Blocked cellular differentiation is a central pathologic feature of the myeloid malignancies, myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) and acute myeloid leukemia (AML). Treatment regimens promoting differentiation have resulted in incredible cure rates in certain AML subtypes, such as acute promyelocytic leukemia. Over the past several years, we have seen many new therapies for MDS/AML enter clinical practice, including epigenetic therapies (e.g., 5-azacitidine), isocitrate dehydrogenase (IDH) inhibitors, fms-like kinase 3 (FLT3) inhibitors, and lenalidomide for deletion 5q (del5q) MDS. Despite not being developed with the intent of manipulating differentiation, induction of differentiation is a major mechanism by which several of these novel agents function. In this review, we examine the new therapeutic landscape for these diseases, focusing on the role of hematopoietic differentiation and the impact of inflammation and aging. We review how current therapies in MDS/AML promote differentiation as a part of their therapeutic effect, and the cellular mechanisms by which this occurs. We then outline potential novel avenues to achieve differentiation in the myeloid malignancies for therapeutic purposes. This emerging body of knowledge about the importance of relieving differentiation blockade with anti-neoplastic therapies is important to understand how current novel agents function and may open avenues to developing new treatments that explicitly target cellular differentiation. Moving beyond cytotoxic agents has the potential to open new and unexpected avenues in the treatment of myeloid malignancies, hopefully providing more efficacy with reduced toxicity.
Myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) and acute myeloid leukemia (AML), the two most common myeloid malignancies, have recently seen a wave of novel therapeutics approved. While the outcomes for MDS/AML have historically been poor, this is now starting to change . Initial advances in MDS/AML therapy came with the development of cytotoxic chemotherapy and allogeneic stem cell transplant [2, 3]. This was followed almost three decades later by the approval of hypomethylating agents (HMAs), such as 5-azacitidine (5AZA), for the treatment of MDS/AML . During this time lenalidomide also emerged as a therapy specific for MDS with a deletion of the long arm of the 5q chromosome (del5q) . Subsequently, we have seen the development of several novel therapies, including those targeting mutations in the isocitrate dehydrogenase (IDH) enzymes  and fms-like kinase 3 (FLT3) [7, 8], as well as combination therapies such as azacitidine with the B-cell lymphoma 2 (BCL2) inhibitor venetoclax . While these agents were not necessarily developed with the intent of manipulating cellular differentiation, new data suggest that a central part of the mechanism for several of these drugs (e.g., IDH inhibitors) is inducing cellular differentiation, with subsequent apoptosis of the differentiated malignant cells .
Preclinical drug development in myeloid malignancies, as in other malignancies, has historically focused on differential cytotoxicity as the major goal. While this approach has led to significant advances, a focus on cytotoxicity may now be delivering diminishing returns. Myeloid malignancies are unique in oncology as treatment protocols focused on inducing cellular differentiation already exist. The most striking example is the case of acute promyelocytic leukemia (APL); the development of the all-trans retinoic acid (ATRA) and arsenic trioxide (ATO) regimen (the “Lo-coco regimen”) in 2013, notable for consisting of two drugs that lack significant intrinsic cytotoxicity, has led to complete remission (CR) and overall survival (OS) rates of greater than 95% . This suggests that targeting cellular differentiation programs may be a fruitful area to be further explored in both myeloid malignancies and other cancers. Theoretical benefits of differentiation therapies may be fewer systemic side effects and lower propensity for clonal selection with subsequent resistance development, as observed with the low relapse rates generated by the Lo-coco regimen.
In this review, we outline the major scientific and clinical milestones in differentiation therapy, and suggest that these approaches may open avenues beyond cytotoxicity for the treatment of myeloid malignancies, ultimately producing new agents with high efficacy and reduced toxicity.
Recent advances in understanding hematopoietic differentiation
Hematopoiesis remains one of the best characterized differentiation pathways, and one in which differentiation blockade is known to be a prominent mechanism of malignant transformation. This has historically been modeled as a hematopoietic differentiation “cascade” with distinct, non-overlapping intermediate cell states, defined by immunophenotype, existing between stem/progenitor and terminally differentiated cells [12,13,14,15]. This model has taken the field far, but it is now clear that hematopoietic differentiation is more complex and less discrete than this model would suggest. Partially informed by single-cell studies, it is now appreciated that immunophenotypically defined hematopoietic cell populations are intrinsically heterogeneous, and that epigenomic signatures primarily define distinct functional cell states. Farlik et al. mapped the DNA methylation profiles of single immunophenotypically defined hematopoietic stem cells (HSC) . Single-cell whole genome bisulfite sequencing (scWGBS) identified distinct methylation profiles in HSC as well as multipotent (MPP), myeloid, and lymphoid progenitors . They demonstrated that unique methylation signatures define hematopoietic differentiation states, with different degrees  of genome-wide methylation and unique patterns of targeted hypomethylation at cell-type specific TF binding sites [16, 17]. There is also an interdependent role for alterations to 3-dimensional (3D) chromatin conformation in hematopoietic differentiation. Transposon-accessible chromatin sequencing (ATAC-seq) has demonstrated that CCTC-binding factor (CTCF) sites, which are often sensitive to methylation status, are engaged in short-term HSC, repressing a host of quiescence pathways [18, 19, 21]; CTCF binding has also been shown to be aberrant in AML, with enrichment of CTCF binding at motifs for key myeloid transcription factors such as CEBPA, PU.1, and RUNX1 . These findings suggest that a renewed focus on discovering agents that can manipulate DNA methylation, chromatin conformation, and TF binding will likely be the most fruitful territory to explore in the search for novel differentiation-inducing drugs.
Clonal heterogeneity extends to the malignant state . AML is an oligoclonal disease with a mix of different mutational profiles in individual clonal populations [22, 23]. Frequently, somatic mutations in epigenetic regulatory genes are shared between clones, with activating mutations (e.g., FLT3) often being found in a single subclonal population. This clonal composition shifts in response to cytotoxic therapy, ultimately resulting in disease relapse. Indeed, a commonly observed pattern is that cytotoxic therapy will eradicate clonal populations harboring activating mutations (e.g., FLT3) and achieve a morphologic remission, though persistence of low-level clones harboring epigenetic regulator mutations (e.g., TET2, DNMT3a) can be observed . In some studies, persistence of these clones has been linked to a higher risk of relapse in absence of allogeneic stem cell transplantation, though some studies have demonstrated conflicting results around their prognostic relevance [24,25,26]. Dysregulation of critical epigenomic states is a common mechanism of differentiation blockade in MDS/AML. One potential benefit of targeting differentiation is that it may avoid this well-documented phenomenon of clonal selection, which plays a prominent role in disease relapse in MDS/AML. Rather than targeting the rapidly dividing subclone while leaving a residue of slower growing malignant cells with a differentiation block and an aberrant epigenomic profile, drugs which enforce terminal differentiation programs may be able to target a broader range of clonal populations.
