Title: Therapy-related mixed phenotype acute leukemia in a pediatric
survivor of Ewing sarcoma with a novel RUNX1-TAF3 fusion: A case report
and review of the literature
Madhav Vissa, MD, Cheryl Cohler Peretz, MD, Jennifer Michlitsch, MD
Abstract:
Increasing treatment intensity for pediatric Ewing sarcoma (ES) has
improved survival, but comes with an increased incidence of secondary
malignancy. Here, we describe a case of therapy-related mixed phenotype
acute leukemia (t-MPAL), T-myeloid type, in a pediatric patient four
years after completion of therapy for ES. Genomic evaluation revealed a
novel and likely pathogenic RUNX1-TAF3 fusion. This patient did not
respond to T-cell leukemia-directed therapy, and while he initially
responded to myeloid leukemia-directed therapy, he never achieved
complete remission and died of disease 10 months after diagnosis. Here,
we present this case and review prior literature regarding t-MPAL.
Introduction:
Modern treatment modalities have improved survival for childhood cancer
substantially. In particular, Ewing sarcoma (ES) has seen a dramatic
improvement in survival, mostly owing to aggressive local and systemic
therapy.1 Unfortunately, due to exposure to genotoxic
therapy including topoisomerase II inhibitors, alkylating agents,
anthracyclines and radiation, treatment for ES carries a significant
risk of secondary malignant neoplasms (SMNs), with therapy-related
AML/MDS being the most common.2,3 Overall survival
after diagnosis of secondary leukemia in children ranges from 20-40%,
though some have reported more optimistic outcomes, especially when
patients are treated with allogeneic stem cell
transplantation.4–11 Mixed phenotype acute leukemia
(MPAL), defined by the World Health Organization (WHO) as acute leukemia
with immunophenotypic expression of both lymphoid (T or B) and myeloid
cell markers, is a rare entity accounting for 3-5% of de novopediatric acute leukemias.12,13 Outcomes of de
novo pediatric MPAL are similar to those of de novo AML, though
significantly worse than those of ALL. There is controversy over
standard MPAL treatment, with many providers favoring ALL-type
therapy.12 Therapy-related MPAL (t-MPAL) is rare and,
to our knowledge has been reported only once in a child, who harbored a
B-myeloid variant.14 Here, we report a case of t-MPAL,
T-myeloid type, in a childhood survivor of Ewing sarcoma.
Case Presentation:
A two-year-old male was diagnosed with localized Ewing sarcoma of the
left scapula and was enrolled on the Children’s Oncology Group (COG)
clinical trial AEWS1031. He received systemic vincristine, doxorubicin,
cyclophosphamide, etoposide and ifosfamide as well as 5580cGy external
beam radiation to the left scapula. His clinical course was complicated
by severe veno-occlusive disease/sinusoidal obstruction syndrome,
respiratory failure, disseminated varicella and fungal infections,
pancreatitis, and cardiomyopathy. He fortunately recovered from these
complications and was in complete remission by the end of therapy. He
was subsequently treated for late effects of therapy including
developmental delay, functional limitations with mobility, and
transfusion related-iron overload, for which he was briefly
phlebotomized.
Four years after completion of therapy for ES, routine labs showed
progressive pancytopenia prompting further evaluation. Bone marrow
morphology showed hypercellularity with myelofibrosis; flow cytometry
showed two abnormal blast populations, both with predominantly T-cell
marker expression and minimal myeloid differentiation: cytoplasmic CD3
(majority subset), CD7 (bright), CD33 (uniform), CD34 (variable), CD38,
CD45, CD56 (small subset), CCD71, CD117 (variable), CD123 (variable),
HLA-DR. There was no significant expression of CD2, surface CD3, CD4,
CD5, CD8, CD10, CD14, CD15, CD16, CD19, CD20, CD64, cytoplasmic CD79a,
cytoplasmic MPO or surface light chains.
Cytogenetic analysis revealed a clonal population with loss of
chromosome 6, gain of chromosome 13, and a ring chromosome in 60% of
cells. A cancer genetics panel (UCSF500) showed a pathogenic NRASmutation and a novel RUNX1-TAF3 structural variant, predicted to result
in a functional fusion gene product and considered likely pathogenic.
