and C-findings. Substantial diagnostic challenges may be posed to the pathologist and clinician especially in the so-called advanced SM variants, that is, ASM, MCL, and SM-AHN. In this article, updated recommendations of the EU-US Cooperative Group regarding standards of pathology in the diagnosis of SM, presented during the year 2020 Working Conference held in September in Vienna, are reported.T. I. George was supported by the ARUP Institute for Clinical and Experimental Pathology. K. Hartmann was supported by the Swiss National Science Foundation, grant number 310030_207705. D. D. Metcalfe, J. J. Lyons, and M. Carter were supported by the Division of Intramural Research, National Institutes of Allergic and Infectious Diseases, National Institutes of Health (NIH). The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not represent the official views of the NIH. P. Valent was supported by the Austrian Science Funds (FWF), projects F4701-B20 and F4704-B20

Risk and management of patients with mastocytosis and MCAS in the SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) pandemic:Expert opinions

The COVID-19 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic has massively distorted our health care systems and caused catastrophic consequences in our affected communities. The number of victims continues to increase and patients at risk can only be protected to a degree, since the virulent state may be asymptomatic. Risk factors concerning COVID-19-induced morbidity and mortality include advanced age, an impaired immune system, cardiovascular or pulmonary diseases, obesity, diabetes mellitus, and cancer treated with chemotherapy. Here within, we discuss the risk and impact of COVID-19 in patients with mastocytosis and mast cell activation syndromes. As no published data are yet available, expert opinions are, by necessity, based on case experience and reports from patients. Whereas the overall risk to acquire the SARS-CoV-2 virus may not be elevated in mast cell disease, certain conditions may increase the risk of infected patients to develop severe COVID-19. These factors include certain co-morbidities, mast cell activation-related events affecting the cardiovascular or bronchopulmonary system and chemotherapy or immunosuppressive drugs. Therefore, such treatments should be carefully evaluated on a case-by-case basis during a COVID-19 infection. By contrast, other therapies, such as anti-mediator-type drugs, venom immunotherapy, or vitamin D, should be continued. Overall, patients with mast cell disorders should follow the general and local guidelines in the COVID-19 pandemic and advice from their medical provider.P.V. was supported by the Austrian Science Fund (FWF), projects P32470-B and 46 F4704-B20. J.G. is supported by the Charles and Ann Johnson Foundation. 47 D.D.M. is supported by the Division of Intramural Research, NIAID.Peer reviewe

Global Classification of Mast Cell Activation Disorders:An ICD-10-CM–Adjusted Proposal of the ECNM-AIM Consortium

Mast cell activation (MCA) is common and occurs in a number of pathologic conditions, including IgE-dependent and independent allergic reactions, atopic disorders, autoimmune processes, and mastocytosis. In a subset of patients, no underlying disease and no known trigger of MCA are found. When the symptoms are severe, systemic, and recurrent, and accompanied by a diagnostic increase in the serum tryptase level or other mast cell mediators, an MCA syndrome (MCAS) may be diagnosed. In these patients, the symptoms typically respond to drugs suppressing MCA, mediator production in mast cells, or mediator effects. In each case, diagnostic consensus criteria must be fulfilled to diagnose MCAS. In other patients, MCA may be local, less severe, or less acute, or may be suspected but not confirmed, so that the diagnostic criteria of MCAS are not fulfilled. In these patients, it may be difficult to prove MCA, for example, by measuring multiple mast cell mediators or basophil activation, the latter as a surrogate of IgE-dependent hypersensitivity. However, validated diagnostic criteria for implicating suspected MCA behind such conditions are lacking, even if some of these conditions have recently been assigned to an International Classification of Diseases-10-Clinical Modification code (ICD-10-CM). In this article, we discuss diagnostic features and criteria and propose a ICD-10-CM–adjusted classification for disorders associated with MCA, herein referred to as MCA disorders (MCADs), with special emphasis on the delineation between confirmed MCAS, MCAD not fulfilling MCAS criteria, and suspected MCAD that is not present. In addition, we discuss the discrimination between overt MCAD and predisposing conditions, such as atopic states, mastocytosis, and hereditary alpha tryptasemia.</p

Refined treatment response criteria for indolent systemic mastocytosis proposed by the ECNM-AIM consortium