Inflammation, the marrow microenvironment, and differentiation
Characteristics that affect hematopoietic differentiation extend beyond those intrinsic to the HSCs. Specifically, there is emerging evidence for the role that inflammation and aging (“inflammaging”) can play in driving both normal and aberrant differentiation (Fig. 1). There are two primary mechanisms by which HSCs are affected by inflammation: extrinsic stimulation through chemokine and cytokine signaling, and intrinsic mechanisms downstream of direct pathogen recognition. With regards to cytokine-driven pathways, previous studies used interferon-α (IFN-α) to provoke an acute inflammatory response in mice, which was found to lead to a proliferation of endothelial cells in the bone marrow, partially mediated by vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) secretion from bone marrow cells and HSCs . This was found to lead to increased vascular permeability and the release of immune cells from the marrow . Pathogenic stimuli (either lipopolysaccharide or Escherichia coli) have also been shown to enforce granulopoiesis and differentiation through activation of the toll-like receptors (TLRs), as well as signaling through myeloid differentiation protein 88 (MYD88) and, downstream, granulocyte colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) [28, 29]. TLRs are predominantly responsible for intrinsic signaling and direct mechanisms that drive progenitor differentiation down a myeloid pathway [30,31,32,33]. Cytokine stimulation and TLR signaling are not independent, however. HSCs are known to engage in paracrine signaling, with a significant amount of cytokine secretion after TLR stimulation, and this has been shown to be an important mechanism behind stress granulopoiesis . Chronic inflammation is also known to imprint myeloid bias into HSCs through trained immunity. The administration of β-glucan has been shown to result in the expansion of myeloid-biased progenitors, and progenitor cells previously exposed to β-glucan retain an increased myeloid potential upon rechallenge, demonstrating that inflammatory stimuli can permanently imprint the latter differentiation programs of HSCs . Similarly, it is known that myeloid skewing in autoimmune arthritis occurs at the level of the HSC, showing that previous exposure to inflammatory stimuli can permanently perturb the downstream differentiation programs of HSCs . Thus, inflammation has a physiologic role to play in driving differentiation of both HSCs and committed progenitors and enforcing a myeloid differentiation program in response to infections or other stress stimuli. (e.g., “stress granulopoiesis”). This occurs through a mix of both cytokine-mediated and intrinsic signaling pathways, with the TLRs playing a central role.
Inflammation and immune activation, and the associated impacts on cellular differentiation, also have relevance in MDS. Several immune signaling related proteins have been shown to be aberrantly expressed in MDS, including TLRs  as well as downstream effectors such as MYD88 , IRAK1  and the ubiquitin ligase TRAF6 . Intrinsic regulators of immune signaling, such as miR-145 and miR-146a, have also been shown to be downregulated in MDS . These changes seen in established MDS may have their roots in antecedent inflammation-driven myeloid-skewing and HSC dysfunction. It has been shown that IL-1β can drive HSC proliferation , induce myeloid differentiation via Batf2 and C/EBPβ [43, 44], and promote megakaryopoiesis in primed (CD41hi) HSCs . Alterations to intrinsic regulators of aging-associated inflammation have been shown to drive HSC dysfunction and predispose to myeloid malignancy. Grants et al. showed that miR-146a expression declined in older mice, and that miR-146a null young mice demonstrated premature HSC aging by depleting quiescent HSCs through IL6 and tumor necrosis factor (TNF) activation, predisposing these mice to myeloid malignancy . Similarly, it has been demonstrated that loss of miR-143/145 depletes functional HSCs through the transforming growth factor β (TGFβ) pathway . However, despite the loss of normal HSCs, many of the mice from this study developed a leukocytosis and a transplantable myeloid malignancy due to the expansion of a transformed, malignant progenitor population . The effects of inflammation are an important consideration in hematopoietic differentiation status, particularly in the context of MDS/AML, and may be a target for future approaches that modify differentiation status.
Linking differentiation to therapy
As we have outlined, the modern view of hematopoietic differentiation is more nuanced than historically appreciated. Physiologic hematopoietic differentiation is largely epigenetically regulated and characterized by a pool of precursors that become lineage-restricted in a dynamic and flexible fashion. It is also clear that the traditional immunophenotypically defined cell compartments are intrinsically heterogeneous, both on genomic and functional bases. Alterations to regulators of normal hematopoietic differentiation also seem to be a key feature in the development of myeloid malignancies. This may relate to a failure of intrinsic regulators of normal differentiation (e.g., somatic mutations in epigenetic regulators) or chronic external stimuli (e.g., inflammation) that promote the development of subsequent clonal disorders. Despite the importance of abnormal differentiation to pathogenesis in MDS/AML, explicitly targeting these pathways has not been a focus in drug development for these diseases. However, as we outline below, induction of differentiation is an important part of the mechanism of action of several successful therapeutic approaches. While there have not been specific studies directly examining the impact of inflammation on therapeutic outcomes, we do know that inflammation is strongly correlated with several secondary features that result in inferior therapy outcomes (e.g., advanced age, comorbidities, poor functional status). There is significant interest in integrating measures of the “immunome” into future clinical trials . Characterizing the interaction between therapy resistance, systemic inflammation, and differentiation blockade should be prioritized as a correlative when trying to understand the efficacy of novel therapies.
The original differentiation therapy: all-trans retinoic acid and arsenic in acute promyelocytic leukemia
The prototypical malignant cell differentiation therapy is the ATO and ATRA combination for APL. APL is characterized by a fulminant clinical presentation with bleeding and thrombosis and usually carries the classical translocation of chromosome 15 and 17 t(15;17) [49, 50]. The consequence of this translocation is the fusion of the promyelocytic leukemia (PML) gene with the retinoic acid receptor-alpha (RARα) gene to form the PML-RARα fusion transcript; this results in a myeloid differentiation block at the promyelocytic stage . ATRA binds the retinoic acid receptor component of the transgene, displacing bound corepressor complexes and promoting degradation of the PML-RARα fusion protein . ATO acts by blocking the transcriptional repression function of the PML-RARα fusion protein by triggering phosphorylation of SMRT through the mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) pathway. This results in a relocalization of SMRT from the nucleus to the cytoplasm . The downstream effect of this combination removes the transcriptional repression induced by the fusion protein, and effectively removes the differentiation blockade that is in place. This therapy-induced differentiation results in hyperleukocytosis with a characteristic differential profile that is comprised of a mix of mature myeloid cells with an eventual clearance of the malignant blasts . The treatment course is generally long for the ATO-ATRA combination, at 32 weeks in the original Lo-coco trial. A longer treatment course with gradually accruing remissions is a consistent feature of other therapies involving differentiation as a mechanism of action also [4, 54, 55].
It was quickly recognized with the ATO-ATRA combination that some patients would develop a syndrome characterized by the acute onset of fevers, volume overload, and pulmonary edema, which was dubbed “differentiation syndrome” (DS) . DS has also subsequently been observed in the context of other novel therapies such as the IDH inhibitors. The specific mechanism of DS in APL is thought to be related to chemokine secretion after the malignant promyelocytes are exposed to ATO and ATRA. One study used an in vitro model to identify that the stimulation of APL cells by ATO and ATRA caused induced expression of CC-chemokines . Another study examined the role of CXC chemokines (MIP-2 and KC) along with ICAM-1 in a murine model of DS. They found that ATRA treatment increased gene expression of the CXC chemokines and ICAM-1 in the lung alveolar cells, and MIP-2 was observed on the alveolar macrophages . Overall, the mechanism of action of DS seems to be driven by ATRA-induced expression of the CC- and CXC-chemokine families resulting in neutrophil and monocyte recruitment to affected tissues that is possibly compounded by increased expression of adhesion molecules such as ICAM-1. Outside of the context of ATRA therapy, it may be that DS is primarily driven by chemokine secretion from the differentiating myeloblasts, though this has largely not been explored.
