-Author name in bold denotes the presenting author
-Asterisk * with author name denotes a Non-ASH member
Clinically Relevant Abstract denotes an abstract that is clinically relevant.

PhD Trainee denotes that this is a recommended PHD Trainee Session.

Ticketed Session denotes that this is a ticketed session.

4329 Leukemic Phenotype Determines Prognostic Relevance of Limit of Quantification for Flow Cytometry-Based Measurable Residual Disease Assessment in Acute Myeloid Leukemia

Program: Oral and Poster Abstracts
Session: 619. Acute Myeloid Leukemias: Disease Burden and Minimal Residual Disease in Prognosis and Treatment: Poster III
Hematology Disease Topics & Pathways:
Research, Translational Research, Measurable Residual Disease
Monday, December 9, 2024, 6:00 PM-8:00 PM

Lukas H. Haaksma, MD1,2*, Raffaele Palmieri3*, Jesse M. Tettero, MD, PhD1,2*, Tom Reuvekamp1,2,4*, Lok Lam Ngai, MD1,2*, Costa Bachas, PhD1,2*, Angèle Kelder1,2*, Willemijn J. Scholten1,2*, Patrycja Gradowska, PhD5,6*, Valentina Arena7*, Anderson Simione8*, Luca Maurillo, MD3*, Adriano Venditti3, Bob Lowenberg, MD, PhD6, Gert J. Ossenkoppele, MD, PhD1,2, David C. de Leeuw, MD, PhD1,2*, Maura R. V. Ikoma-Colturato, MD, PhD8*, Francesco Buccisano, MD3 and Jacqueline Cloos, PhD1,2*

1Department of Hematology, Amsterdam UMC location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands
2Imaging and Biomarkers, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands
3Department of Biomedicine and Prevention, University of Rome Tor Vergata, Rome, Italy
4Department of Hematology, Amsterdam UMC location Universiteit van Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands
5HOVON Foundation, Rotterdam, Netherlands
6Department of Hematology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, Netherlands
7GIMEMA Foundation, Rome, Italy
8Flow Cytometry Laboratory, Hospital Amaral Carvalho, Jaú, Brazil

Background

The limit of quantification (LOQ) is an objective low-level cutoff for measurable residual disease (MRD) assessment with multi-parametric flow cytometry (MFC) in patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML). It is a fixed cutoff defined as 50 leukemia-associated immunophenotype (LAIP) positive events in samples with at least 500.000 CD45-expressing white blood cells (WBC). It was introduced as an addition to the current clinically validated MRD threshold (European LeukemiaNet advised <0.1% LAIP of total WBC) to reduce false negative results. Its application showed significantly worse overall survival (OS) for LOQ-positive patients compared to MRD-negative patients in retrospective analyses of the GIMEMA AML-1310 and HOVON132 trials, suggesting that MRD below 0.1% might hold prognostic value. However, clinical implementation is challenging as the survival differences were small, and the number of low-level MRD-positive patients was high. As the LOQ is a low-level threshold, it is highly dependent on the background levels of the assay, which vary between different LAIPs. Therefore, we hypothesized that the prognostic relevance of LOQ varies across AML phenotypes. With more than 100 different LAIPs, however, this poses a challenge for LAIP-based analysis, requiring a large amount of detailed data. Hence, we designed a novel approach that allowed us to combine three datasets of different MFC-MRD panels and gating strategies. This rendered the unique possibility of studying the prognostic relevance of LOQ on a LAIP-based level.

Methods

We included AML patients in complete morphologic remission after two cycles of intensive chemotherapy from the AML-1310 trial (N=153), the pooled HOVON-AML trials (H42A, H92, H102, H103 & H132, N=873), and the AMLSG in Brazil (N=12). To perform a combined analysis per phenotype, we gathered detailed MFC-data on LAIP expression and event numbers for cases with more than 500.000 acquired WBC. We harmonized LAIPs measured by different institutions by classifying them based on expression type and background levels as asynchronous/cross-lineage, under/over-expression, and mature. We classified cases as MRDpos (≥0.1%), MRDnegLOQpos (<0.1% and ≥ 50 LAIP events), and LOQneg (< 50 LAIP events) and assessed OS and relapse-free survival (RFS) using Kaplan-Meier method and log-rank test and cox-regression.

Results

A total of 1038 patients were classified into LOQneg (N=292, 28%), LOQposMRDneg (N=555, 54%), and MRDpos (N=191, 18%), with significant differences in 5-year OS (64%; 60%; 46%; p < 0.001) and 3-year RFS (60%; 55%; 41%; p < 0.001). Direct comparison of MRD negative subgroups showed a non-significant trend towards OS (hazard ratio (HR) (95%CI): 1.23 (0.98-1.55); p = 0.07) and RFS benefit (HR (95% CI): 1.18 (0.96-1.45); p = 0.1) for LOQneg compared to LOQposMRDneg.

LAIPs were categorized as asynchronous/cross-lineage (N=689, 66%), under/over-expression (N=282, 27%) and mature (N=40, 4%); only 27 cases (3%) could not be classified. We found notable survival differences for asynchronous/cross-lineage LAIPs for OS (LOQneg 68% vs LOQposMRDneg 58%; p = 0.03) and RFS (LOQneg 60% vs LOQposMRDneg 53%; p = 0.1), while we found no differences in under/over-expression and mature LAIPs. Except for CD7 LAIPs, we observed no differences in survival in LAIP-specific analysis. For CD7 LAIP-positive cases (N=276), we found a non-significant difference in OS (LOQneg 74% vs 58% LOQposMRDneg; p = 0.2) and RFS (LOQneg 64% vs LOQposMRDneg 52%; p = 0.1), with similar relapse incidence for LOQposMRDneg and MRDpos patients.

Sensitivity analyses that corrected for patients with possible MRD-guided consolidation treatment in the AML1310 and H132 trials showed similar trends. When defining MRD positivity ≥0.035% for patients from the AML1310 trial, the clinical cutoff used in this cohort, the results also remained similar.

Conclusion

This study is the first to combine detailed MFC-MRD data of a large cohort of patients measured in different platforms. Using our unique approach, our analyses revealed a prognostic relevance of LOQ in MRDneg patients only for asynchronous/cross-lineage LAIPs, particularly for CD7-based LAIPs. This approach paves the way for the extension of these data with other platforms, which is warranted to substantiate our findings.

Disclosures: Venditti: BMs celgene: Consultancy, Other: invited speaker; servier: Consultancy, Other: invited speaker; astellas: Consultancy, Other: invited speaker; jazz: Consultancy, Other: invited speaker, Research Funding; pfizer: Consultancy, Other: invited speaker; AstraZeneca: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy, Other: invited speaker; glycostem: Consultancy; laboratories Delbert: Consultancy; beigene: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy, Other: invited speaker; Gilead: Consultancy, Other: invited speaker; menarini: Consultancy, Other: invited speaker; istituto gentili: Consultancy. de Leeuw: AbbVie: Consultancy; Servier: Consultancy; Immedica: Consultancy. Buccisano: Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Delbert Pharma: Honoraria; Servier: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Honoraria. Cloos: Novartis: Research Funding; Navigate: Patents & Royalties: MRD measurement; Astellas: Speakers Bureau; Merus: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding.

*signifies non-member of ASH