Indolent systemic mastocytosis (ISM) has a favorable prognosis and normal life expectancy. However, many patients suffer from mast cell (MC) mediator-related symptoms, which significantly affect quality of life (QoL). Cutaneous, gastrointestinal, and neurological complaints, musculoskeletal pain, and the presence of skin lesions, anaphylaxis, and osteoporosis are the main symptoms and signs in ISM and must be assessed in all patients before and during treatment. Validated mastocytosis-specific patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) should be used for this purpose. Serum tryptase and KIT D816V allele burden are recommended as secondary outcome parameters, noting that they do not reflect the severity of signs, symptoms, and related QoL impairment, but indirectly express MC burden. Changes from baseline of 90%, 60%, and 30% indicate complete response >90%, major response 60% to 90%, partial response 30% to 60%, and no response <30% to treatment. To conclude, we recommend the use of PROMs as primary outcome parameters to define treatment response in patients with ISM in clinical trials and in everyday clinical practice.M. C. Carter, J. J. Lyons, and D. D. Metcalfe were supported by the Division of Intramural Research, National Institutes of Allergic and Infectious Diseases, and National Institutes of Health. M. Niedoszytko was supported by the Medical University of Gdansk grant 02-0141/07/231. P. Valent was supported by the Austrian Science Fund (FWF) grant # P32470-B

Multidisciplinary Management of Mastocytosis : Nordic Expert Group Consensus

Mastocytosis is a heterogeneous group of diseases defined by an increased number and accumulation of mast cells, and often also by signs and symptoms of mast cell activation. Disease subtypes range from indolent to rare aggressive forms. Mastocytosis affects people of all ages and has been considered rare; however, it is probably underdiagnosed with potential severe implications. Diagnosis can be challenging and symptoms may be complex and involve multiple organ-systems. In general it is advised that patients should be referred to centres with experience in the disease offering an individualized, multidisciplinary approach. We present here consensus recommendations from a Nordic expert group for the diagnosis and general management of patients with mastocytosis.Peer reviewe

Secondary cytogenetic abnormalities in core-binding factor AML harboring inv(16) vs t(8;21)

Patients with core-binding factor (CBF) acute myeloid leukemia (AML), caused by either t(8; 21)(q22;q22) or inv(16)(p13q22)/t(16;16)(p13;q22), have higher complete remission rates and longer survival than patients with other subtypes of AML. However, similar to 40% of patients relapse, and the literature suggests that patients with inv(16) fare differently from those with t(8;21). We retrospectively analyzed 537 patients with CBF-AML, focusing on additional cytogenetic aberrations to examine their impact on clinical outcomes. Trisomies of chromosomes 8, 21, or 22 were significantly more common in patients with inv(16)/t(16;16): 16% vs 7%, 6% vs 0%, and 17% vs 0%, respectively. In contrast, del(9q) and loss of a sex chromosome were more frequent in patients with t(8;21): 15% vs 0.4% for del(9q), 37% vs 0% for loss of X in females, and 44% vs 5% for loss of Y in males. Hyperdiploidy was more frequent in patients with inv(16) (25% vs 9%, whereas hypodiploidy was more frequent in patients with t(8;21) (37% vs 3%. In multivariable analyses (adjusted for age, white blood counts at diagnosis, and KIT mutation status), trisomy 8 was associated with improved overall survival (OS) in inv(16), whereas the presence of other chromosomal abnormalities (not trisomy 8) was associated with decreased OS. In patients with t(8;21), hypodiploidy was associated with improved disease-free survival; hyperdiploidy and del(9q) were associated with improved OS. KIT mutation (either positive or not tested, compared with negative) conferred poor prognoses in univariate analysis only in patients with t(8;21)

Core-binding factor acute myeloid leukemia with t(8;21) Risk factors and a novel scoring system (I-CBFit)

Background: Although the prognosis of core-binding factor (CBF) acute myeloid leukemia (AML) is better than other subtypes of AML, 30% of patients still relapse and may require allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (alloHCT). However, there is no validated widely accepted scoring system to predict patient subsets with higher risk of relapse. Methods: Eleven centers in the US and Europe evaluated 247 patients with t(8;21) (q22;q22). Results: Complete remission (CR) rate was high (92.7%), yet relapse occurred in 27.1% of patients. A total of 24.7% of patients received alloHCT. The median diseasefree (DFS) and overall (OS) survival were 20.8 and 31.2 months, respectively. Age, KIT D816V mutated (11.3%) or nontested (36.4%) compared with KIT D816V wild type (52.5%), high white blood cell counts (WBC), and pseudodiploidy compared with hyper- or hypodiploidy were included in a scoring system (named I-CBFit). DFS rate at 2 years was 76% for patients with a low-risk I-CBFit score compared with 36% for those with a high-risk I-CBFit score (P <0.0001). Low- vs high-risk OS at 2 years was 89% vs 51% (P <0.0001). Conclusions: I-CBFit composed of readily available risk factors can be useful to tailor the therapy of patients, especially for whom alloHCT is not need in CR1 (ie, patients with a low-risk score)