There are several lessons that can be abstracted from the ATO-ATRA story in APL. The first is the striking therapeutic efficacy that this combination achieves, while provoking minimal cytotoxicity. Given that most current drug-discovery platforms utilize rapid cell death as an endpoint to assess the efficacy of compounds, neither of these compounds may have been identified in that context. However, it is important to recognize that APL is a distinct disease state with a lower degree of genetic complexity versus non-APL MDS/AML; the more pronounced clonal and genetic diversity in non-APL MDS/AML adds an additional layer of complexity to consider when examining the role for differentiation induction in therapy. In addition, ATO/ATRA directly targets the founding genetic event in APL within the leukemia stem cells, which is more difficult to achieve in non-APL leukemia stem cells. The utility of ATRA without ATO has been examined in non-APL AML. One in vitro study suggested that ATRA might be efficacious at inducing differentiation in AML with low expression of the transcriptional regulator MN1 , or in the presence of mutated NPM1 [59, 60]. Two previous studies demonstrated that ATO and/or ATRA could induce proteasome-mediated degradation of mutant NPM1 in AML cell lines and primary samples, leading to differentiation and apoptosis [59, 60]. Other recent data suggests that non-APL AML cells overexpressing EVI-1 may be sensitive to ATRA. Two studies demonstrated that ATRA could induce differentiation and apoptosis in EVI-1 overexpressing non-APL cell lines and primary samples [61, 62]. Despite these encouraging preclinical findings, the role for ATRA or ATO for non-APL AML in a clinical context remains unclear [63, 64]. Other selective RARα agonists, such as tamibarotene (SY-1425) have been shown to induce differentiation and apoptosis in high RARα expressing AML primary cells . Tamibarotene is in early phase clinical trials for both relapsed/refractory and unfit AML patients with high RARα expression and has shown encouraging results so far [66, 67].
Epigenetic therapy and differentiation
Another type of therapy for which differentiation is increasingly recognized as a component of its mechanism are the HMAs, 5AZA and decitabine (DEC). While hypomethylation is the most direct and obvious effect of HMAs, the downstream mechanism of action is complex and likely dose-dependent, and the connections between hypomethylation and eventual blast clearance in the marrow remain to be fully defined . It is interesting to note it often takes 4 or greater months of therapy to see a response with HMAs, similar to other differentiation-inducing agents. At high doses (~20 µM), a 5AZA metabolite is incorporated into cellular RNA directly, resulting in inhibition of protein synthesis and subsequent cell death . However, these concentrations are not reflective of those achieved in vivo, with a pharmacologic Cmax of 5AZA corresponding to approximately 4 µM, suggesting this may not be the primary mechanism by which 5AZA works in patients . With regards to mechanisms at more physiologic concentrations, there has been an extensive amount of investigation into the possible role of endogenous retroelement (ERE) reactivation and the associated stimulation of an anti-leukemic response from the resident T- and natural killer (NK)-cell populations [71,72,73]. There has also been a competing argument, historically, suggesting that 5AZA partially works by inducing terminal differentiation, with subsequent apoptosis, in leukemic cells . This has been reinforced by a recent study that used RNA sequencing (RNA-seq) to assess a cohort of MDS and chronic myelomonocytic leukemia (CMML) patients who were either primary responders or non-responders to 5AZA . They comprehensively annotated ERE-related transcripts and noted that, while their expression did increase after 5AZA therapy, this did not correlate with response. Instead, they identified differential expression of developmentally regulated transcriptional signatures of both protein-coding and noncoding genes between 5AZA responders and non-responders . This suggests that a major component of the 5AZA mechanism of action may be through activating latent differentiation programs in the malignant blasts, and that the induction of ERE transcripts may be a bystander effect, though this remains to be fully explored. Reports of clinical DS with 5AZA treatment have been noted, but this is rare . Both 5AZA and DEC irreversibly bind a broad range of DNA methyltransferases, partially accounting for their toxicity profile. Novel competitive inhibitors that are selective for DNMT1 (e.g., GSK3685032) have been developed, and may produce fewer hematologic toxicities than conventional HMAs . Recently, there has also been emerging data about the association between ten-eleven translocation 2 (TET2) and IDH mutations, ascorbic acid (Vitamin C), and the epigenome, as vitamin C has been shown to stimulate TET2 catalytic activity in vitro . In one study using a murine model of IDH1 mutated AML, vitamin C exposure induced a pattern of differentially methylated regions that overlapped with enhancers implicated in myeloid differentiation, specifically regions related to the hematopoietic-specific TFs: CEBPβ, HIF1α, RUNX1, and PU.1. Chromatin immunoprecipitation sequencing confirmed a loss of PU.1 and increase in RUNX1-bound elements and an increase in H3K27ac flanking sites near RUNX1-bound sequences . The authors suggest that vitamin C may have a role in inducing epigenetic remodeling of differentiation-related TF binding sites in this AML model. It has also been suggested that vitamin C may be synergistic with DEC in promoting activation of TET2 , though this area requires further investigation.
There are several other epigenetic therapies currently in clinical trials for MDS and AML (Table 1). Specifically, a number of epigenetically targeted agents have recently been developed for leukemia patients that harbor the MLL fusion protein, which comprise about 10% of acute leukemias. The MLL-rearranged fusion protein binds to and dysregulates proliferation-associated genes such as the HOXA cluster, MEIS1, and PBX3. However, both native and rearranged MLL must bind with a chromatin-associated protein complex, which includes members such as disruptor of telomeric silencing 1-like (DOT1L) and Menin . Two groups have developed small molecules that inhibit the MLL-Menin interaction, which have demonstrated efficacy in a patient-derived xenograft model of MLL-rearranged leukemia. This approach is being tested in early phase clinical trials [80, 81]. There is also evolving data for the use of Menin inhibitors in AML harboring NPM1-mutations [82, 83] or NUP98 rearrangements . There have also been a number of DOT1L inhibitors recently developed (EPZ-5676), which function by inhibiting the DOT1L enzyme and thus relieving the inappropriate methylation of H3K79 . HOXA9 overexpression is thought to be a downstream transcriptional consequence of the MLL-rearrangement; it has been shown that inhibition of dihydroorotate dehydrogenase (DHODH) relieves the MLL-induced differentiation block by modulating mitochondrial metabolism . Inhibitors of DHODH are currently in early phase trials (Brequinar) .
Another epigenetic therapy in early phase trials are the bromodomain and extraterminal (BET) inhibitors (e.g., CPI-0610). Normally BET proteins, such as Bromodomain-containing protein 4 (BRD4), bind acetylated histone tails, bringing together the elongation complex and the promoter region [88, 89]. One study compared compounds in early clinical trials for several of these epigenetic regulators, including inhibitors of BET, DHODH, DOT1L, Menin, as well as a CDK9 inhibitor . Using a unique in vitro model the authors examined inhibition of proliferation and apoptosis, as well as differentiation induction with phagocytosis as a functional readout . Menin-MLL and DOT1L inhibitors appear to act specifically on MLL-rearranged cell lines, while inhibitors for BET, DHODH, and CDK also impact non-MLL-rearranged cells. Interestingly, they identified significant differentiation induction effects for inhibitors of Menin-MLL, DOT1L, and DHODH while the BET and CDK9 inhibitors primarily acted by apoptosis induction .