Germline testing showed no alterations in cancer-related genes. Based on
these data, the patient was diagnosed with t-MPAL, T-myeloid type.
A summary of the patient’s treatment course is presented in Table 1.
Briefly, per current guidelines for de novo pediatric
MPAL15, he received ALL-type induction therapy without
a response. End of induction marrow evaluation showed progression of
disease as well as a third clonal population with 17% of cells
expressing monosomy 7. He was re-induced with AML-type therapy and had a
significant response, with minimal residual disease (MRD) of 0.09% by
flow cytometry. Subsequent attempts were made to achieve complete
remission (CR) with the goal to proceed with allogeneic hematopoietic
stem cell transplant (HSCT), however these attempts were unsuccessful.
Due to prior cardiotoxicity, he was not a candidate for additional
anthracycline therapy. The patient died of disease progression 10 months
after diagnosis of t-MPAL at age 8.
Discussion:
Secondary malignant neoplasms (SMNs) are a rare but potentially
devastating complication for survivors of childhood cancer.
Therapy-related AML/MDS is the most common SMN and it remains difficult
to cure despite use of aggressive therapies, often including HSCT. With
Ewing sarcoma in particular, prior studies have shown that survivors of
ES have a significantly increased risk of secondary AML. One large
cancer registry study reported that the standardized incidence ratio
(SIR; observed to expected ratios based on age- and sex-specific
incidence in the general population) for AML after ES was
71.17.16 Although therapy-related hematologic
malignancies in survivors of childhood cancer have been well described,
secondary, or therapy-related MPAL is rare.
We have identified eight prior published cases of t-MPAL, four B-myeloid
and four T-myeloid, and summarized major clinical features in Table 2.
Cases had variable exposures for treatments of different primary
diseases and varied immunophenotypic and cytogenetic characteristics.
Most patients initially received AML-directed therapy. Only two of the
nine patients reviewed here (including the present case) were alive at
the time of case report: one was diagnosed with a
Philadelphia-chromosome positive t-MPAL and was treated with an
imatinib-containing regimen; the other underwent HSCT after achieving CR
with ALL-type induction therapy. As is the case with de novopediatric MPAL, recurrent chromosomal abnormalities have not been
identified.
We present the first published case of t-MPAL of the T-myeloid type in a
pediatric patient. This lineage assignment is essential because it helps
determine management. Diagnosis of MPAL, however, is evolving and is
often not straightforward. In this case, the immunophenotype, with
strong expression of cytoplasmic CD3 was highly suggestive of T-cell
leukemia. Blasts also expressed myeloid markers, CD33 and CD117, thus it
may be argued that these myeloid markers represented aberrant expression
rather than defining the lineage. Although our patient did not meet
strict WHO 2016 criteria for myeloid leukemia (requires either MPO
expression or 2 markers of monocytic differentiation including NSE,
CD11c, CD14, CD64 or lysozyme), a number of supporting factors validate
the diagnosis of T-myeloid MPAL. The first of these is history of
treatment for ES, which carries a notable increased risk for AML as
mentioned above. Second, this patient responded to myeloid, but not
T-lymphoid therapy. Third, a cancer genetics panel (UCSF500) identified
an activating mutation in NRAS , which is commonly found inde novo MPAL and AML. Lastly, the leukemia developed five years
after alkylator exposure and included a clonal population with monosomy
7. Alkylating agents have been associated with development of AML 5-7
years after exposure, frequently with loss or deletion of chromosomes 5
or 7. 17
We also identified a novel fusion of RUNX1 with TAF3. RUNX1 , on
chromosome 21, is a member of the core-binding factor family of
transcription factors and is a critical regulator of
hematopoiesis.18 Mutations in RUNX1 are
commonly thought to be drivers of leukemogenesis. Further, structural
variants including fusions of RUNX1 are very common in pediatric
AML.19 Notably, NRAS mutations have been seen
in a third of AML patients with certain RUNX1
rearrangements.18 TATA-box binding protein
associated factor 3 , TAF3, on chromosome 10, has been documented
in structural variants involving NUP family genes, but not as a
fusion partner with RUNX1. This novel fusion places exons 1-7 ofRUNX1 in frame with exons 3-7 of TAF3 , which is predicted
to result in a pathogenic gene product.