One other class of agents that have been investigated are inhibitors of the histone demethylase LSD1 (also known as KDM1A), which is a component of the MLL-protein complex. One preclinical study demonstrated that LSD1/KDM1A inhibition with a small molecule (ORY-1001) induced H3K4me2 accumulation on KDM1A target genes, resulting in blast differentiation and reduced leukemia burden in cell line and animal models of MLL-rearranged T-acute lymphoblastic leukemia . These promising agents emphasize that it is important to consider not just the relevant TFs and epigenetic factors involved in malignancy associated differentiation blockade, but to also consider other mechanistically relevant aspects of TF binding and gene regulation (e.g., co-factors and metabolic enzymes) as possible targets for intervention.
Mutationally targeted therapy and differentiation: IDH and FLT3 inhibitors
IDH and FLT3 inhibitors are rapidly being incorporated into the therapeutic algorithms for myeloid malignancies. IDH inhibitors are another example of successful agents for myeloid malignancies that work partly through differentiation induction. Clinical DS has been a relatively commonly reported adverse event at 18% for ivosidenib  and 7% for enasidenib . Compared to the DS seen with ATO-ATRA therapy in APL, the median time to onset is significantly longer (48 vs. 11 days), though the clinical presentation and management are similar . The mechanism by which the IDH inhibitors are thought to act is by suppressing production of the oncometabolite 2-hydroxyglutarate (2-HG), which is produced by the mutant enzyme . Elevated levels of 2-HG induce epigenetic remodeling by inhibiting TET2 and Jumonji C domain-containing histone demethylases, which is partially responsible for the differentiation blockade seen in IDH-mutated myeloid malignancies [95, 96]. Inhibitors of mutant IDH1/2 proteins decrease the intracellular levels of 2-HG, which induces cellular differentiation, possibly through altering DNA methylation patterns, or alternatively through regulation of histone methylation [97, 98]. While there is some limited in vitro evidence  to support a link to DNA methylation, there are no studies confirming it in patient samples. Similar to what is seen with other therapies that manipulate differentiation, the median time to achieve a disease response is prolonged, often taking 4–6 months before a maximal response is seen [6, 92]. In addition, changes to cellular metabolism (e.g., through 2-HG induction) are linked to epigenetic changes, which in turn are related to differentiation state. Given the numerous metabolic and mitochondrial abnormalities described in AML , the interplay between these three factors should be examined in more detail.
Somewhat more unexpectedly, there is an evolving body of literature examining the role of cellular differentiation in the mechanism of the novel FLT3-inhibitors. FLT3-internal tandem deletions (FLT3-ITD) are classically thought of as a “driver” mutation in MDS/AML that are usually a later event in AML evolution . These mutations are not typically linked with differentiation blockade and cell state in the same way that epigenetic regulator mutations or IDH mutations have been. One study examined the role of quizartinib, a second-generation FLT3-ITD inhibitor, and differentiation in primary AML patient samples . They observed that in 13 of 14 FLT3-ITD AML patients treated with quizartinib that terminal myeloid differentiation of the bone marrow blasts was observed. They then demonstrated with an in vitro co-culture model with human bone marrow stroma and FLT3-ITD mutated primary blast cells that quizartinib induced terminal differentiation . In patients treated with gilteritinib, clinical DS has been reported in up to 3% of patients . Another study examined differentiation induction in primary samples from AML patients treated with gilteritinib . They demonstrated a differentiation response in 10 of 21 bone marrow samples in response to gilteritinib, and this was associated with a reduction in the malignant blast fraction in the marrow. Notably, this is higher than the observed incidence of observed DS, suggesting that the amount of differentiation being induced may often be below the threshold to manifest clinical DS. The remaining patients appeared to develop a response through an alternative, non-differentiation-related pathway. The reasons for individual heterogeneity may relate to other co-existing mutations and the epigenetic cell state, though this has yet to be explored. These authors also demonstrated evidence of persistent clonal hematopoiesis in patients in whom differentiation was induced, suggesting that the nature of the response achieved differs fundamentally from that seen with cytotoxic agents . These data suggest that the clinical efficacy of FLT3 inhibition is, in part, mediated by induction of cellular differentiation, re-emphasizing the importance of differentiation to effective therapy in myeloid malignancies. It also emphasizes that the relative roles and importance of differentiation and cytotoxicity may be contextually dependent upon the distinct set of co-existing mutations and other unexplored factors.
The role of megakaryocytic differentiation: dasatinib and lenalidomide
Historically, megakaryocyte differentiation has been viewed as arising from a common myeloid-erythroid progenitor downstream of the multipotent progenitor (MPP) cell subpopulation. More recently, a new understanding has emerged that suggests most megakaryocytes derive directly from a megakaryocyte-biased HSC pool . Megakaryocyte-biased HSCs have been shown to express lineage-specific surface markers such as von Willebrand factor (vWF) and CD41 and are responsive to thrombopoietin . They also demonstrate a TF profile biased towards megakaryocyte differentiation, including TFs such as GATA1, GFI1b, GATA2, and FLI1 . These megakaryocyte-biased HSCs are thought to rapidly differentiate to produce platelet responses after inflammatory or infectious stimuli . Interestingly, dasatinib, a second-generation inhibitor of the BCR-ABL kinase, has been shown to promote megakaryocyte differentiation . It has been observed that mice treated with dasatinib have a 30% increase in the number of megakaryocytes in the bone marrow despite developing peripheral blood thrombocytopenia. As well there is an increase in the number of polyploid (8–64N) megakaryocytes. Despite increased numbers, these megakaryocytes demonstrated defective migration in the presence of dasatinib, possibly through a loss of phosphorylation of the Src and Syk tyrosine kinases . While the anatomical distribution of megakaryocytes was unchanged, dasatinib treatment abolished chemotaxis in response to stromal cell-derived factor 1α, and abolished proplatelet formation, possibly explaining dasatinib-induced thrombocytopenia .
New evidence also implicates megakaryocyte differentiation in the therapeutic response of lenalidomide in del(5q) MDS. Del(5q) is the most common cytogenetic abnormality seen in MDS, and results in haploinsufficiency for various coding and noncoding genes; this MDS subtype is uniquely sensitive to the immunomodulatory drug lenalidomide. However, at least half of the del(5q) MDS patients who respond to lenalidomide eventually become resistant. Del(5q) MDS patients who become lenalidomide resistant tend to have a either a TP53 or RUNX1 mutation, and in a rare case, loss of GATA2 function (Fig. 2) [10, 106]. Ikaros, RUNX1 and GATA2 bind megakaryocyte promoters at common sites in hematopoietic cells, and lenalidomide-bound Cereblon targets Ikaros for degradation. Subsequent derepression at megakaryocyte lineage promoters allows RUNX1 and GATA2 to drive expression leading to megakaryocyte differentiation. Thus, lenalidomide activates a RUNX1/GATA2-dependent megakaryocytic program in hematopoietic cells. Although TP53 does not bind these megakaryocytic promoters, it appears to have an upstream non-transcriptional effect on megakaryocyte differentiation that is RUNX1/GATA2-dependent. Haploinsufficiency of CSNK1A1 in megakaryocytes derived from the malignant del(5q) clone makes the cells differentially sensitive to Lenalidomide/CRBN-mediated CSNK1A1 degradation and subsequent TP53-mediated apoptosis . Lenalidomide/CRBN-mediated megakaryocyte differentiation is an essential requirement for subsequent apoptosis, as CSNK1A1 degradation only induces apoptosis in del(5q) megakaryocytes, but spares the erythroid and myeloid populations. In both examples, dasatinib and lenalidomide, induction of megakaryocytic differentiation is a downstream effect of these therapeutic interventions, and in the case of lenalidomide it appears central to its therapeutic activity. We also see commonalities in that both agents indirectly activate megakaryocyte specific TFs and their downstream pathways, resulting in malignant cells proceeding down a megakaryocyte differentiation pathway. As such, the evolution of mechanisms that result in de novo differentiation blockade in MDS/AML patients who are receiving active treatment may be a more common mechanism of disease relapse than previously appreciated.
Potential and future directions
As we have outlined, aberrant cellular differentiation is a core feature of both MDS and AML. We also have seen that differentiation is a major player in the mechanism of action of many of the novel therapies being introduced in MDS and AML, and that it appears to be central to their efficacy. We have also outlined many potential benefits to exploiting differentiation induction the treatment of myeloid malignancies, such as reduced toxicity and clonal selection. One major challenge in developing therapeutics that enforce cellular differentiation is that the proteins involved are often TFs, which have not been traditionally viewed as druggable targets. However, there are creative ways to address this; in the example of lenalidomide resistance, is there a possible way to activate GATA2 in lenalidomide-resistant patients with RUNX1 or TP53 mutations? GATA2 is partially regulated through a positive-feedback loop wherein interleukin-1-beta and CXCL2 stimulate GATA2 expression . Could interleukin-1-beta stimulation or a CXCL2 agonist overcome lenalidomide resistance by boosting GATA2 activity? Mechanisms such as this should be explored as possible ways to either overcome therapy resistance and develop new treatment approaches. We would also emphasize the importance of including differentiation endpoints in preclinical and high-throughput drug screening approaches. Overall, understanding and manipulating cellular differentiation holds promise in advancing cancer therapeutics in myeloid malignancies.
Döhner H, Estey E, Grimwade D, Amadori S, Appelbaum FR, Büchner T, et al. Diagnosis and management of AML in adults: 2017 ELN recommendations from an international expert panel. Blood. 2017;129:424–47.
Yates JW, Wallace HJ, Ellison RR, Holland JF. Cytosine arabinoside (NSC-63878) and daunorubicin (NSC-83142) therapy in acute nonlymphocytic leukemia. Cancer Chemother Rep. 1973;57:485–8.
Thomas ED, Buckner CD, Clift RA, Fefer A, Johnson FL, Neiman PE, et al. Marrow transplantation for acute nonlymphoblastic leukemia in first remission. N. Engl J Med. 1979;301:597–9.
Fenaux P, Mufti GJ, Hellström-Lindberg E, Santini V, Gattermann N, Sanz G, et al. Azacitidine prolongs overall survival and reduces infections and hospitalizations in patients with WHO-defined acute myeloid leukaemia compared with conventional care regimens: an update. Ecancermedicalscience. 2008;2:121.
List A, Dewald G, Bennett J, Giagounidis A, Raza A, Feldman E, et al. Lenalidomide in the myelodysplastic syndrome with chromosome 5q deletion. N Engl J Med. 2006;355:1456–65.
Stein EM, DiNardo CD, Pollyea DA, Fathi AT, Roboz GJ, Altman JK, et al. Enasidenib in mutant. Blood. 2017;130:722–31.
Perl AE, Martinelli G, Cortes JE, Neubauer A, Berman E, Paolini S, et al. Gilteritinib or chemotherapy for relapsed or refractory. N Engl J Med. 2019;381:1728–40.
Stone RM, Mandrekar SJ, Sanford BL, Laumann K, Geyer S, Bloomfield CD, et al. Midostaurin plus chemotherapy for acute myeloid leukemia with a FLT3 mutation. N. Engl J Med. 2017;377:454–64.
DiNardo CD, Pratz K, Pullarkat V, Jonas BA, Arellano M, Becker PS, et al. Venetoclax combined with decitabine or azacitidine in treatment-naive, elderly patients with acute myeloid leukemia. Blood. 2019;133:7–17.
Martinez-Høyer S, Deng Y, Parker J, Jiang J, Mo A, Docking TR, et al. Loss of lenalidomide-induced megakaryocytic differentiation leads to therapy resistance in del(5q) myelodysplastic syndrome. Nat Cell Biol. 2020;22:526–33.
Osman AEG, Anderson J, Churpek JE, Christ TN, Curran E, Godley LA, et al. Treatment of acute promyelocytic leukemia in adults. J Oncol Pract. 2018;14:649–57.
Dick JE. Stem cell concepts renew cancer research. Blood. 2008;112:4793–807.
Till JE, McCulloch EA. Hemopoietic stem cell differentiation. Biochim Biophys Acta. 1980;605:431–59.
Julius MH, Masuda T, Herzenberg LA. Demonstration that antigen-binding cells are precursors of antibody-producing cells after purification with a fluorescence-activated cell sorter. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 1972;69:1934–8.
Larochelle A, Vormoor J, Hanenberg H, Wang JC, Bhatia M, Lapidot T, et al. Identification of primitive human hematopoietic cells capable of repopulating NOD/SCID mouse bone marrow: implications for gene therapy. Nat Med. 1996;2:1329–37.
Farlik M, Halbritter F, Muller F, Choudry FA, Ebert P, Klughammer J, et al. DNA methylation dynamics of human hematopoietic stem cell differentiation. Cell Stem Cell. 2016;19:808–22.
Bröske AM, Vockentanz L, Kharazi S, Huska MR, Mancini E, Scheller M, et al. DNA methylation protects hematopoietic stem cell multipotency from myeloerythroid restriction. Nat Genet. 2009;41:1207–15.
Corces MR, Buenrostro JD, Wu B, Greenside PG, Chan SM, Koenig JL, et al. Lineage-specific and single-cell chromatin accessibility charts human hematopoiesis and leukemia evolution. Nat Genet. 2016;48:1193–203.
Takayama N, Murison A, Takayanagi SI, Arlidge C, Zhou S, Garcia-Prat L. et al. The transition from quiescent to activated states in human hematopoietic stem cells is governed by dynamic 3D genome reorganization. Cell Stem Cell. 2020;28:488–501.
Mujahed H, Miliara S, Neddermeyer A, Bengtzén S, Nilsson C, Deneberg S, et al. AML displays increased CTCF occupancy associated with aberrant gene expression and transcription factor binding. Blood. 2020;136:339–52.
Bell AC, Felsenfeld G. Methylation of a CTCF-dependent boundary controls imprinted expression of the Igf2 gene. Nature. 2000;405:482–5.
Miles LA, Bowman RL, Merlinsky TR, Csete IS, Ooi AT, Durruthy-Durruthy R, et al. Single-cell mutation analysis of clonal evolution in myeloid malignancies. Nature. 2020;587:477–82.
Morita K, Wang F, Jahn K, Hu T, Tanaka T, Sasaki Y, et al. Clonal evolution of acute myeloid leukemia revealed by high-throughput single-cell genomics. Nat Commun. 2020;11:5327.
Rothenberg-Thurley M, Amler S, Goerlich D, Köhnke T, Konstandin NP, Schneider S, et al. Persistence of pre-leukemic clones during first remission and risk of relapse in acute myeloid leukemia. Leukemia. 2018;32:1598–608.