This case, the first reported therapy-related T-myeloid MPAL in a
pediatric patient, represents the growing importance of molecular
diagnostics not only in predicting the behavior of hematologic
malignancies, but potentially also in choosing appropriate therapy.
Disclosure of conflicts of interest: None
References
1. Pappo AS, Dirksen U. Rhabdomyosarcoma, Ewing Sarcoma, and Other Round
Cell Sarcomas. Journal of Clinical Oncology . Published online
December 8, 2017. doi:10.1200/JCO.2017.74.7402
2. Caruso J, Shulman DS, DuBois SG. Second malignancies in patients
treated for Ewing sarcoma: A systematic review. Pediatric Blood &
Cancer . 2019;66(11):e27938. doi:10.1002/pbc.27938
3. Bhatia S, Krailo MD, Chen Z, et al. Therapy-related myelodysplasia
and acute myeloid leukemia after Ewing sarcoma and primitive
neuroectodermal tumor of bone: a report from the Children’s Oncology
Group. Blood . 2007;109(1):46-51. doi:10.1182/blood-2006-01-023101
4. Kobos R, Steinherz PG, Kernan NA, et al. Allogeneic Hematopoietic
Stem Cell Transplantation for Pediatric Patients with Treatment-Related
Myelodysplastic Syndrome or Acute Myelogenous Leukemia. Biology of
Blood and Marrow Transplantation . 2012;18(3):473-480.
doi:10.1016/j.bbmt.2011.11.009
5. Koh K-N, Yoo KH, Im HJ, et al. Characteristics and Outcomes of Second
Malignant Neoplasms after Childhood Cancer Treatment: Multi-Center
Retrospective Survey. J Korean Med Sci . 2016;31(8):1254.
doi:10.3346/jkms.2016.31.8.1254
6. Woodard P, Barfield R, Hale G, et al. Outcome of hematopoietic stem
cell transplantation for pediatric patients with therapy-related acute
myeloid leukemia or myelodysplastic syndrome. Pediatr Blood
Cancer . 2006;47(7):931-935. doi:10.1002/pbc.20596
7. Aguilera DG, Vaklavas C, Tsimberidou AM, Wen S, Medeiros LJ, Corey
SJ. Pediatric Therapy-related Myelodysplastic Syndrome/Acute Myeloid
Leukemia: The MD Anderson Cancer Center Experience. Journal of
Pediatric Hematology/Oncology . 2009;31(11):803-811.
doi:10.1097/MPH.0b013e3181ba43dc
8. Tabori U, Revach G, Nathan PC, et al. Toxicity and outcome of
children with treatment related acute myeloid leukemia. Pediatr
Blood Cancer . 2008;50(1):17-23. doi:10.1002/pbc.21157
9. Cho HW, Choi YB, Yi ES, et al. Therapy-related myeloid neoplasms in
children and adolescents. Blood Res . 2016;51(4):242.
doi:10.5045/br.2016.51.4.242
10. Hong KT, Choi JY, Hong CR, Kang HJ, Park KD, Shin HY.
Therapy-related Acute Myeloid Leukemia After the Treatment of Primary
Solid Cancer in Children: A Single-center Experience. J Pediatr
Hematol Oncol . 2018;40(1):6.
11. Vyas C, Jain S, Kapoor G. Therapy Related AML/MDS Following
Treatment for Childhood Cancer: Experience from a Tertiary Care Centre
in North India. Indian J Hematol Blood Transfus .