Bhatnagar B, Eisfeld AK, Nicolet D, Mrózek K, Blachly JS, Orwick S, et al. Persistence of DNMT3A R882 mutations during remission does not adversely affect outcomes of patients with acute myeloid leukaemia. Br J Haematol. 2016;175:226–36.
Debarri H, Lebon D, Roumier C, Cheok M, Marceau-Renaut A, Nibourel O, et al. IDH1/2 but not DNMT3A mutations are suitable targets for minimal residual disease monitoring in acute myeloid leukemia patients: a study by the Acute Leukemia French Association. Oncotarget. 2015;6:42345–53.
Prendergast Á, Kuck A, van Essen M, Haas S, Blaszkiewicz S, Essers MA. IFNα-mediated remodeling of endothelial cells in the bone marrow niche. Haematologica. 2017;102:445–53.
Andonegui G, Zhou H, Bullard D, Kelly MM, Mullaly SC, McDonald B, et al. Mice that exclusively express TLR4 on endothelial cells can efficiently clear a lethal systemic Gram-negative bacterial infection. J Clin Invest. 2009;119:1921–30.
Boettcher S, Gerosa RC, Radpour R, Bauer J, Ampenberger F, Heikenwalder M, et al. Endothelial cells translate pathogen signals into G-CSF-driven emergency granulopoiesis. Blood. 2014;124:1393–403.
Takizawa H, Fritsch K, Kovtonyuk LV, Saito Y, Yakkala C, Jacobs K, et al. Pathogen-induced TLR4-TRIF innate immune signaling in hematopoietic stem cells promotes proliferation but reduces competitive fitness. Cell Stem Cell. 2017;21:225–40.e5.
Liu A, Wang Y, Ding Y, Baez I, Payne KJ, Borghesi L. Cutting Edge: Hematopoietic stem cell expansion and common lymphoid progenitor depletion require hematopoietic-derived, cell-autonomous TLR4 in a model of chronic endotoxin. J Immunol. 2015;195:2524–8.
Nagai Y, Garrett KP, Ohta S, Bahrun U, Kouro T, Akira S, et al. Toll-like receptors on hematopoietic progenitor cells stimulate innate immune system replenishment. Immunity. 2006;24:801–12.
Schmid MA, Takizawa H, Baumjohann DR, Saito Y, Manz MG. Bone marrow dendritic cell progenitors sense pathogens via Toll-like receptors and subsequently migrate to inflamed lymph nodes. Blood. 2011;118:4829–40.
Zhao JL, Ma C, O’Connell RM, Mehta A, DiLoreto R, Heath JR, et al. Conversion of danger signals into cytokine signals by hematopoietic stem and progenitor cells for regulation of stress-induced hematopoiesis. Cell Stem Cell. 2014;14:445–59.
Mitroulis I, Ruppova K, Wang B, Chen LS, Grzybek M, Grinenko T, et al. Modulation of myelopoiesis progenitors is an integral component of trained immunity. Cell. 2018;172:147–61.e12.
Oduro KA, Liu F, Tan Q, Kim CK, Lubman O, Fremont D, et al. Myeloid skewing in murine autoimmune arthritis occurs in hematopoietic stem and primitive progenitor cells. Blood. 2012;120:2203–13.
Maratheftis CI, Andreakos E, Moutsopoulos HM, Voulgarelis M. Toll-like receptor-4 is up-regulated in hematopoietic progenitor cells and contributes to increased apoptosis in myelodysplastic syndromes. Clin Cancer Res. 2007;13:1154–60.
Dimicoli S, Wei Y, Bueso-Ramos C, Yang H, Dinardo C, Jia Y, et al. Overexpression of the toll-like receptor (TLR) signaling adaptor MYD88, but lack of genetic mutation, in myelodysplastic syndromes. PLoS ONE. 2013;8:e71120.
Rhyasen GW, Bolanos L, Fang J, Jerez A, Wunderlich M, Rigolino C, et al. Targeting IRAK1 as a therapeutic approach for myelodysplastic syndrome. Cancer Cell. 2013;24:90–104.
Hofmann WK, de Vos S, Komor M, Hoelzer D, Wachsman W, Koeffler HP. Characterization of gene expression of CD34+ cells from normal and myelodysplastic bone marrow. Blood. 2002;100:3553–60.
Starczynowski DT, Kuchenbauer F, Argiropoulos B, Sung S, Morin R, Muranyi A, et al. Identification of miR-145 and miR-146a as mediators of the 5q- syndrome phenotype. Nat Med. 2010;16:49–58.
Weisser M, Demel UM, Stein S, Chen-Wichmann L, Touzot F, Santilli G, et al. Hyperinflammation in patients with chronic granulomatous disease leads to impairment of hematopoietic stem cell functions. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2016;138:219–28.e9.
Matatall KA, Shen CC, Challen GA, King KY. Type II interferon promotes differentiation of myeloid-biased hematopoietic stem cells. Stem Cells. 2014;32:3023–30.
Matatall KA, Jeong M, Chen S, Sun D, Chen F, Mo Q, et al. Chronic infection depletes hematopoietic stem cells through stress-induced terminal differentiation. Cell Rep. 2016;17:2584–95.
Haas S, Hansson J, Klimmeck D, Loeffler D, Velten L, Uckelmann H, et al. Inflammation-induced emergency megakaryopoiesis driven by hematopoietic stem cell-like megakaryocyte progenitors. Cell Stem Cell. 2015;17:422–34.
Grants JM, Wegrzyn J, Hui T, O’Neill K, Shadbolt M, Knapp DJHF, et al. Altered microRNA expression links IL6 and TNF-induced inflammaging with myeloid malignancy in humans and mice. Blood. 2020;135:2235–51.
Lam J, van den Bosch M, Wegrzyn J, Parker J, Ibrahim R, Slowski K, et al. miR-143/145 differentially regulate hematopoietic stem and progenitor activity through suppression of canonical TGFβ signaling. Nat Commun. 2018;9:2418.
Winter S, Shoaie S, Kordasti S, Platzbecker U. Integrating the “immunome” in the stratification of myelodysplastic syndromes and future clinical trial design. J Clin Oncol. 2020;38:1723–35.
Larson RA, Kondo K, Vardiman JW, Butler AE, Golomb HM, Rowley JD. Evidence for a 15;17 translocation in every patient with acute promyelocytic leukemia. Am J Med. 1984;76:827–41.
Park JH, Qiao B, Panageas KS, Schymura MJ, Jurcic JG, Rosenblat TL, et al. Early death rate in acute promyelocytic leukemia remains high despite all-trans retinoic acid. Blood. 2011;118:1248–54.
Grimwade D, Mistry AR, Solomon E, Guidez F. Acute promyelocytic leukemia: a paradigm for differentiation therapy. Cancer Treat Res. 2010;145:219–35.
Hong SH, Yang Z, Privalsky ML. Arsenic trioxide is a potent inhibitor of the interaction of SMRT corepressor with Its transcription factor partners, including the PML-retinoic acid receptor alpha oncoprotein found in human acute promyelocytic leukemia. Mol Cell Biol. 2001;21:7172–82.
Camacho LH, Soignet SL, Chanel S, Ho R, Heller G, Scheinberg DA, et al. Leukocytosis and the retinoic acid syndrome in patients with acute promyelocytic leukemia treated with arsenic trioxide. J Clin Oncol. 2000;18:2620–5.
DiNardo CD, Stein EM, de Botton S, Roboz GJ, Altman JK, Mims AS, et al. Durable remissions with ivosidenib in IDH1-mutated relapsed or refractory AML. N. Engl J Med. 2018;378:2386–98.
Pollyea DA, Tallman MS, de Botton S, Kantarjian HM, Collins R, Stein AS, et al. Enasidenib, an inhibitor of mutant IDH2 proteins, induces durable remissions in older patients with newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia. Leukemia. 2019;33:2575–84.
Luesink M, Pennings JL, Wissink WM, Linssen PC, Muus P, Pfundt R, et al. Chemokine induction by all-trans retinoic acid and arsenic trioxide in acute promyelocytic leukemia: triggering the differentiation syndrome. Blood. 2009;114:5512–21.
Ninomiya M, Kiyoi H, Ito M, Hirose Y, Naoe T. Retinoic acid syndrome in NOD/scid mice induced by injecting an acute promyelocytic leukemia cell line. Leukemia. 2004;18:442–8.
Heuser M, Argiropoulos B, Kuchenbauer F, Yung E, Piper J, Fung S, et al. MN1 overexpression induces acute myeloid leukemia in mice and predicts ATRA resistance in patients with AML. Blood. 2007;110:1639–47.
Martelli MP, Gionfriddo I, Mezzasoma F, Milano F, Pierangeli S, Mulas F, et al. Arsenic trioxide and all-trans retinoic acid target NPM1 mutant oncoprotein levels and induce apoptosis in NPM1-mutated AML cells. Blood. 2015;125:3455–65.
El Hajj H, Dassouki Z, Berthier C, Raffoux E, Ades L, Legrand O, et al. Retinoic acid and arsenic trioxide trigger degradation of mutated NPM1, resulting in apoptosis of AML cells. Blood. 2015;125:3447–54.
Verhagen HJ, Smit MA, Rutten A, Denkers F, Poddighe PJ, Merle PA, et al. Primary acute myeloid leukemia cells with overexpression of EVI-1 are sensitive to all-trans retinoic acid. Blood. 2016;127:458–63.
Steinmetz B, Hackl H, Slabáková E, Schwarzinger I, Smějová M, Spittler A, et al. The oncogene EVI1 enhances transcriptional and biological responses of human myeloid cells to all-trans retinoic acid. Cell Cycle. 2014;13:2931–43.
Paubelle E, Plesa A, Hayette S, Elhamri M, Zylbersztejn F, Hermine O, et al. Efficacy of all-trans-retinoic acid in high-risk acute myeloid leukemia with overexpression of EVI1. Oncol Ther. 2019;7:121–30.
Küley-Bagheri Y, Kreuzer KA, Monsef I, Lübbert M, Skoetz N. Effects of all-trans retinoic acid (ATRA) in addition to chemotherapy for adults with acute myeloid leukaemia (AML) (non-acute promyelocytic leukaemia (non-APL)). Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018;8:CD011960.
McKeown MR, Corces MR, Eaton ML, Fiore C, Lee E, Lopez JT, et al. Superenhancer analysis defines novel epigenomic subtypes of non-apl aml, including an RARα dependency targetable by SY-1425, a potent and selective RARα agonist. Cancer Discov. 2017;7:1136–53.
De Botton S, Cluzeau T, Enrique Vigil C, Cook RJ, Rousellot P, Rizzieri DA, et al. Abstract 112: SY-1425, a potent and selective RARA agonst, in combination with azacitidine demonstrates a high complete response rate and a rapid onset of response in RARA-positive newly diagnosed unfit acute myeloid leukemia. American Society of Hematology Annual Abstracts; 2020.
Stein EM, De Botton S, Cluzeau T, Pigneux A, Liesvaled L, Cook RJ, et al. Abstract 114: Initial results from a biomarker-directed phase 2 trial of SY-1425, a potent and selective RARA agonist, in combination with azacitidine in relapsed/refractory acute myeloid leukemia. American Society of Hematology Annual Meeting Abstracts; 2020.
Stresemann C, Lyko F. Modes of action of the DNA methyltransferase inhibitors azacytidine and decitabine. Int J Cancer. 2008;123:8–13.
Li LH, Olin EJ, Fraser TJ, Bhuyan BK. Phase specificity of 5-azacytidine against mammalian cells in tissue culture. Cancer Res. 1970;30:2770–5.
FDA Drug Access Data VIDAZA (Azacitidine for Injection) Initial U.S. Approval 2004 (Accessed Sep 14, 2021).
Ohtani H, Ørskov AD, Helbo AS, Gillberg L, Liu M, Zhou W, et al. Activation of a subset of evolutionarily young transposable elements and innate immunity are linked to clinical responses to 5-azacytidine. Cancer Res. 2020;80:2441–50.
Tobiasson M, Abdulkadir H, Lennartsson A, Katayama S, Marabita F, De Paepe A, et al. Comprehensive mapping of the effects of azacitidine on DNA methylation, repressive/permissive histone marks and gene expression in primary cells from patients with MDS and MDS-related disease. Oncotarget. 2017;8:28812–25.
Chiappinelli KB, Strissel PL, Desrichard A, Li H, Henke C, Akman B, et al. Inhibiting DNA methylation causes an interferon response in cancer via dsrna including endogenous retroviruses. Cell. 2015;162:974–86.
Christman JK, Mendelsohn N, Herzog D, Schneiderman N. Effect of 5-azacytidine on differentiation and DNA methylation in human promyelocytic leukemia cells (HL-60). Cancer Res. 1983;43:763–9.
Kazachenka A, Young GR, Attig J, Kordella C, Lamprianidou E, Zoulia E, et al. Epigenetic therapy of myelodysplastic syndromes connects to cellular differentiation independently of endogenous retroelement derepression. Genome Med. 2019;11:86.
Laufer CB, Roberts O. Differentiation syndrome in acute myeloid leukemia after treatment with azacitidine. Eur J Haematol. 2015;95:484–5.
Pappalardi MB, Keenan K, Cockerill M, Kellner WA, Stowell A, Sherk C. et al. Discovery of a first-in-class reversible DNMT1-selective inhibitor with improved tolerability and efficacy in acute myeloid leukemia. Nat Cancer. 2021;2:1002–1017.
Mingay M, Chaturvedi A, Bilenky M, Cao Q, Jackson L, Hui T, et al. Vitamin C-induced epigenomic remodelling in IDH1 mutant acute myeloid leukaemia. Leukemia. 2018;32:11–20.
Zhao H, Zhu H, Huang J, Zhu Y, Hong M, Zhang J, et al. The synergy of Vitamin C with decitabine activates TET2 in leukemic cells and significantly improves overall survival in elderly patients with acute myeloid leukemia. Leuk Res. 2018;66:1–7.
Krivtsov AV, Evans K, Gadrey JY, Eschle BK, Hatton C, Uckelmann HJ, et al. A menin-MLL inhibitor induces specific chromatin changes and eradicates disease in models of MLL-rearranged leukemia. Cancer Cell. 2019;36:660–73.e11.
Grembecka J, He S, Shi A, Purohit T, Muntean AG, Sorenson RJ, et al. Menin-MLL inhibitors reverse oncogenic activity of MLL fusion proteins in leukemia. Nat Chem Biol. 2012;8:277–84.