2018;34(1):78-82. doi:10.1007/s12288-017-0840-x
12. Orgel E, Alexander TB, Wood BL, et al. Mixed‐phenotype acute
leukemia: A cohort and consensus research strategy from the Children’s
Oncology Group Acute Leukemia of Ambiguous Lineage Task Force.Cancer . Published online October 29, 2019:cncr.32552.
doi:10.1002/cncr.32552
13. Arber DA, Orazi A, Hasserjian R, et al. The 2016 revision to the
World Health Organization classification of myeloid neoplasms and acute
leukemia. Blood . 2016;127(20):2391-2405.
doi:10.1182/blood-2016-03-643544
14. Whittle SB, Punia JN, López-Terrada D, Gaikwad A, Hampton OA, Heczey
A. Therapy-related Acute Leukemia With Mixed Phenotype and Novel t(1:
6)(q25;p23) After Treatment for High-risk Neuroblastoma. J Pediatr
Hematol Oncol . 2017;39(8):e486-e488. doi:10.1097/MPH.0000000000000956
15. Hrusak O, de Haas V, Stancikova J, et al. International cooperative
study identifies treatment strategy in childhood ambiguous lineage
leukemia. Blood . 2018;132(3):264-276.
doi:10.1182/blood-2017-12-821363
16. Rihani R, Bazzeh F, Faqih N, Sultan I. Secondary hematopoietic
malignancies in survivors of childhood cancer. Cancer .
2010;116(18):4385-4394. doi:10.1002/cncr.25313
17. Barnard D, Woods W. Treatment-related myelodysplastic syndrome/acute
myeloid leukemia in survivors of childhood cancer – An update.Leukemia & Lymphoma . 2005;46(5):651-663.
doi:10.1080/10428190500051042
18. Sood R, Kamikubo Y, Liu P. Role of RUNX1 in hematological
malignancies. Blood . 2017;129(15):2070-2082.
doi:10.1182/blood-2016-10-687830
19. Tarlock K, Zhong S, He Y, et al. Distinct age-associated molecular
profiles in acute myeloid leukemia defined by comprehensive clinical
genomic profiling. Oncotarget . 2018;9(41):26417-26430.
doi:10.18632/oncotarget.25443
20. Parker C, Waters R, Leighton C, et al. Effect of mitoxantrone on
outcome of children with first relapse of acute lymphoblastic leukaemia
(ALL R3): an open-label randomised trial. Lancet .
2010;376(9757):2009-2017. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(10)62002-8
21. Yamamoto K, Sada A, Kawano Y, Katayama Y, Shimoyama M, Matsui T.
Therapy-related, mixed phenotype acute leukemia with t(1;21)(p36;q22)
and RUNX1 rearrangement. Cancer Genetics and Cytogenetics .
2010;201(2):122-127. doi:10.1016/j.cancergencyto.2010.05.011
22. Cho J-H, Hur M, Moon H-W, et al. Therapy-related acute leukemia with
mixed phenotype and t(9;22)(q32;q11.2): a case report and review of the
literature. Human Pathology . 2012;43(4):605-609.
doi:10.1016/j.humpath.2011.07.010
23. Gong X, Yan L, Xiao X, Tang Q, Zhao X. Secondary mixed phenotype
acute leukemia following chemotherapy for diffuse large B-cell lymphoma:
a case report and review of the literature. :7.
24. Briasoulis E, Tzouvara E, Tsiara S, Vartholomatos G, Tsekeris P,
Bourantas K. Biphenotypic Acute Leukemia Following Intensive Adjuvant
Chemotherapy for Breast Cancer: Case Report and Review of the
Literature. The Breast Journal . 2003;9(3):241-245.
doi:10.1046/j.1524-4741.2003.09323.x
25. Colovic N, Suvajdzic N, Kraguljac Kurtovic N, et al. Therapy-related
acute leukemia in two patients with multiple sclerosis treated with
Mitoxantrone. Biomedicine & Pharmacotherapy . 2012;66(3):173-174.
doi:10.1016/j.biopha.2011.10.004
26. Roberts III E, Oncale M, Safah H, Schmieg J. Therapy-Related
T/Myeloid Mixed Phenotype Acute Leukemia in a Patient Treated with
Chemotherapy for Cutaneous Diffuse Large B Cell Lymphoma. JOURNAL
OF THE LOUISIANA STATE MEDICAL SOCIETY .:7.
27. Yang D, Cho SR, Jung S, et al. A Case of Therapy-Related Acute
Leukemia With Mixed Phenotype With BCR-ABL1 After Treatment of
Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma. Ann Lab Med . 2017;37(2):166.
doi:10.3343/alm.2017.37.2.166