Dzama MM, Steiner M, Rausch J, Sasca D, Schönfeld J, Kunz K, et al. Synergistic targeting of FLT3 mutations in AML via combined menin-MLL and FLT3 inhibition. Blood. 2020;136:2442–56.
Klossowski S, Miao H, Kempinska K, Wu T, Purohit T, Kim E, et al. Menin inhibitor MI-3454 induces remission in MLL1-rearranged and NPM1-mutated models of leukemia. J Clin Invest. 2020;130:981–97.
Heikamp EB, Henrich JA, Perner F, Wong EM, Hatton C, Wen Y, et al. The Menin-MLL1 interaction is a molecular dependency in NUP98-rearranged AML. Blood. 2021. https://doi.org/10.1182/blood.2021012806.
Perner F, Gadrey JY, Xiong Y, Hatton C, Eschle BK, Weiss A, et al. Novel inhibitors of the histone methyltransferase DOT1L show potent antileukemic activity in patient-derived xenografts. Blood. 2020;136:1983–8.
Sykes DB, Kfoury YS, Mercier FE, Wawer MJ, Law JM, Haynes MK, et al. Inhibition of dihydroorotate dehydrogenase overcomes differentiation blockade in acute myeloid leukemia. Cell. 2016;167:171–86.e15.
Arteaga CL, Brown TD, Kuhn JG, Shen HS, O’Rourke TJ, Beougher K, et al. Phase I clinical and pharmacokinetic trial of Brequinar sodium (DuP 785; NSC 368390). Cancer Res. 1989;49:4648–53.
Berthon C, Raffoux E, Thomas X, Vey N, Gomez-Roca C, Yee K, et al. Bromodomain inhibitor OTX015 in patients with acute leukaemia: a dose-escalation, phase 1 study. Lancet Haematol. 2016;3:e186–95.
Latif AL, Newcombe A, Li S, Gilroy K, Robertson NA, Lei X, et al. BRD4-mediated repression of p53 is a target for combination therapy in AML. Nat Commun. 2021;12:241.
Brzezinka K, Nevedomskaya E, Lesche R, Steckel M, Eheim AL, Haegebarth A, et al. Functional diversity of inhibitors tackling the differentiation blockage of MLL-rearranged leukemia. J Hematol Oncol. 2019;12:66.
Maes T, Mascaró C, Tirapu I, Estiarte A, Ciceri F, Lunardi S, et al. ORY-1001, a potent and selective covalent KDM1A inhibitor, for the treatment of acute leukemia. Cancer Cell. 2018;33:495–511.e12.
Roboz GJ, DiNardo CD, Stein EM, de Botton S, Mims AS, Prince GT, et al. Ivosidenib induces deep durable remissions in patients with newly diagnosed IDH1-mutant acute myeloid leukemia. Blood. 2020;135:463–71.
Gasparovic L, Weiler S, Higi L, Burden AM. Incidence of differentiation syndrome associated with treatment regimens in acute myeloid leukemia: a systematic review of the literature. J Clin Med. 2020;9:3342.
Chan SM, Thomas D, Corces-Zimmerman MR, Xavy S, Rastogi S, Hong WJ, et al. Isocitrate dehydrogenase 1 and 2 mutations induce BCL-2 dependence in acute myeloid leukemia. Nat Med. 2015;21:178–84.
Figueroa ME, Abdel-Wahab O, Lu C, Ward PS, Patel J, Shih A, et al. Leukemic IDH1 and IDH2 mutations result in a hypermethylation phenotype, disrupt TET2 function, and impair hematopoietic differentiation. Cancer Cell. 2010;18:553–67.
Lu C, Ward PS, Kapoor GS, Rohle D, Turcan S, Abdel-Wahab O, et al. IDH mutation impairs histone demethylation and results in a block to cell differentiation. Nature. 2012;483:474–8.
Yen K, Travins J, Wang F, David MD, Artin E, Straley K, et al. AG-221, a first-in-class therapy targeting acute myeloid leukemia harboring oncogenic. Cancer Discov. 2017;7:478–93.
Heuser M, Yun H, Thol F. Epigenetics in myelodysplastic syndromes. Semin Cancer Biol. 2018;51:170–9.
Stubbins RJ, Maksakov IA, Sanford DS, Rouhi A, Kuchenbauer F. Mitochondrial metabolism: powering new directions in acute myeloid leukemia. Leuk Lymphoma. 2021;62:2331–41.
Papaemmanuil E, Gerstung M, Bullinger L, Gaidzik VI, Paschka P, Roberts ND, et al. Genomic classification and prognosis in acute myeloid leukemia. N. Engl J Med. 2016;374:2209–21.
Sexauer A, Perl A, Yang X, Borowitz M, Gocke C, Rajkhowa T, et al. Terminal myeloid differentiation in vivo is induced by FLT3 inhibition in FLT3/ITD AML. Blood. 2012;120:4205–14.
McMahon CM, Canaani J, Rea B, Sargent RL, Qualtieri JN, Watt CD, et al. Gilteritinib induces differentiation in relapsed and refractory. Blood Adv. 2019;3:1581–5.
Psaila B, Mead AJ. Single-cell approaches reveal novel cellular pathways for megakaryocyte and erythroid differentiation. Blood. 2019;133:1427–35.
Noetzli LJ, French SL, Machlus KR. New insights into the differentiation of megakaryocytes from hematopoietic progenitors. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol. 2019;39:1288–300.
Mazharian A, Ghevaert C, Zhang L, Massberg S, Watson SP. Dasatinib enhances megakaryocyte differentiation but inhibits platelet formation. Blood. 2011;117:5198–206.
Jädersten M, Saft L, Pellagatti A, Göhring G, Wainscoat JS, Boultwood J, et al. Clonal heterogeneity in the 5q- syndrome: p53 expressing progenitors prevail during lenalidomide treatment and expand at disease progression. Haematologica. 2009;94:1762–6.
Järås M, Miller PG, Chu LP, Puram RV, Fink EC, Schneider RK, et al. Csnk1a1 inhibition has p53-dependent therapeutic efficacy in acute myeloid leukemia. J Exp Med. 2014;211:605–12.
Katsumura KR, Bresnick EH, Group GFM. The GATA factor revolution in hematology. Blood. 2017;129:2092–102.
RS received funding from the Leukemia Lymphoma Society of Canada, Canadian Institutes of Health Research, and the Clinician Investigator Program of the University of British Columbia. (202002LFC-439884) Work in the lab of AK is funded by grants from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, the Terry Fox Research Institute, the Canadian Cancer Society Research Institute, Genome BC, Genome Canada, the Leukemia and Lymphoma Society of Canada, and the BC Cancer Foundation through the Leukemia and Myeloma Program. AK is the recipient of the BC Cancer Foundation John Auston Clinical Scientist Award. We thank all of the authors of the primary studies included in this review, and apologize to authors not cited due to space limitations.
The authors declare no competing interests.
Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
About this article
Cite this article
Stubbins, R.J., Karsan, A. Differentiation therapy for myeloid malignancies: beyond cytotoxicity. Blood Cancer J. 11, 193 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41408-021-00584-3
This article is cited by
Esculetin releases maturation arrest and induces terminal differentiation in leukemic blast cells by altering the Wnt signaling axes
BMC Cancer (2023)
Downregulation of DNA methylation enhances differentiation of THP-1 cells and induces M1 polarization of differentiated macrophages
Scientific Reports (2023)
Cell Death & Disease (2022)